Younger clients, bigger horizons: The value of aggressive investing
Vogiatzis argues that for many younger investors, the real risk is being too conservative for too long, rather than riding...
Vogiatzis argues that for many younger investors, the real risk is being too conservative for too long, rather than riding...
With advisers under pressure to deliver tailored portfolios while preserving efficiency, Cho explains why scalable, rules-based investment solutions – particularly...
Downey explains why this hesitation exists, why it’s rational – particularly when it comes to security concerns – and how...
We move through economic cycles much like we do the seasons. Like preparing for changes in temperature by carrying an...
Domestic credit spreads have tightened markedly since US Liberation Day on 2 April, buoyed by US trade deal announcements between...
Private credit is reshaping commercial real estate finance. Success now depends on collaboration, discipline, and strong governance across the market.
Excitement sells stories, not stability. For long-term wealth, consistency and compounding matter most — proving that sometimes boring is the...
This poll has closed
© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited
© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited
Aleks While I admire Wacka for his zeal, his comments that risk needs commission, not fees, so the average punter can get advice, are frankly a bit late. He really can’t bathe in the glow of a banking royal commission, because the banks had got what they wanted before the announcement when LIF made their insurance arms more attractive to overseas buyers. Why wasn’t Wacka in the ear of Frydenberg and O’Dwyer before LIF was legislated. He also is praising ASIC too much, considering their blind ideology to eliminating risk commissions. BTW, did the AFA ever go to Wacka ?
I heard him speak when LIF was proposed but not legislated (I think) and he mentioned that reducing commissions wouldn’t have a negative impact on the financial planning industry and something had to be done given that financial planners had been selling insurance policies to clients that had already passed away. Only problem was that the situation he referenced were non financial planners working for Combined Insurance. Like all politicians he speaks to what he thinks the audience wants and shouldn’t be trusted. Basically he hates banks because of something which happened on the family farm and is running his personal agenda — for the record I don’t work for a bank.