In a statement, Adviser Ratings said the crowdfunding campaign will assist how the industry deals with new compliance and monitoring obligations and costs of distribution.
“The environment has never been more conducive for substantive reform. Our business is well positioned to help elevate this industry towards becoming a profession that the community trusts and respects, while at the same time reducing costs where Hayne and other regulations have increased costs or removed revenue streams,” said Adviser Ratings founder and managing director Angus Woods.
“The launch of our crowdfund campaign will give every adviser in Australia an opportunity to participate in not only the ongoing success of Adviser Ratings, but to benefit the industry in general.
“The crowdfunding opportunity allows those that use us and benefit from our products to invest in us, making them a closer part of the family. Pleasingly, the demand for this raise has been strong with our minimum target of $350,000 achieved in the first four days.”
The capital raise, arranged through Birchal Financial Services, takes advantage of the government’s recently introduced Crowd Sourced Funding (CSF) regime that allows retail investors access to unlisted investment opportunities previously only available to high-net-worth or institutional investors.
“Adviser Ratings has set a stunning pace for its CSF offer, one of the fastest to hit its minimum target,” said Birchal co-founder Matt Vitale.
“Over 65 per cent of investors during the private phase have been financial advisers choosing to take action to drive positive change in the industry. We think this is a brilliant case study of how CSF can be used to marshal support around a core industry issue.”
Adviser Ratings said it will soon be launching an Adviser Marketplace to improve transparency and counterparty risk management between advisers and wealth sector vendors.
This lot twist their ‘value prop’ into the most convoluted load of BS. They’re basically collecting adviser data and selling it back to corporates under the guise of ‘driving outcomes from the royal commissions’ – one of their crack pot directors answered that the money Adviser Ratings makes from selling this data comes from ‘trust’ which is ironic. More ironic still is how adviser ratings is toting themselves as being transparent, when the privacy policy on their site says nothing about the on-selling of customer data. Their prospectus that keeps popping up in my newsfeed promotes some very odd numbers that don’t stack up in terms of their apparently grow. Greasy directors in a greasy business, misrepresenting everything their doing – I wouldn’t invest a cent.
I was not against Adviser Ratings, until I received a totally fake (negative) review, and the team at Adviser Ratings would not remove it, provide me with any information on who posted it, or ask the “reviewer” to prove their (false) claims. There was nothing I could do about it and I knew the person posting was using an alias they used elsewhere, and that the claims were absolute rubbish.
I hope contributing to the crowd funding gives me a 6 Star rating 🙂
Just another bunch of leeches sucking the life from real advisers.
When the “service is provided FREE, then YOU are the PRODUCT!”. We should all cancel their permission to use our data…
The ratings system lacks any form of scientific basis and is meaningless. The service is designed so unethical planners can rort the system to generate new leads based on their 5 star ratings and pay to have their profile appear higher up the list. Not a good look in an era when higher ethical standards are expected by the community and regulators.
It concerns me when a private company assumes control for how advisers and licences are rated and then crowd funds to raise capital avoiding formal scrutiny of a prospectus. Is it just me or does anyone else hear alarm bells? They have no legislative instrument to determine ratings, rankings, methodologies and yet seem to want to take the place of regulators in a less regulated way. I feel another opportunist business unfolding.
Adviser ratings is yet again another organisation profiting from advisers, can anyone tell me how their rating system actually works???? When i have spotted advisers with FPA quals and membership rated higher then advisers with higher levels of qualifications and or more experience you can’t help wonder….. remove your data if you want but most definitely don’t be sucked in to paying these guys a cent.
[quote=easyfix]just email adviser ratings and remove yourself. Simple[/quote][quote=easyfix]just email adviser ratings and remove yourself. Simple[/quote]
Is this actually possible?
[quote=Corps Actor]Page 9 of the Adviser Ratings offer document says [i]Adviser Ratings is Australia’s first [b]independent[/b]
marketplace of financial advisers.[/i]
They are an authorised rep of iPraxis.
Do they meet the s 923A requirements to call themselves independent? Not receive benefits from the issuer of a financial product?
Their quoted customers include IOOF, netwealth, Magellan.[/quote][quote=Corps Actor]Page 9 of the Adviser Ratings offer document says [i]Adviser Ratings is Australia’s first [b]independent[/b]
marketplace of financial advisers.[/i]
They are an authorised rep of iPraxis.
Do they meet the s 923A requirements to call themselves independent? Not receive benefits from the issuer of a financial product?
Their quoted customers include IOOF, netwealth, Magellan.[/quote]
let’s report them to ASIC so they can commence legal proceedings
That’s it , I am going to set up via crowdfunding , adviser ratings to watch adviser ratings and Adviser marketplace . Lets wait for the institutions to get there mob onboard , no conflict hear …I can then pat myself on the back and say how good i am !!! Go home adviser ratings and stop manipulating views .
Page 9 of the Adviser Ratings offer document says [i]Adviser Ratings is Australia’s first [b]independent[/b]
marketplace of financial advisers.[/i]
They are an authorised rep of iPraxis.
Do they meet the s 923A requirements to call themselves independent? Not receive benefits from the issuer of a financial product?
Their quoted customers include IOOF, netwealth, Magellan.
is there anyone who does not want to kick me in the guts.
Just more evidence of how broken this industry is! I wondered if my first reaction from reading this was an over-reaction….then I read other people comments and realised, nope! It wasn’t just me. It seems to me the only people left with integrity in this industry [b]are[/b][b][/b] the advisers. The regulators, the insurance companies, FASEA (more so than anyone) and the industry bodies all seem to have hidden greedy agendas. How ironic! No wonder they’re all potting advisers….we represent everything they’re not!
I agree. Isn’t it funny how us advisers are going to end up being the most ethical, conflict free profession in Australia. The more Ethics, BID, conflicts, conflicted revenue education / exposure I do, the more and more unethical, conflicted and self interest I see in every other person I have dealings with. People everywhere seem to expect a kick back in all dealings. (Except in our world)
just email adviser ratings and remove yourself. Simple
Just more evidence of how broken this industry is! I wondered if my first reaction from reading this was an over-reaction….then I read other people comments and realised, nope! It wasn’t just me.
It seems to me the only people left with integrity in this industry [b]are[/b][b][/b] the advisers. The regulators, the insurance companies, FASEA (more so than anyone) and the industry bodies all seem to have hidden greedy agendas. How ironic!
No wonder they’re all potting advisers….we represent everything they’re not!
Adviser Ratings originally purchased via a commercial transaction all adviser details and data from Rainmaker Group and then banged it all into their system at inception without any authorisation from any advisers whatsoever. This was a strategy driven by the “advisers friend”, and consumer advocate guru Christopher Zinn who had constantly been critical of advisers on just about every conceivable level.
It was based on an Opt Out model and advisers had to contact Adviser Ratings to notify them they did not want to be part of their business.
For them to be using other people’s money to drive their own business is not surprising in the slightest.
What the? is all I have to say about this.
65% of your new funders are the people you’re rating on an independent and unbiased basis?
Understood.
This crew are taking the industry for a ride and profiting from our data. It’s time for all advisers to say no thanks!
All Advisers take note “Adviser Ratings” was set up for the Corporates behind it including a so called finance guru with no qualifications, who you watch every morning on tv. Did you know they have just sold off sections of your info for $11 million the site has nothing to do with ratings and is all about a marketing platform for there advertisers, and educational institutes etc. I cancelled my membership as soon as I found out do the same.
How ridiculous – I dont see other occupations have to run a crowd funding campaign to keep their right to work