The exam was held in eight metropolitan and seven regional centres across Australia from 19-23 September, with 1,697 advisers sitting the exam, FASEA said in a statement.
Over 88 per cent of candidates passed the September exam.
“FASEA is pleased with the implementation of the second exam and congratulates successful candidates on completing an important component of their education requirements under the Corporations Act,” said FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield.
“Unsuccessful candidates are able to resit the exam and these advisers will receive guidance on which knowledge areas they need to improve to enhance their ability to pass at a future sitting.”
The next exam will be held in December in 19 locations and with over 3,200 advisers currently enrolled, FASEA said. Registrations for the December exam are closed.
Registrations for the February 2020 exam are open. The February exam will be held in 17 locations including regional locations, with over 190 advisers currently enrolled.
[quote=Giggity]Looks like the doomsday predictions are correct. Only 22% of advisers have attempted or registered for the exam in the first 3 sittings. I doubt many advisers who are serious about persevering in this profession would be waiting until the last minute. So I’d say 70% plus will be gone by the end of next year; and with the Code of Ethics banning asset-based fees and life insurance commissions on 1 Jan, even some of those who passed (like myself) may be gone very soon as well.[/quote][quote=Giggity]Looks like the doomsday predictions are correct. Only 22% of advisers have attempted or registered for the exam in the first 3 sittings. I doubt many advisers who are serious about persevering in this profession would be waiting until the last minute. So I’d say 70% plus will be gone by the end of next year; and with the Code of Ethics banning asset-based fees and life insurance commissions on 1 Jan, even some of those who passed (like myself) may be gone very soon as well.[/quote]
I would say 40% will be gone by 31 December 2021 for sure.
According to the IFA poll – circa 32% of existing advisers will not sit the examination. So presumably they will leave the industry. I have passed the examination, however if someone can tell me who gets to decide how a “reasonable fee” is calculated, Id be glad to listen. I also wonder whether my time studying and doing bridging courses is factored into the “reasonable fee” calculation ?
88% passing is very impressive. I thought it would be lower for the second batch as, from what I could see, these participants were less academic.
FASEA haven’t disclosed the passmark and they didn’t for June either, so you may be spot on. The second batch of advisers may have performed worse. FASEA openly say the passmark will vary from one exam to the next, so they could have manipulated the passmark to achieve an outcome they were happy with. I personally believe that is exactly what FASEA are doing. It’s just an opinion, I can’t prove it. But until FASEA start acting transparently and genuinely consulting with advisers, no-one will trust them and many of us will continue to believe they are an unethical, morally bankrupt organisation that is more interested in making themselves look good than improving our profession and creating a better outcome for consumers.
Interested in why you say you see the second batch was less academic? Thanks
I am aware of 2 dealer groups who sent their techo’s in to do the exam in the first round, so they could see what we are up against and then develop training for their advisers. My personal experience on the day, was that the group I sat the exam with, in June, was very high calibre. Let’s just say there were a lot of degrees in that room. I’m not saying these advisers were any better than the average in terms of the quality of their advice etc., but in terms of understanding, interpreting and responding to exam questions that were clearly designed by academics without any practical advice experience, I would definitely say round one was high class and I was personally very surprised the pass rate was so close between the June and September sittings. Unless FASEA come clean and release more information, many of us will speculate that FASEA are manipulating the passmark to manufacture a passrate that makes them look good. It would certainly be consistent with their behaviour on the Code of Ethics, the Education standards and CPD. Everything is FASEA does is designed to make them look good. There is no substance, balance or proper consultation going on.
Looks like the doomsday predictions are correct. Only 22% of advisers have attempted or registered for the exam in the first 3 sittings. I doubt many advisers who are serious about persevering in this profession would be waiting until the last minute. So I’d say 70% plus will be gone by the end of next year; and with the Code of Ethics banning asset-based fees and life insurance commissions on 1 Jan, even some of those who passed (like myself) may be gone very soon as well.
The way I read it, the Code of Ethics bans asset based fees and insurance commissions for advisers, but not for licensees. So a licensee with employed advisers can still receive such payments as long as as they pay the recommending adviser a fixed salary I.e. the adviser’s remuneration is not linked to the amount of FUM or insurance.
Anyone else interpreting it this way? FASEA?
Oh fantastic, the corporates and product floggers can keep their armies of sales staff masquerading as advisers, only the independent, non-aligned, self employed advisers will be wiped out. What a relief