WEBVTT - Interview With Ron Rhoades: Masters in Business (Audio)

0:00:03.240 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>This is Masters in Business with Barry Ridholts on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:08.000 --> 0:00:10.240
<v Speaker 1>So this week on the podcast, I have a really

0:00:10.280 --> 0:00:12.639
<v Speaker 1>fascinating guest. And I know I said that every week,

0:00:12.680 --> 0:00:18.800
<v Speaker 1>but this is really deep inside baseball. Uh, how how

0:00:18.840 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>the industry works, how it's supposed to work, what it

0:00:21.440 --> 0:00:27.880
<v Speaker 1>doesn't do. Ron Rhodes is a professor, lawyer, uh fiduciary.

0:00:27.960 --> 0:00:31.560
<v Speaker 1>He has been both in and around the industry and

0:00:31.640 --> 0:00:34.479
<v Speaker 1>a number of capacities, both as a lawyer setting up

0:00:34.479 --> 0:00:37.520
<v Speaker 1>trusts in the States and other such stuff, running an

0:00:37.600 --> 0:00:41.879
<v Speaker 1>r i A, running a fiduciary shop, and as a

0:00:41.880 --> 0:00:46.000
<v Speaker 1>professor teaching financial planning and other things. He's probably best

0:00:46.040 --> 0:00:51.160
<v Speaker 1>known as a gadfly who has been lobbying Congress, the SEC, FINRA,

0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>the Department of Labor. I call him a one man

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:59.520
<v Speaker 1>wrecking crew. He, amongst other people, prevented FINRA from becoming

0:00:59.560 --> 0:01:03.440
<v Speaker 1>the uh S r O for the r A industry.

0:01:03.760 --> 0:01:06.959
<v Speaker 1>He has been absolutely crucial in moving the ball down

0:01:07.000 --> 0:01:12.319
<v Speaker 1>the field for moving towards a fiduciary standard for all

0:01:12.360 --> 0:01:17.440
<v Speaker 1>advisors or many advisors. This is if you're interested in

0:01:18.200 --> 0:01:24.080
<v Speaker 1>managing money, running a firm, or understanding the regulatory process

0:01:24.120 --> 0:01:29.640
<v Speaker 1>and how it impacts investors and brokers and advisors. Uh,

0:01:29.640 --> 0:01:32.679
<v Speaker 1>this is really a very deep dive into that sort

0:01:32.680 --> 0:01:36.119
<v Speaker 1>of stuff. Stay with it. It gets more and more

0:01:36.160 --> 0:01:39.959
<v Speaker 1>detailed and interesting as we go on, and the podcast portion,

0:01:40.200 --> 0:01:44.000
<v Speaker 1>as you'll hear, is really terrific. So, without any further ado,

0:01:44.280 --> 0:01:51.560
<v Speaker 1>my conversation with Professor Ron Rhodes. This is Masters in

0:01:51.640 --> 0:01:56.200
<v Speaker 1>Business with Barry Ridholts on Bloomberg Radio. My special guest

0:01:56.280 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 1>this week is Ron Rhodes. He is a professor at

0:01:59.160 --> 0:02:02.440
<v Speaker 1>Western kentuck A University where he is chairman of the

0:02:02.480 --> 0:02:07.960
<v Speaker 1>Financial Planning Program and teaches applied investments, retirement planning, and

0:02:08.240 --> 0:02:11.600
<v Speaker 1>estate planning. You may not have heard of Ron if

0:02:11.639 --> 0:02:15.079
<v Speaker 1>you're not in the asset management business or if you

0:02:15.160 --> 0:02:17.680
<v Speaker 1>don't work for the SEC. But a little bit of

0:02:17.680 --> 0:02:21.120
<v Speaker 1>background as to who he is. He was voted Wealth

0:02:21.200 --> 0:02:26.360
<v Speaker 1>Management Magazines uh most influential person today. That was back

0:02:26.560 --> 0:02:32.200
<v Speaker 1>in He is the recipient of the Tamar Frankel Fiduciary

0:02:32.240 --> 0:02:35.720
<v Speaker 1>of the Year award, and he was named by Investment

0:02:35.800 --> 0:02:40.560
<v Speaker 1>Advisor magazine one of the twenty five most influential persons

0:02:40.919 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 1>in the asset management business. Ron, Welcome to Bloomberg Great

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:47.560
<v Speaker 1>thanks good to be here. So so that was a

0:02:47.560 --> 0:02:51.000
<v Speaker 1>little bit of an ambiguous introduction. I want to ask

0:02:51.000 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 1>you a question. For someone like me, you do many

0:02:54.720 --> 0:02:58.160
<v Speaker 1>different things, You wear many different hats. But when people

0:02:58.360 --> 0:03:01.520
<v Speaker 1>first meet you and in the conversation they ask what

0:03:01.560 --> 0:03:05.000
<v Speaker 1>do you do? How do you answer that question? Well,

0:03:05.280 --> 0:03:06.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, I asked people to think back to to

0:03:07.000 --> 0:03:11.360
<v Speaker 1>their kids and as they were growing up. Um, kids

0:03:11.400 --> 0:03:15.239
<v Speaker 1>need to be pushed, uh to develop and and that's

0:03:15.240 --> 0:03:18.880
<v Speaker 1>why God invented mothers. But but those kids are sent

0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:22.000
<v Speaker 1>off to college by their mothers. And that's why God

0:03:21.840 --> 0:03:25.000
<v Speaker 1>invented college professors like myself. So your job is to

0:03:25.040 --> 0:03:28.080
<v Speaker 1>push them in the right direction, push them expand their

0:03:28.120 --> 0:03:32.600
<v Speaker 1>comfort zones, to show them how to develop and maintain

0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:36.400
<v Speaker 1>relationships other than the relationship they have with their smartphone

0:03:36.520 --> 0:03:40.840
<v Speaker 1>or their Facebook page, and uh, to get them the

0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:44.080
<v Speaker 1>set goals and and really think about self improving themselves

0:03:44.160 --> 0:03:47.680
<v Speaker 1>and and and getting ready for a career. But you

0:03:47.680 --> 0:03:50.600
<v Speaker 1>you do more than push college students. You push the SEC.

0:03:51.320 --> 0:03:54.800
<v Speaker 1>You fished, the Department of Labor. You push Finro, which

0:03:54.840 --> 0:03:59.880
<v Speaker 1>is the brokerage world's self regulating organization. Let's let's talk

0:04:00.040 --> 0:04:03.840
<v Speaker 1>little bit about how you found your way from the

0:04:03.840 --> 0:04:08.080
<v Speaker 1>practice of law into finance and ultimately into academic How

0:04:08.160 --> 0:04:11.800
<v Speaker 1>how did you find your way into finance as a lawyer? Now,

0:04:11.840 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 1>it goes back to college years. You know. When I

0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>was going to college, I was working during the day

0:04:16.160 --> 0:04:20.680
<v Speaker 1>at wal Disney World. I was a Disney character and Uh,

0:04:21.040 --> 0:04:23.240
<v Speaker 1>I just remember all the time having a book about

0:04:23.240 --> 0:04:26.599
<v Speaker 1>stocks or bonds. Uh. This is probably about nineteen eighty

0:04:26.680 --> 0:04:30.120
<v Speaker 1>or so, tucked away in in my beer costume, and

0:04:30.200 --> 0:04:33.200
<v Speaker 1>during breaks off stage, I'd be reading it. So you

0:04:33.240 --> 0:04:36.240
<v Speaker 1>were a bear reading about stocks. There's some there's some ironing.

0:04:36.600 --> 0:04:40.520
<v Speaker 1>I know. Yeah, that's that's that's neat. Uh. Yeah, you

0:04:40.560 --> 0:04:43.640
<v Speaker 1>know ours blue and bear Bear and Little John and

0:04:43.720 --> 0:04:47.719
<v Speaker 1>Goofy as well. Just my my clients used to say

0:04:47.760 --> 0:04:52.680
<v Speaker 1>that they had a Goofy attorney. Uh, we're a bearish adviser.

0:04:52.720 --> 0:04:56.359
<v Speaker 1>It's the same thing. So you're reading about stocks. But

0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:59.560
<v Speaker 1>how do you make the transition from being a lawyer

0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:02.920
<v Speaker 1>to to being full on in finance. Well, I was

0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:05.800
<v Speaker 1>going to state planning and tax attorney, and and I

0:05:05.839 --> 0:05:11.479
<v Speaker 1>got recruited to help a major financial services company, Uh,

0:05:11.680 --> 0:05:15.279
<v Speaker 1>attack the four one K market with a retirement planning

0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:20.080
<v Speaker 1>program and that lasted for about six months. UH enjoyed.

0:05:20.120 --> 0:05:22.480
<v Speaker 1>It was glad to see the program kind of in

0:05:23.440 --> 0:05:26.039
<v Speaker 1>because it involved flying up here to New York and

0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:28.560
<v Speaker 1>back from Florida, where I was at the time, every

0:05:28.600 --> 0:05:32.160
<v Speaker 1>week for twenty six weeks straight. But after that, UH,

0:05:32.320 --> 0:05:34.520
<v Speaker 1>some c p as that I had helped put together

0:05:34.640 --> 0:05:38.440
<v Speaker 1>their firm from a legal standpoint approached me and said,

0:05:38.480 --> 0:05:42.359
<v Speaker 1>you know, we're not very happy referring who we're referring

0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:44.200
<v Speaker 1>to right now, and I said, well, I'm not very happy.

0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:47.120
<v Speaker 1>So they asked me to help them interview UH financial

0:05:47.160 --> 0:05:49.919
<v Speaker 1>advisors in our community, and we did about a dozen

0:05:49.960 --> 0:05:54.240
<v Speaker 1>interviews and nobody even came close to to meeting our expectations.

0:05:54.360 --> 0:05:56.200
<v Speaker 1>And then we got together and said, we just need

0:05:56.240 --> 0:05:58.760
<v Speaker 1>to do this ourselves. We don't want to send our

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:00.599
<v Speaker 1>clients here and here. We we need to do it

0:06:00.640 --> 0:06:03.560
<v Speaker 1>the right way, and we explored eight different business models

0:06:03.600 --> 0:06:08.320
<v Speaker 1>and ended up forming our own independent registered investment advisory firm.

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:11.560
<v Speaker 1>So that's kind of fascinating. So you kind of it's

0:06:11.600 --> 0:06:13.960
<v Speaker 1>the old joke about Dick Cheney. You interviewed a lot

0:06:13.960 --> 0:06:16.760
<v Speaker 1>of people for vice president and finally said there's no

0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:20.360
<v Speaker 1>capable I'll do it. That that turned out to be true.

0:06:21.000 --> 0:06:24.920
<v Speaker 1>Um so what then led to the transition to academia.

0:06:24.960 --> 0:06:27.279
<v Speaker 1>You did that for a number of years. What brought

0:06:27.279 --> 0:06:30.240
<v Speaker 1>you back to college? You know, if you're a good

0:06:30.240 --> 0:06:33.800
<v Speaker 1>financial advisor, you're you're really a good educator. You like

0:06:33.920 --> 0:06:38.720
<v Speaker 1>counseling and and kind of teaching colleges counseling on mass

0:06:38.760 --> 0:06:41.480
<v Speaker 1>in essence, so instead of doing it one on one,

0:06:41.520 --> 0:06:43.040
<v Speaker 1>you're doing it in front of a whole room full

0:06:43.080 --> 0:06:47.160
<v Speaker 1>of minds. To be most and I always thought i'd

0:06:47.160 --> 0:06:49.640
<v Speaker 1>get into teaching. When I was in law school. I

0:06:49.640 --> 0:06:52.320
<v Speaker 1>would run study groups of a hundred people, and you

0:06:52.360 --> 0:06:54.760
<v Speaker 1>know that the first year students, as a third year student,

0:06:54.800 --> 0:06:59.159
<v Speaker 1>I'd be giving them a study instruction. But at the

0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:04.039
<v Speaker 1>opportunity resented itself and I rushed for it because and

0:07:04.080 --> 0:07:06.480
<v Speaker 1>I've never looked back, because that the students. It's so

0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:09.640
<v Speaker 1>great to see them transform, even over the course of

0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:12.880
<v Speaker 1>a semester, especially over two or three years. And I

0:07:12.960 --> 0:07:15.239
<v Speaker 1>just love going to work at every day at Western

0:07:15.320 --> 0:07:19.040
<v Speaker 1>Kentucky University. It's just a fantastic place to be. So

0:07:19.040 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 1>so speaking of educating and counseling, in the last minute

0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:24.960
<v Speaker 1>or so we have you've been pretty active on Twitter.

0:07:25.160 --> 0:07:28.600
<v Speaker 1>You've been an active blogger for it seems at least

0:07:28.600 --> 0:07:33.080
<v Speaker 1>five years. How do you find those mediums um are

0:07:33.160 --> 0:07:36.880
<v Speaker 1>in terms of trying to get a message out. I'm

0:07:36.880 --> 0:07:39.600
<v Speaker 1>pretty surprised when I go to industry conferences that the

0:07:39.680 --> 0:07:41.880
<v Speaker 1>number of people who come up to me and and

0:07:41.920 --> 0:07:44.240
<v Speaker 1>said that they've read my blogs and and we have

0:07:44.360 --> 0:07:48.040
<v Speaker 1>a nice discussion about it. Um. I found you through Twitter.

0:07:48.120 --> 0:07:50.440
<v Speaker 1>That's how I first. You know, I've been running about

0:07:50.480 --> 0:07:54.720
<v Speaker 1>the fiduciary standards. Yes, yes, I thought it was kind

0:07:54.720 --> 0:07:57.200
<v Speaker 1>of a lonely thing. And there's this guy, Ron Rhodes,

0:07:57.840 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 1>just scorched earth, destroy everything in his path. I'm like,

0:08:01.720 --> 0:08:04.520
<v Speaker 1>I have to follow this guy. Do people comment to

0:08:04.560 --> 0:08:06.400
<v Speaker 1>you about Oh, I follow you on Twitter? I know

0:08:06.440 --> 0:08:09.520
<v Speaker 1>who you are from that? Oh? Absolutely yes. I I

0:08:09.600 --> 0:08:11.720
<v Speaker 1>don't really hold things back very much. I'm a little

0:08:11.760 --> 0:08:13.800
<v Speaker 1>bit on the blunt side when it comes to things

0:08:13.800 --> 0:08:19.320
<v Speaker 1>like so, I'm just I'm just a big soft bear.

0:08:19.600 --> 0:08:22.120
<v Speaker 1>Is that what it is? I'm Barry rid Hilts. You're

0:08:22.160 --> 0:08:25.840
<v Speaker 1>listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My special

0:08:25.840 --> 0:08:31.320
<v Speaker 1>guest today is Ron Rhodes, Professor Ron Rhodes of Western Kentucky, University.

0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:36.000
<v Speaker 1>He is an expert on fiduciary standards, has been a

0:08:36.080 --> 0:08:40.720
<v Speaker 1>gadfly for the sec Department of Labor and especially finn Roe.

0:08:40.760 --> 0:08:43.200
<v Speaker 1>We're gonna talk a little bit about that in a

0:08:43.200 --> 0:08:46.800
<v Speaker 1>little while. Let's talk a bit about the financial planning industry.

0:08:46.800 --> 0:08:50.200
<v Speaker 1>Where you have lots of background and and lots of

0:08:50.240 --> 0:08:55.079
<v Speaker 1>published work. What do you think clients shouldn't expect from

0:08:55.120 --> 0:08:59.760
<v Speaker 1>their relationship with a financial advisory In one word, trust

0:09:00.200 --> 0:09:03.280
<v Speaker 1>and and and if you look at trust, it's really

0:09:03.320 --> 0:09:07.720
<v Speaker 1>got three elements to it. The first is that the

0:09:07.760 --> 0:09:10.400
<v Speaker 1>advisor before you is a true expert in what they do.

0:09:11.520 --> 0:09:14.720
<v Speaker 1>The second is they're gonna put your best interests forth

0:09:15.280 --> 0:09:19.680
<v Speaker 1>and keep those paramount above theirs. It's not about their

0:09:19.679 --> 0:09:24.040
<v Speaker 1>commission also selling whatever product as the highest um bonus

0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:27.040
<v Speaker 1>on it. It's about the client's interest. First, Yes, there

0:09:27.040 --> 0:09:30.200
<v Speaker 1>are to be compensation that should be reasonable, agree to

0:09:30.280 --> 0:09:36.320
<v Speaker 1>in advance, transparent, absolutely completely transparent, and and then work

0:09:36.760 --> 0:09:39.720
<v Speaker 1>under that constraint to go out and find the best

0:09:39.880 --> 0:09:44.319
<v Speaker 1>investment strategies and thevest best products to implement those strategies

0:09:44.600 --> 0:09:48.640
<v Speaker 1>for the client. And lastly, it's candor. You know a

0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:52.600
<v Speaker 1>lot of times clients really need to hear something they

0:09:52.920 --> 0:09:55.800
<v Speaker 1>may not want to hear, like spend less money or

0:09:56.880 --> 0:10:01.600
<v Speaker 1>uh control thyselves in some way, or you know, keep

0:10:01.640 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>the emotions down, you know, stick with this market that

0:10:05.640 --> 0:10:09.559
<v Speaker 1>we have conversations with people. Sometimes I'll get emails with

0:10:09.720 --> 0:10:12.480
<v Speaker 1>people say I have this big inheritance and I want

0:10:12.480 --> 0:10:15.480
<v Speaker 1>to seed four different hedge funds and whichever one gives

0:10:15.520 --> 0:10:18.240
<v Speaker 1>me the best returns, That's what I'm giving my money to. Like,

0:10:18.320 --> 0:10:21.280
<v Speaker 1>you understand game theory, right, you understand you just gave

0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:24.440
<v Speaker 1>these guys an incentive to do nothing but throw hail

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:27.120
<v Speaker 1>Mary's because if they lose, hey, the odds are against

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:29.920
<v Speaker 1>them getting your money. And if they win, they they're

0:10:29.920 --> 0:10:31.839
<v Speaker 1>not going to be able to put up those numbers again.

0:10:32.120 --> 0:10:35.920
<v Speaker 1>So you've created a terrible situation. People don't seem to

0:10:35.960 --> 0:10:39.280
<v Speaker 1>think those sort of things through. I think financial advices

0:10:39.280 --> 0:10:43.400
<v Speaker 1>through a lot of keeping clients from making big mistakes

0:10:43.679 --> 0:10:48.720
<v Speaker 1>and behavioral counseling. Absolutely that. In fact, almost every financial

0:10:48.840 --> 0:10:50.760
<v Speaker 1>planner I've ever talked to you says, you know, I

0:10:50.800 --> 0:10:54.920
<v Speaker 1>wish I had a minor in psychology, and and it's

0:10:54.960 --> 0:10:59.280
<v Speaker 1>that important that that's quite interesting, So let's talk about that.

0:10:59.400 --> 0:11:01.600
<v Speaker 1>That's one of of things I think the industry is

0:11:01.640 --> 0:11:04.600
<v Speaker 1>doing right. What else is the industry doing right? And

0:11:04.640 --> 0:11:09.240
<v Speaker 1>what else is it doing wrong? Well, I think what

0:11:09.360 --> 0:11:12.560
<v Speaker 1>it's doing wrong? And where we really think seen things

0:11:12.640 --> 0:11:15.600
<v Speaker 1>change over the last forty years as we went from

0:11:15.600 --> 0:11:20.320
<v Speaker 1>this fixed commission structure and abandoned that in nine that

0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:24.640
<v Speaker 1>was a good thing, but it's been replaced with a

0:11:24.679 --> 0:11:28.480
<v Speaker 1>whole bunch of variable compensation where people can get paid

0:11:28.480 --> 0:11:30.760
<v Speaker 1>a lot more money to sell one product over another,

0:11:31.600 --> 0:11:35.040
<v Speaker 1>and just a ton of conflicts of interest and a

0:11:35.080 --> 0:11:39.199
<v Speaker 1>lot of hidden fees. Clients have no idea what they're paying.

0:11:39.679 --> 0:11:42.840
<v Speaker 1>I have had many a perspective client client coming to

0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:45.200
<v Speaker 1>see me and they say, you know what, I've never

0:11:45.240 --> 0:11:47.960
<v Speaker 1>paid my broker a dollar. You know, I get that

0:11:48.000 --> 0:11:50.400
<v Speaker 1>on the bond side of things, they don't charge me

0:11:50.440 --> 0:11:54.600
<v Speaker 1>any commissioners bonds. Well, that's because it's it's not you know,

0:11:54.640 --> 0:11:58.880
<v Speaker 1>there's a difference between an agency transaction and a principal transaction.

0:11:59.120 --> 0:12:01.240
<v Speaker 1>They're selling you by on is at a markup, not

0:12:01.320 --> 0:12:04.040
<v Speaker 1>a commission. It's even worse right, No, no, no, it

0:12:04.080 --> 0:12:06.040
<v Speaker 1>doesn't show that on any of my confidence. And then

0:12:06.040 --> 0:12:08.440
<v Speaker 1>when I when I take them through and say here's

0:12:08.440 --> 0:12:11.120
<v Speaker 1>the commission. Here's the twelve B one fees. Here's the

0:12:11.120 --> 0:12:13.720
<v Speaker 1>payment for shelf space that the brokerage firm is getting

0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:17.240
<v Speaker 1>of some amount. Okay, Like it's like it's potato chips

0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:18.680
<v Speaker 1>in the supermarket if you want to be on the

0:12:18.760 --> 0:12:21.920
<v Speaker 1>end gap. They're being the supermarkets for that placement. And

0:12:21.960 --> 0:12:24.920
<v Speaker 1>they're soft all the compensation, and there's other revenue shary

0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:27.520
<v Speaker 1>and gifts and the like. And when you start explaining

0:12:27.559 --> 0:12:31.600
<v Speaker 1>this to clients, they typically get really angry because they

0:12:31.600 --> 0:12:35.000
<v Speaker 1>thought that this guy was their best friend and it

0:12:35.000 --> 0:12:38.000
<v Speaker 1>turns out that they were a very good product salesperson.

0:12:38.640 --> 0:12:40.679
<v Speaker 1>The the old joke is if you want a friend

0:12:40.760 --> 0:12:43.360
<v Speaker 1>on Wall Street, get a dog, And it's really true,

0:12:43.440 --> 0:12:47.400
<v Speaker 1>because they're there to do the business of their firm.

0:12:47.480 --> 0:12:49.840
<v Speaker 1>And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but

0:12:49.960 --> 0:12:53.920
<v Speaker 1>it's important that investors educate themselves and find out how

0:12:53.960 --> 0:12:56.680
<v Speaker 1>that guy who's not charging you for those bond transactions

0:12:56.760 --> 0:12:59.200
<v Speaker 1>is driving a really nice car and living in a

0:12:59.280 --> 0:13:02.840
<v Speaker 1>really big hal us and doing it without much training,

0:13:02.840 --> 0:13:07.200
<v Speaker 1>and what they do. It's almost as if sometimes when

0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:09.960
<v Speaker 1>people get hired into some of the berg which firms nowadays,

0:13:10.320 --> 0:13:12.719
<v Speaker 1>they get training and how to sell, of course, but

0:13:12.920 --> 0:13:16.280
<v Speaker 1>they don't really get training and investment strategy and investment

0:13:16.320 --> 0:13:21.640
<v Speaker 1>portfolio management, tax tax efficient investing, uh, all the things

0:13:21.640 --> 0:13:24.800
<v Speaker 1>that they really should know to be experts, to know

0:13:24.840 --> 0:13:27.000
<v Speaker 1>where close to be in ANET. Now that is a

0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:29.880
<v Speaker 1>change from years ago, because I know when I was

0:13:29.920 --> 0:13:31.920
<v Speaker 1>coming up. Look, I've been in this business for twenty

0:13:31.920 --> 0:13:35.280
<v Speaker 1>plus years. I had friends that started at mary Lynch,

0:13:35.280 --> 0:13:38.280
<v Speaker 1>started at Morgan Stanley, started at bear Stearns, and these

0:13:38.320 --> 0:13:42.280
<v Speaker 1>guys went through a rigorous six month training program. Do

0:13:42.400 --> 0:13:45.600
<v Speaker 1>these exist anymore? They have to still be around somewhere,

0:13:45.960 --> 0:13:48.800
<v Speaker 1>or has the industry given up on training people and

0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:51.400
<v Speaker 1>it's cfps and c f A s that or where

0:13:51.400 --> 0:13:55.000
<v Speaker 1>all the training take place. I think for a large

0:13:55.040 --> 0:13:58.280
<v Speaker 1>part they went away. And and the old model that

0:13:58.360 --> 0:14:02.400
<v Speaker 1>you perhaps grew up in, the old party marty commercial, Uh,

0:14:02.480 --> 0:14:04.720
<v Speaker 1>we make money the old fashioned way we earned it,

0:14:05.160 --> 0:14:08.120
<v Speaker 1>that largely disappeared and it's now just beginning to get

0:14:08.160 --> 0:14:12.800
<v Speaker 1>back come back. In part of this because people want

0:14:12.840 --> 0:14:16.720
<v Speaker 1>advice people, and it's really a lot more complicated world

0:14:16.760 --> 0:14:21.280
<v Speaker 1>out there. Sure financially tax wise, people don't need just

0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:25.440
<v Speaker 1>investment advice. They need financial advice, financial planning, and and

0:14:25.480 --> 0:14:29.720
<v Speaker 1>that's where you see things like the UH Certified Financial

0:14:29.760 --> 0:14:33.600
<v Speaker 1>Planning Board of Standards with their CFP certification becoming really

0:14:33.680 --> 0:14:37.920
<v Speaker 1>priced as a standard for investors. So we've seen the

0:14:37.960 --> 0:14:40.800
<v Speaker 1>industry change a lot over the past couple of years,

0:14:40.800 --> 0:14:43.560
<v Speaker 1>past couple of decades. What do you think are the

0:14:43.600 --> 0:14:47.080
<v Speaker 1>next couple of changes we're gonna see going forward? UH

0:14:47.120 --> 0:14:52.720
<v Speaker 1>this year is likely to be transformational. Transformational. Now we

0:14:52.760 --> 0:14:55.960
<v Speaker 1>know the Department of Labor Fiduciary standards coming. We're gonna

0:14:56.000 --> 0:14:59.120
<v Speaker 1>talk more about that in our last segment. But what

0:14:59.200 --> 0:15:03.960
<v Speaker 1>else do you see changing the landscape for investors? Well,

0:15:05.280 --> 0:15:07.600
<v Speaker 1>the fiduciary Standards is going to change it and in

0:15:08.000 --> 0:15:10.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of different ways. So let's look at the

0:15:10.760 --> 0:15:13.440
<v Speaker 1>longer term impacts of this. There are some things that

0:15:13.480 --> 0:15:15.800
<v Speaker 1>exist now which a lot aren't you going to go away?

0:15:16.200 --> 0:15:19.880
<v Speaker 1>If not by the regulators themselves, just from a standpoint

0:15:19.920 --> 0:15:24.000
<v Speaker 1>of having a more competitive marketplace. One, fees likely to

0:15:24.040 --> 0:15:30.000
<v Speaker 1>be gone, okay, payment for self space okay, proprietary funds

0:15:30.600 --> 0:15:32.920
<v Speaker 1>a lot less, a lot less of that. How much

0:15:32.920 --> 0:15:35.640
<v Speaker 1>of this is driven by the massive inflows we see

0:15:35.680 --> 0:15:38.960
<v Speaker 1>into Vanguard. That's just in the last minute. We have

0:15:39.040 --> 0:15:42.040
<v Speaker 1>Vanguard is sucking up all the oxygen the room, and

0:15:42.080 --> 0:15:45.320
<v Speaker 1>all the active managers out there seem to be flailing.

0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:52.080
<v Speaker 1>Is that a competitive factor that's driving this to some degree? Yes,

0:15:52.120 --> 0:15:54.760
<v Speaker 1>because once you start eliminating all these hidden fees and

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:58.080
<v Speaker 1>you get down to lower fees, all the academic research

0:15:58.120 --> 0:16:01.960
<v Speaker 1>shows lower fees means higher return for investors, and investors

0:16:01.960 --> 0:16:04.520
<v Speaker 1>to starting the catch onto this, I'm Barry Ridhults. You're

0:16:04.560 --> 0:16:08.400
<v Speaker 1>listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My special

0:16:08.440 --> 0:16:12.680
<v Speaker 1>guest today is Professor Ron Rhodes. He's from Western Kentucky

0:16:12.800 --> 0:16:17.960
<v Speaker 1>University and a specialist in various forms of financial planning

0:16:18.160 --> 0:16:22.840
<v Speaker 1>and the rules and regulations and standards that governed the

0:16:22.960 --> 0:16:26.840
<v Speaker 1>different participants in the market. Let's talk a little bit

0:16:27.520 --> 0:16:31.320
<v Speaker 1>about this and and and start out really broadly, put

0:16:31.320 --> 0:16:34.000
<v Speaker 1>on your lawyer's hat and explain what is it that

0:16:34.080 --> 0:16:37.200
<v Speaker 1>a duty of care is, who's it owed to and

0:16:37.200 --> 0:16:41.120
<v Speaker 1>why is this important? Well, for financial services, what it

0:16:41.160 --> 0:16:44.920
<v Speaker 1>means is you have to have a certain level of

0:16:44.960 --> 0:16:51.000
<v Speaker 1>expertise and apply that expertise uh in designing investment strategies

0:16:51.040 --> 0:16:54.840
<v Speaker 1>and selecting investment products. And that's part of a duty

0:16:54.880 --> 0:16:58.040
<v Speaker 1>of care of the fiduciary standards of duty care. The

0:16:58.040 --> 0:17:01.120
<v Speaker 1>other part is the duty of loyalty, which means you've

0:17:01.120 --> 0:17:05.600
<v Speaker 1>got to keep the client's best interest paramount. What's interesting

0:17:05.680 --> 0:17:09.439
<v Speaker 1>is that most brokers who are not acting as fiduciaries

0:17:09.840 --> 0:17:13.439
<v Speaker 1>don't have either of these duties. They're not obligated to

0:17:13.440 --> 0:17:16.680
<v Speaker 1>have any sort of expertise that when they're not obligated

0:17:16.720 --> 0:17:20.000
<v Speaker 1>to with the clients uh interest. Fact, they're just governed

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:24.280
<v Speaker 1>by a suitability standards something that's far less. It's amazing

0:17:24.280 --> 0:17:26.879
<v Speaker 1>in this world that we have so many service providers

0:17:26.880 --> 0:17:30.320
<v Speaker 1>that have a duty of care and what the suitability

0:17:30.359 --> 0:17:33.040
<v Speaker 1>doctrine really does. It was adoptive way back in the

0:17:33.520 --> 0:17:37.440
<v Speaker 1>earlier twenty century when the whole theory of negligence was

0:17:37.600 --> 0:17:41.200
<v Speaker 1>developing in the law was. It basically was enacted because

0:17:41.200 --> 0:17:44.760
<v Speaker 1>we didn't want to hold brokers responsible for stock recommendations

0:17:45.080 --> 0:17:48.960
<v Speaker 1>when they were only executing stock trades and listen, stocks

0:17:49.000 --> 0:17:51.879
<v Speaker 1>go up and down. You can't hold people responsible for

0:17:52.200 --> 0:17:57.280
<v Speaker 1>good faith bad choices. But suitability is such a low standard.

0:17:57.280 --> 0:17:59.520
<v Speaker 1>I used to call that don't sell I p o

0:17:59.560 --> 0:18:02.560
<v Speaker 1>s to grant MS standard. But but there's a little

0:18:02.560 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 1>more to it. Explain exactly what suitability means and how

0:18:05.920 --> 0:18:12.800
<v Speaker 1>much different that is than fiduciary Suitability essentially says, don't

0:18:12.920 --> 0:18:16.000
<v Speaker 1>sell things that explode that you know we're going to explode,

0:18:16.400 --> 0:18:20.800
<v Speaker 1>and perhaps for elderly clients, don't even sell firecrackers. All right,

0:18:21.320 --> 0:18:24.680
<v Speaker 1>But suitability is basically says you don't have a duty

0:18:24.680 --> 0:18:27.240
<v Speaker 1>of care. All you have to do is make sure

0:18:27.320 --> 0:18:32.160
<v Speaker 1>that this investment could be held by this particular client.

0:18:32.400 --> 0:18:34.760
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't have to be the best investment if it's

0:18:34.760 --> 0:18:37.280
<v Speaker 1>in a taxable account, it doesn't have to be tax efficient.

0:18:38.359 --> 0:18:41.160
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't have to be a low cost investment. In fact,

0:18:41.200 --> 0:18:44.800
<v Speaker 1>it can be a very high cost investment. Yeah. And

0:18:45.840 --> 0:18:49.160
<v Speaker 1>from the standpoint, it doesn't even require you to think

0:18:49.200 --> 0:18:53.440
<v Speaker 1>about an entire portfolio together and how you can minimize

0:18:53.440 --> 0:18:56.240
<v Speaker 1>the risk in that portfolio. It doesn't even require the

0:18:56.280 --> 0:18:59.280
<v Speaker 1>application of what we've known for sixty five years now,

0:18:59.320 --> 0:19:02.880
<v Speaker 1>modern PORTFOLI theory. So is it fair to say suitability

0:19:03.080 --> 0:19:06.160
<v Speaker 1>is can be summed up as try not to be reckless?

0:19:06.320 --> 0:19:09.480
<v Speaker 1>Is it? Is it that lowest standard? I think it

0:19:09.520 --> 0:19:12.240
<v Speaker 1>actually allows people to be reckless. I think it's I

0:19:12.320 --> 0:19:15.720
<v Speaker 1>think it's below that point, so recklessness, all right? It

0:19:15.760 --> 0:19:20.680
<v Speaker 1>was reckless, but it wasn't unsuitable. Gross negligence perhaps is

0:19:21.040 --> 0:19:27.080
<v Speaker 1>is outall and a suitability is really a standard that

0:19:27.160 --> 0:19:29.960
<v Speaker 1>it's very difficult to actually say what it is. It's

0:19:29.960 --> 0:19:32.600
<v Speaker 1>so vague. So so let's talk a little bit about

0:19:32.680 --> 0:19:35.560
<v Speaker 1>the regulator in this space. The brokerage world has a

0:19:35.880 --> 0:19:40.280
<v Speaker 1>s r OH, a self regulating organization formally NASDAC or

0:19:40.440 --> 0:19:43.959
<v Speaker 1>any SDR. Now it's FINRA. You have been a major

0:19:44.119 --> 0:19:50.960
<v Speaker 1>thorn in their side, mostly about this suitability standard and

0:19:51.080 --> 0:19:55.600
<v Speaker 1>their opposition to the fiduciary standard. Tell us a little

0:19:55.600 --> 0:19:58.800
<v Speaker 1>bit about your your relationship with FINRA. Let me take

0:19:58.840 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 1>this to the back in night Senator Maloney who was

0:20:03.840 --> 0:20:06.240
<v Speaker 1>the author of the Maloney Act that led to the

0:20:06.280 --> 0:20:09.640
<v Speaker 1>creation of any s D which is now FINRAD. He said,

0:20:09.960 --> 0:20:12.720
<v Speaker 1>the purpose of this s r OH is to create

0:20:12.760 --> 0:20:17.160
<v Speaker 1>an organization that will gradually, over time raise the standard

0:20:17.200 --> 0:20:19.639
<v Speaker 1>of conduct for those in the securities business to the

0:20:19.720 --> 0:20:23.520
<v Speaker 1>various highest standard and the law, in other words, raise

0:20:23.600 --> 0:20:26.920
<v Speaker 1>it to the fiduciary standard. That vision has never been

0:20:26.960 --> 0:20:28.919
<v Speaker 1>put in place. You know, if you go back to

0:20:28.960 --> 0:20:34.119
<v Speaker 1>the forties, uh findra it's its biggest accomplishment. It wrote,

0:20:34.480 --> 0:20:39.080
<v Speaker 1>was uh not was preventing the separation of brokers from dealers.

0:20:39.760 --> 0:20:42.320
<v Speaker 1>All right, well, that's a conflict of interest situation. They

0:20:42.440 --> 0:20:46.760
<v Speaker 1>basically led to this huge conflict of interest in financial services.

0:20:46.800 --> 0:20:50.359
<v Speaker 1>They maintained that when they adopted their first rule book

0:20:50.359 --> 0:20:53.720
<v Speaker 1>in even though they acknowledged in their first newsletter that

0:20:53.800 --> 0:20:57.080
<v Speaker 1>brokers are often fiducaries to clients, that they have a

0:20:57.119 --> 0:21:00.320
<v Speaker 1>relationship of trust and confidence with there's nothing in the

0:21:00.320 --> 0:21:03.920
<v Speaker 1>finer rule book. Now we're back then this has the

0:21:03.960 --> 0:21:06.359
<v Speaker 1>word fiducry in it. So in the last minute we

0:21:06.440 --> 0:21:09.200
<v Speaker 1>have in this segment, there was a time not too

0:21:09.200 --> 0:21:13.200
<v Speaker 1>long ago when FINRA made a play to take over

0:21:13.280 --> 0:21:17.199
<v Speaker 1>managing or supervising um the r I a world, the

0:21:17.240 --> 0:21:22.199
<v Speaker 1>registered investment advisory world currently supervised by the SEC. You

0:21:22.320 --> 0:21:25.639
<v Speaker 1>pretty much were a one man wrecking ball that stopped that.

0:21:25.880 --> 0:21:28.280
<v Speaker 1>Tell us a little bit about how that happened. I

0:21:28.320 --> 0:21:30.120
<v Speaker 1>think there were a lot of people involved in that

0:21:30.160 --> 0:21:34.040
<v Speaker 1>effort to stop them. It was a bill that's coming

0:21:34.080 --> 0:21:37.760
<v Speaker 1>out of the Senate and that was proposed, and there

0:21:37.800 --> 0:21:40.879
<v Speaker 1>was just a lot of opposition from consumer groups for

0:21:41.000 --> 0:21:44.840
<v Speaker 1>myself but many others to that to basically say, listen,

0:21:44.840 --> 0:21:48.159
<v Speaker 1>we shouldn't be rewarding FINRA by giving them oversight of

0:21:48.600 --> 0:21:53.000
<v Speaker 1>investment advisors. Yes, we need more oversight, we need more inspections,

0:21:53.000 --> 0:21:54.840
<v Speaker 1>but this is not the way to do it. I'm

0:21:54.880 --> 0:21:58.480
<v Speaker 1>Barry Ridhults. You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

0:21:58.760 --> 0:22:01.920
<v Speaker 1>My special guest today is Professor Ron Rhodes. He is

0:22:01.960 --> 0:22:07.600
<v Speaker 1>an expert on fiduciary standards and legal obligations that advisers

0:22:07.960 --> 0:22:12.320
<v Speaker 1>owe their clients, namely the investment community. Let's talk a

0:22:12.359 --> 0:22:16.159
<v Speaker 1>little bit about the fiduciary standard. Back in two thousand

0:22:16.240 --> 0:22:19.320
<v Speaker 1>and eleven, as part of the Dodd Frank Rules, the

0:22:19.440 --> 0:22:23.560
<v Speaker 1>SEC had a research a um put together a study

0:22:23.760 --> 0:22:28.040
<v Speaker 1>on the appropriate standards for brokers and advisors and all

0:22:28.040 --> 0:22:30.600
<v Speaker 1>sorts of people in the industry, and they put out

0:22:30.640 --> 0:22:34.280
<v Speaker 1>this long research report. I actually published it on the

0:22:34.320 --> 0:22:39.000
<v Speaker 1>blog some time ago. Uh that specifically said, and I'm quoting,

0:22:39.280 --> 0:22:43.439
<v Speaker 1>all financial advisors and stockbrokers should be placed under a

0:22:43.640 --> 0:22:48.560
<v Speaker 1>uniform fiduciary standard. First, what does that mean? And second,

0:22:48.760 --> 0:22:53.400
<v Speaker 1>why hasn't that happened? Back in two thousand eleven that

0:22:53.400 --> 0:22:57.600
<v Speaker 1>that study came out from the SEC staff, and we

0:22:57.680 --> 0:23:01.760
<v Speaker 1>had spent a lot of time with the SEC myself

0:23:01.800 --> 0:23:06.320
<v Speaker 1>and many other fiduciary advocates, educating them about the fiduciary

0:23:06.359 --> 0:23:09.080
<v Speaker 1>standard and why it was so important and what this

0:23:09.119 --> 0:23:12.000
<v Speaker 1>would mean if it was adopted, And it came out

0:23:12.080 --> 0:23:14.480
<v Speaker 1>with what I thought was a pretty strong report on it,

0:23:14.760 --> 0:23:17.120
<v Speaker 1>very very strong. Yeah, you can you can tell by

0:23:17.119 --> 0:23:20.240
<v Speaker 1>the pushback to it immediately from the rest of the industry.

0:23:20.400 --> 0:23:23.399
<v Speaker 1>The SEC commissioners did not sign off on. That is

0:23:23.440 --> 0:23:26.879
<v Speaker 1>not signed by any SEC commissioner. Uh. Kind of an

0:23:26.880 --> 0:23:29.920
<v Speaker 1>indication of the split and the commission that has persisted

0:23:29.960 --> 0:23:33.639
<v Speaker 1>for probably at least a decade now. UH. But you

0:23:33.640 --> 0:23:36.760
<v Speaker 1>know now that the situation at the SEC has quite changed.

0:23:37.000 --> 0:23:41.520
<v Speaker 1>You have you always have staff turnover, and the senior

0:23:41.560 --> 0:23:44.240
<v Speaker 1>staff at the SEC, they all worked on the Wall

0:23:44.280 --> 0:23:47.600
<v Speaker 1>Street before, uh, and they a lot of them worked

0:23:47.600 --> 0:23:49.600
<v Speaker 1>at the SEC, went to Wall Street, came back. A

0:23:49.600 --> 0:23:53.640
<v Speaker 1>little bit of revolving do going on tremendous And one

0:23:53.640 --> 0:23:56.280
<v Speaker 1>of the interesting things is, and it doesn't happen for

0:23:56.320 --> 0:23:59.640
<v Speaker 1>all the SEC staff, but but it does happen generally

0:23:59.680 --> 0:24:03.399
<v Speaker 1>between New York and Washington. You leave Wall Street, you

0:24:03.480 --> 0:24:06.480
<v Speaker 1>get a bonus to go work at a government agency

0:24:06.880 --> 0:24:08.679
<v Speaker 1>and a promise that you'll have a job when you

0:24:08.720 --> 0:24:11.520
<v Speaker 1>come back, Does that influence what you do in Washington?

0:24:12.160 --> 0:24:15.960
<v Speaker 1>Certainly does. Yeah, there's no way around the fact that

0:24:16.000 --> 0:24:19.000
<v Speaker 1>it's going to influence your decision making. And right now

0:24:20.080 --> 0:24:23.639
<v Speaker 1>the chair of the SEC is surrounded by senior staff

0:24:23.640 --> 0:24:26.359
<v Speaker 1>that really hold an allegiance to to Wall Street and

0:24:26.359 --> 0:24:30.480
<v Speaker 1>don't want the fiduciary standard. M that's amazing that. Um,

0:24:30.520 --> 0:24:32.760
<v Speaker 1>so let's talk a little bit. You you reference the

0:24:32.800 --> 0:24:36.720
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary standard in an earlier segment, but let's let's get

0:24:36.720 --> 0:24:40.800
<v Speaker 1>into that again. Explain exactly what the So you're an investor,

0:24:40.880 --> 0:24:42.960
<v Speaker 1>you're you open a brokerage account or you open a

0:24:44.119 --> 0:24:47.960
<v Speaker 1>an account with an advisor. What should the fiduciary standard

0:24:48.440 --> 0:24:51.800
<v Speaker 1>mean to you as an investor? First, that you're dealing

0:24:51.880 --> 0:24:55.680
<v Speaker 1>with an expert, someone who if you say I want

0:24:55.680 --> 0:24:58.480
<v Speaker 1>to prove in portfolio, that's what they'll give you. And

0:24:58.480 --> 0:25:00.840
<v Speaker 1>and and generally speaking, this in a assumption that that's

0:25:00.840 --> 0:25:03.679
<v Speaker 1>what you want, although not all advices live up to it.

0:25:04.720 --> 0:25:08.360
<v Speaker 1>And and second this what really makes the fiduciary standard

0:25:08.359 --> 0:25:11.280
<v Speaker 1>distinctive is the duty of loyalty, the duty to keep

0:25:11.320 --> 0:25:15.359
<v Speaker 1>your best interest first paramount best interest of the client

0:25:15.520 --> 0:25:17.720
<v Speaker 1>over that of the advisor and the and the only

0:25:17.760 --> 0:25:20.000
<v Speaker 1>way to do that is to avoid conflicts of interest.

0:25:20.359 --> 0:25:22.560
<v Speaker 1>They say, Hey, we agree on how much I'm gonna

0:25:22.560 --> 0:25:25.399
<v Speaker 1>get paid, I'm going to do my best to not

0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:28.800
<v Speaker 1>receive any third party compensation whatsoever. When you say do

0:25:28.920 --> 0:25:33.119
<v Speaker 1>your best, you know someone's giving you a check, you

0:25:33.160 --> 0:25:35.840
<v Speaker 1>know it. It should be pretty easy to not get

0:25:35.880 --> 0:25:39.440
<v Speaker 1>paid by anybody but the clients or am I wrong?

0:25:40.080 --> 0:25:43.199
<v Speaker 1>Generally it's easy. But for example, I'll go to a

0:25:43.240 --> 0:25:48.639
<v Speaker 1>custodial conference, uh that I use the custodian for my

0:25:48.680 --> 0:25:51.679
<v Speaker 1>client funds, and I don't pay for the education at

0:25:51.680 --> 0:25:53.800
<v Speaker 1>the conference. I pay my own way there the hotel,

0:25:54.400 --> 0:25:57.119
<v Speaker 1>but they give some free food and and even some

0:25:57.200 --> 0:26:02.280
<v Speaker 1>free entertainment and up in the in the in the boothroom.

0:26:02.400 --> 0:26:04.800
<v Speaker 1>So that that's a minor conflict of interest that I

0:26:04.840 --> 0:26:07.400
<v Speaker 1>would say, it's not going to influence my judgment at all.

0:26:08.119 --> 0:26:10.080
<v Speaker 1>But if I went to twelve of those conferences a

0:26:10.160 --> 0:26:13.120
<v Speaker 1>year of mine, right, So so you have to there

0:26:13.119 --> 0:26:17.440
<v Speaker 1>aren't small conflicts, and everybody has, but it's avoiding those

0:26:17.440 --> 0:26:20.600
<v Speaker 1>major conflicts. But even if you don't avoid a conflict,

0:26:21.400 --> 0:26:23.640
<v Speaker 1>then this is the key to the duty of loyalty.

0:26:23.840 --> 0:26:27.520
<v Speaker 1>A lot of people out there, including someone Wall Street lawyers,

0:26:27.560 --> 0:26:30.159
<v Speaker 1>they think that all that's required is you have to

0:26:30.200 --> 0:26:32.879
<v Speaker 1>disclose the conflict of interest. But that's not what the

0:26:32.920 --> 0:26:39.000
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary laws. Interests must come first. And so having a

0:26:39.040 --> 0:26:42.440
<v Speaker 1>conflict of interest is a breach of a fiduciary duty.

0:26:42.920 --> 0:26:45.200
<v Speaker 1>You have to cure that breach. How do you do that?

0:26:45.600 --> 0:26:49.639
<v Speaker 1>You disclose the conflict and its ramifications to the client.

0:26:50.359 --> 0:26:53.639
<v Speaker 1>You do that affirmatively. You make sure the client understands,

0:26:53.640 --> 0:26:57.919
<v Speaker 1>and that's a duty that's subjectively applied. You get the

0:26:57.960 --> 0:27:01.800
<v Speaker 1>clients informed consent. And here's the key. No clients ever

0:27:01.840 --> 0:27:06.120
<v Speaker 1>going to consent to be to be harmed. One would help.

0:27:06.200 --> 0:27:08.320
<v Speaker 1>So so if you say, well, I'm going to get

0:27:08.320 --> 0:27:13.040
<v Speaker 1>an extra fifty basis points when I sell you this

0:27:13.440 --> 0:27:16.640
<v Speaker 1>on an ongoing conversation, as opposed to the exact same

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:21.560
<v Speaker 1>product elsewhere. That course, by the way, when I've reviewed portfolios,

0:27:21.600 --> 0:27:26.200
<v Speaker 1>I've seen people with SMP holdings at like one in

0:27:26.280 --> 0:27:29.960
<v Speaker 1>a quarter internal expense or one percent. You can pick

0:27:30.000 --> 0:27:34.639
<v Speaker 1>that up at a vanguard or a dimensional for almost nothing,

0:27:34.680 --> 0:27:38.119
<v Speaker 1>eight bits, twelve bits something in insane six basis points.

0:27:38.520 --> 0:27:41.880
<v Speaker 1>How can anyone justify an index fund with a one

0:27:42.680 --> 0:27:45.760
<v Speaker 1>internal expense rate. You can't. You can't, and there's way

0:27:45.800 --> 0:27:48.440
<v Speaker 1>of doing it. So so we talked about the the

0:27:48.600 --> 0:27:52.960
<v Speaker 1>SEC study and how they proposed a uniform standard. That

0:27:53.040 --> 0:27:56.920
<v Speaker 1>hasn't happened, but the Department of Labor has now stepped

0:27:56.920 --> 0:28:00.800
<v Speaker 1>in and said, retirement accounts are a form of compensation.

0:28:01.400 --> 0:28:05.479
<v Speaker 1>We cover compensation, and therefore we're going to cover the

0:28:05.600 --> 0:28:09.920
<v Speaker 1>standards for people who are managing these because essentially they're

0:28:09.960 --> 0:28:15.520
<v Speaker 1>managing compensation and therefore we're implying the fiduciary standard. How

0:28:15.520 --> 0:28:19.679
<v Speaker 1>did that come about? Well, Assistant Secretary Phyllis Borsey over

0:28:19.720 --> 0:28:22.440
<v Speaker 1>at the Department of Labor, who are really admire When

0:28:22.480 --> 0:28:25.040
<v Speaker 1>she came on board about seven years ago, she asked

0:28:25.080 --> 0:28:27.520
<v Speaker 1>her staff what are the things that we can do

0:28:27.640 --> 0:28:32.240
<v Speaker 1>to improve retirement security for for Americans? And they came

0:28:32.320 --> 0:28:34.200
<v Speaker 1>up with a list and some two of those things

0:28:34.200 --> 0:28:39.320
<v Speaker 1>have already been implemented. Disclosures to plan sponsors and disclosures

0:28:39.360 --> 0:28:43.000
<v Speaker 1>to plan participants. They've already had a huge impact. Once

0:28:43.040 --> 0:28:46.040
<v Speaker 1>you disclose all the fees and costs, attends to lower things.

0:28:46.360 --> 0:28:48.040
<v Speaker 1>I can't by the way, I can't tell you how

0:28:48.080 --> 0:28:50.400
<v Speaker 1>often we look at a four one K plan and

0:28:50.440 --> 0:28:54.000
<v Speaker 1>the answers, who the heck put this together? Oh, the

0:28:54.040 --> 0:28:56.560
<v Speaker 1>boss's brother in law did it. That sort of stuff

0:28:56.560 --> 0:29:00.800
<v Speaker 1>has really tailed off because there's an obligation on employer

0:29:01.480 --> 0:29:04.320
<v Speaker 1>to they have a food dociary standard. If they're offering

0:29:04.320 --> 0:29:07.480
<v Speaker 1>a four one, they do, and it's uh. They need

0:29:07.800 --> 0:29:10.880
<v Speaker 1>employers that they're not in the business of of creating

0:29:10.920 --> 0:29:14.480
<v Speaker 1>portfolios for their employees. They run a business, so they

0:29:14.520 --> 0:29:16.720
<v Speaker 1>need a trusted advisor. And if they don't have a

0:29:16.720 --> 0:29:20.360
<v Speaker 1>trust advisor, the employer is the one who is on

0:29:20.440 --> 0:29:24.160
<v Speaker 1>the hook. But under the suitability standard, if some broker

0:29:24.200 --> 0:29:27.920
<v Speaker 1>recommend it, here's twenty funds and all horrible funds. The

0:29:28.000 --> 0:29:30.960
<v Speaker 1>brokers down on the hook, and that's that's a real problem.

0:29:31.040 --> 0:29:35.160
<v Speaker 1>Not usually the aforementioned brother in law. That's department Well,

0:29:35.200 --> 0:29:37.320
<v Speaker 1>Department Labor is in the middle of fixing this with

0:29:37.440 --> 0:29:40.840
<v Speaker 1>something called its conflict of interest rule, supposed to be finalized,

0:29:41.600 --> 0:29:46.440
<v Speaker 1>come out later this spring and hopefully hopefully implemented by

0:29:46.440 --> 0:29:48.920
<v Speaker 1>the end of two thousand sixteen, and it's going to

0:29:49.400 --> 0:29:54.360
<v Speaker 1>basically say, if you're providing advice to either define contribution

0:29:54.440 --> 0:29:56.920
<v Speaker 1>plans that are government by aresa like four one K

0:29:57.080 --> 0:30:00.920
<v Speaker 1>plans some four three bis or if you're providing advice

0:30:01.000 --> 0:30:07.400
<v Speaker 1>to IRA accounts, then you are a fiduciary and and

0:30:08.040 --> 0:30:13.200
<v Speaker 1>all these fiduciary obligations result. Imagine when going from about

0:30:13.440 --> 0:30:17.720
<v Speaker 1>twenty of of publicly traded investments being subject to a

0:30:17.720 --> 0:30:21.840
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary standard, mostly in defined benefit plans and endownment funds,

0:30:22.080 --> 0:30:27.400
<v Speaker 1>to somewhere between forty that's a tipping point. Yeah, that's massive.

0:30:27.440 --> 0:30:29.920
<v Speaker 1>I will tell you in my own office, outside of

0:30:29.920 --> 0:30:32.560
<v Speaker 1>the four oh one case stuff I would say about

0:30:33.120 --> 0:30:36.959
<v Speaker 1>the portfolios are in i ras, people have rollovers they

0:30:36.960 --> 0:30:40.280
<v Speaker 1>set up there. That's a huge, huge change. So about

0:30:40.400 --> 0:30:44.440
<v Speaker 1>half of the total assets under management are going to

0:30:44.520 --> 0:30:48.040
<v Speaker 1>be governed by a fiduciary standard by the time this

0:30:48.120 --> 0:30:51.160
<v Speaker 1>year rolls around. Can anything stop this rule from being

0:30:51.200 --> 0:30:55.600
<v Speaker 1>put into effect? Well? Wall Street is really heavily, heavily

0:30:55.600 --> 0:30:59.360
<v Speaker 1>alarming in Congress to stop it. They didn't succeed in

0:30:59.480 --> 0:31:02.120
<v Speaker 1>the budget negotiations back in December. That was really their

0:31:02.120 --> 0:31:06.000
<v Speaker 1>biggest chance. Uh. They're still trying desperately to get some

0:31:06.080 --> 0:31:10.120
<v Speaker 1>bills past. Uh. I'm going down to d C right

0:31:10.160 --> 0:31:13.160
<v Speaker 1>after this to to to meet on Capitol Hills. To

0:31:13.160 --> 0:31:15.400
<v Speaker 1>try to stop some of that, A lot of this

0:31:15.600 --> 0:31:19.200
<v Speaker 1>a D organizations that are pro fiduciary supporting the rule.

0:31:19.720 --> 0:31:21.920
<v Speaker 1>I think it's got a really really good chance of

0:31:22.000 --> 0:31:26.240
<v Speaker 1>getting through this year. That that's that's really quite quite amazing.

0:31:26.680 --> 0:31:29.480
<v Speaker 1>For the life of I've I've seen all these arguments

0:31:29.520 --> 0:31:32.360
<v Speaker 1>against it, which will come down to, hey, we're gonna

0:31:32.360 --> 0:31:34.880
<v Speaker 1>lose a lot of money and fees. But without me

0:31:34.920 --> 0:31:40.040
<v Speaker 1>being glib or snarky, are there any credible arguments against

0:31:40.080 --> 0:31:45.400
<v Speaker 1>the fiduciary standard? Not? Not really. You know, it's not

0:31:45.480 --> 0:31:48.680
<v Speaker 1>just me because I look, we both went to law school.

0:31:48.800 --> 0:31:50.680
<v Speaker 1>You know, you know what mood court is. You have

0:31:50.800 --> 0:31:55.480
<v Speaker 1>to adopt the other parties argument and argue on their behalf.

0:31:55.880 --> 0:31:57.480
<v Speaker 1>You have to be able to switch hats, and you

0:31:57.520 --> 0:32:00.840
<v Speaker 1>cannot understand your own position unless you can argue your

0:32:00.840 --> 0:32:04.240
<v Speaker 1>opponents position. And I feel like I have a blind

0:32:04.280 --> 0:32:07.040
<v Speaker 1>spot with this because, for the life of me, I

0:32:07.080 --> 0:32:10.920
<v Speaker 1>cannot find a single credible our argument other than we're

0:32:10.920 --> 0:32:14.160
<v Speaker 1>gonna lose a lot of of fees if we go

0:32:14.280 --> 0:32:17.880
<v Speaker 1>from suitability to fiduciary. Uh. You know, I would say this,

0:32:18.000 --> 0:32:22.120
<v Speaker 1>there's there's always a tension in our society between one

0:32:22.240 --> 0:32:25.440
<v Speaker 1>one body of thought that says people have to have

0:32:25.640 --> 0:32:29.840
<v Speaker 1>self responsibility for what they do themselves. And there's another

0:32:29.840 --> 0:32:32.960
<v Speaker 1>body of thought that says, well, wait a minute, the

0:32:33.080 --> 0:32:35.600
<v Speaker 1>law needs to protect people. Sometimes it needs to be

0:32:35.640 --> 0:32:40.440
<v Speaker 1>a little paternalistic, and people hate that word paternalistic. Uh.

0:32:40.480 --> 0:32:45.520
<v Speaker 1>And financial services, really, the question is does the average

0:32:45.520 --> 0:32:50.200
<v Speaker 1>American does almost any American can they? Can they navigate

0:32:50.320 --> 0:32:54.840
<v Speaker 1>this complex financial and investment world themselves when people are

0:32:54.880 --> 0:32:59.080
<v Speaker 1>trying to sell some really lousy stuff to them? Uh,

0:32:59.240 --> 0:33:02.720
<v Speaker 1>my experience that is maybe one in a thousand. We've

0:33:02.720 --> 0:33:06.400
<v Speaker 1>been talking with professor Ron Rhodes of Western Kentucky University.

0:33:06.440 --> 0:33:09.440
<v Speaker 1>If you enjoy this conversation, be sure and hang around

0:33:09.680 --> 0:33:12.280
<v Speaker 1>for a podcast extras where we keep the digital tape

0:33:12.360 --> 0:33:15.920
<v Speaker 1>rolling and continue chatting about all sorts of things. Be

0:33:16.040 --> 0:33:19.240
<v Speaker 1>sure and check out my daily column on Bloomberg View

0:33:19.280 --> 0:33:22.880
<v Speaker 1>dot com. Uh. Follow me on Twitter at rid Halts.

0:33:22.920 --> 0:33:25.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm Barry rid Halts. You've been listening to Masters in

0:33:25.360 --> 0:33:29.400
<v Speaker 1>Business on Bloomberg Radio. Welcome to the podcast. Uh, this

0:33:29.480 --> 0:33:34.040
<v Speaker 1>is the portion too loud. Welcome to the podcast. I

0:33:34.120 --> 0:33:37.280
<v Speaker 1>have as a my special guest this week, Ron Rhodes. Ron,

0:33:37.280 --> 0:33:39.120
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for coming all the way up

0:33:39.560 --> 0:33:41.440
<v Speaker 1>from d C and doing this. I know you're heading

0:33:41.760 --> 0:33:46.480
<v Speaker 1>back down to d C. Um, you're gonna you're gonna

0:33:46.480 --> 0:33:50.280
<v Speaker 1>meet with a bunch of UM organizations and people on

0:33:50.360 --> 0:33:54.160
<v Speaker 1>the hill about the fiduciary standard. Who who's on your

0:33:54.200 --> 0:33:57.520
<v Speaker 1>hit parade? Are you're gonna be seeing the Consumer Financial

0:33:57.560 --> 0:34:00.880
<v Speaker 1>Protection Board? Are they on your your list? Sometimes they are,

0:34:00.960 --> 0:34:05.440
<v Speaker 1>but not this trip. Typically, uh, it's uh the Senate

0:34:05.480 --> 0:34:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Finance uh and Senate Banking Committees, House Education, Workforce Committee,

0:34:11.200 --> 0:34:16.200
<v Speaker 1>Senator Warren she as part of your yes in the past. Uh,

0:34:16.280 --> 0:34:18.759
<v Speaker 1>not not on this trip. You know, there's so many

0:34:18.760 --> 0:34:24.680
<v Speaker 1>senators and representatives theory every trip we in, every trip

0:34:24.719 --> 0:34:27.799
<v Speaker 1>to d C, it's usually seeing you know, about five

0:34:27.840 --> 0:34:31.440
<v Speaker 1>a day, either them or their staffs, their Legislative Council,

0:34:31.480 --> 0:34:37.400
<v Speaker 1>their General Council, or the committee staff, very influential committee staff.

0:34:38.120 --> 0:34:41.080
<v Speaker 1>But also you know, while when there, we typically reach

0:34:41.120 --> 0:34:45.239
<v Speaker 1>out to some of the organization's uh uh visits to

0:34:45.280 --> 0:34:48.000
<v Speaker 1>the SEC. There's still some stuff going on there, right.

0:34:48.840 --> 0:34:51.080
<v Speaker 1>Does it feel like the tide is shifting on this

0:34:51.120 --> 0:34:54.279
<v Speaker 1>on this on this fight? Is it? I feel like

0:34:54.560 --> 0:34:57.000
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't seem like an uphill battle anymore? It seems

0:34:57.040 --> 0:35:00.160
<v Speaker 1>like this is going to happen. Definitely. I would say

0:35:00.200 --> 0:35:05.160
<v Speaker 1>once we got past the December budget negotiations, I don't

0:35:05.160 --> 0:35:09.279
<v Speaker 1>see anything on the horizon that is a hurdle to

0:35:09.400 --> 0:35:14.200
<v Speaker 1>this being implemented. Is not to say that the most intensive,

0:35:14.800 --> 0:35:19.239
<v Speaker 1>coordinated lobbying effort that Capitol Hill has ever seen is

0:35:19.239 --> 0:35:23.799
<v Speaker 1>not occurring as we speak right. Oh. Absolutely, every time

0:35:23.840 --> 0:35:26.839
<v Speaker 1>I go to Capitol Hill is like, Wow, we can't

0:35:26.880 --> 0:35:31.160
<v Speaker 1>believe it. We've seen forty fifty people on the anti

0:35:31.200 --> 0:35:34.560
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary side, including the CEOs of some of our big

0:35:34.640 --> 0:35:38.480
<v Speaker 1>investment banks, making personal trips down there in the lobby. Well,

0:35:38.480 --> 0:35:41.359
<v Speaker 1>they got stock options at risks, so they they see

0:35:41.400 --> 0:35:43.960
<v Speaker 1>forty or fifty of them for every one person on

0:35:44.200 --> 0:35:46.760
<v Speaker 1>the pro fiduciary side, and they say, we're very happy

0:35:46.840 --> 0:35:49.440
<v Speaker 1>to see you. Well, I've been actually going back and

0:35:49.520 --> 0:35:51.960
<v Speaker 1>forth with the sene Warre and staff of having her

0:35:52.040 --> 0:35:54.920
<v Speaker 1>as a guest, and I would love to discuss this

0:35:55.040 --> 0:35:56.920
<v Speaker 1>with her the next time you're in your her office,

0:35:57.400 --> 0:36:01.520
<v Speaker 1>Point her to this podcast, get her down in New

0:36:01.600 --> 0:36:03.680
<v Speaker 1>York for this um. So let's go over a few

0:36:03.719 --> 0:36:07.040
<v Speaker 1>of the questions that that we missed during the actual

0:36:08.080 --> 0:36:13.080
<v Speaker 1>broadcast portion um and we were all over the map.

0:36:13.520 --> 0:36:16.120
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk a little bit about the proper roles

0:36:16.239 --> 0:36:20.400
<v Speaker 1>of advisors. I never got to that question. You mentioned

0:36:20.600 --> 0:36:26.200
<v Speaker 1>expertise and and fiduciary standard, But a broker and an advisor,

0:36:26.320 --> 0:36:30.400
<v Speaker 1>how do they operate as counselors to investors? What should

0:36:30.480 --> 0:36:35.879
<v Speaker 1>their proper roles be? I I think that a good

0:36:35.920 --> 0:36:39.600
<v Speaker 1>financial counselor is a steward of not only wealth, but

0:36:39.760 --> 0:36:43.640
<v Speaker 1>also the client's hopes and dreams. And and when we

0:36:43.760 --> 0:36:48.040
<v Speaker 1>think about wealth and the accumulation of wealth, that's not

0:36:48.160 --> 0:36:51.560
<v Speaker 1>an ends, that's a means to an end. And what

0:36:51.680 --> 0:36:54.120
<v Speaker 1>do you do with wealth is you buy things like

0:36:54.719 --> 0:36:58.600
<v Speaker 1>financial security, or you buy time that you can spend

0:36:58.680 --> 0:37:03.000
<v Speaker 1>a better develop your relationships and maintain relationships with family

0:37:03.080 --> 0:37:05.920
<v Speaker 1>and friends. Or or you explore the world with it

0:37:06.000 --> 0:37:09.319
<v Speaker 1>in some way, expand your horizons. Or you give back

0:37:09.760 --> 0:37:12.640
<v Speaker 1>to the community in some way. Uh, And and all

0:37:12.719 --> 0:37:15.280
<v Speaker 1>of those things. If you ask what is the purpose

0:37:15.360 --> 0:37:19.400
<v Speaker 1>of all those things, it all leads the one thing, happiness.

0:37:20.239 --> 0:37:24.080
<v Speaker 1>And and not happiness as a destination, but happiness every

0:37:24.200 --> 0:37:28.840
<v Speaker 1>day along the journey. And so I really think financial

0:37:28.840 --> 0:37:32.880
<v Speaker 1>advisors do that. They they are stewards of clients happiness.

0:37:34.200 --> 0:37:37.600
<v Speaker 1>Quite quite interesting. You know, we never got to talk

0:37:37.640 --> 0:37:40.839
<v Speaker 1>about the robo advisors. Any thoughts about that. That that's

0:37:40.920 --> 0:37:45.000
<v Speaker 1>kind of an interesting, uh um change over the past

0:37:45.040 --> 0:37:47.719
<v Speaker 1>couple of years. I think it was a change that

0:37:47.960 --> 0:37:54.120
<v Speaker 1>was developed from software that financial advisors have been using

0:37:54.160 --> 0:37:59.840
<v Speaker 1>for over a decade for rebalancing portfolios tax efficiently. Also

0:38:00.160 --> 0:38:04.360
<v Speaker 1>software that has been used to gather client information more efficiently,

0:38:04.920 --> 0:38:09.760
<v Speaker 1>and also report out, especially portfolio reporting software online updated

0:38:09.800 --> 0:38:13.120
<v Speaker 1>every day. And you combine those three things with a

0:38:13.200 --> 0:38:20.160
<v Speaker 1>slick interface, and you adopts a mass market market methodology

0:38:20.239 --> 0:38:23.319
<v Speaker 1>to it lower the fees, and and that's essentially where

0:38:23.320 --> 0:38:27.600
<v Speaker 1>a robo advisor is. Uh, it's been an interesting development.

0:38:27.680 --> 0:38:30.959
<v Speaker 1>I'm not sure how long it's gonna last. Uh it'll

0:38:31.040 --> 0:38:34.839
<v Speaker 1>last till the next major financial crisis when people don't

0:38:34.840 --> 0:38:37.520
<v Speaker 1>know what they have to do with themselves. Look, well,

0:38:38.800 --> 0:38:42.000
<v Speaker 1>it depends. Uh. You know, we talked about this the

0:38:42.080 --> 0:38:46.160
<v Speaker 1>other day in the office. Asset allocation is a commodity product.

0:38:46.239 --> 0:38:50.720
<v Speaker 1>It's it's inexpensive of free, but advice, and good advice

0:38:51.239 --> 0:38:54.600
<v Speaker 1>is fairly expensive. I don't know how you can set

0:38:54.760 --> 0:38:58.640
<v Speaker 1>a person's ouset allocation without having a personal conversation with

0:38:58.760 --> 0:39:01.800
<v Speaker 1>them because it's about risk tolerance. And a lot of

0:39:01.840 --> 0:39:05.000
<v Speaker 1>times you'll see the robo advisors do these online risk

0:39:05.040 --> 0:39:10.640
<v Speaker 1>tolerance questionnaires. But they're helpful, they're helpful, but they're limited,

0:39:11.160 --> 0:39:15.000
<v Speaker 1>the inherently limited. You cannot design a risk tolerance questionnaire,

0:39:16.000 --> 0:39:18.440
<v Speaker 1>UH that has enough questions to really fire it out

0:39:18.520 --> 0:39:22.200
<v Speaker 1>where someone needs to be as opposed to what their

0:39:22.280 --> 0:39:26.520
<v Speaker 1>tolerance for risk is. It helps you, but people's need

0:39:26.600 --> 0:39:29.279
<v Speaker 1>to take on risk is something completely different, and and

0:39:29.400 --> 0:39:32.520
<v Speaker 1>that's set by a lot of different factors. You need

0:39:32.640 --> 0:39:38.600
<v Speaker 1>to have this hand holding with the client to ascertain

0:39:38.680 --> 0:39:43.800
<v Speaker 1>their need for risk. Yeah, investment management, you know, I

0:39:43.880 --> 0:39:45.600
<v Speaker 1>tell my students I can train you to be a

0:39:45.719 --> 0:39:51.400
<v Speaker 1>great investment portfolio manager in a year, but if you

0:39:51.440 --> 0:39:53.719
<v Speaker 1>want to be a great financial planner, it's going to

0:39:53.800 --> 0:39:57.080
<v Speaker 1>take you five to teen years. It is that? Is

0:39:57.120 --> 0:40:00.239
<v Speaker 1>it just a matter of life experience and no the

0:40:00.320 --> 0:40:03.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of cycles clients go through or is it something

0:40:03.320 --> 0:40:07.560
<v Speaker 1>something else? Financial planning is both broad and what it

0:40:07.640 --> 0:40:14.200
<v Speaker 1>covers tax planning and state planning, insurance issues, UH, maintaining debt,

0:40:14.320 --> 0:40:17.680
<v Speaker 1>paying off debt, major expenditure is planning. So many people

0:40:17.760 --> 0:40:22.239
<v Speaker 1>make huge mistakes in that area. Uh and investments is

0:40:22.280 --> 0:40:24.759
<v Speaker 1>only one part of that. So you have this very

0:40:24.840 --> 0:40:29.880
<v Speaker 1>broad area, but it's also pretty deep. And so the

0:40:30.000 --> 0:40:32.719
<v Speaker 1>only way to start connecting those dots, you know, if

0:40:32.760 --> 0:40:34.840
<v Speaker 1>you do one decision over here, how does it affect

0:40:34.880 --> 0:40:39.120
<v Speaker 1>something way over here is through experience, and and it's

0:40:39.160 --> 0:40:41.359
<v Speaker 1>gonna take five to ten years of experience, I think

0:40:41.400 --> 0:40:45.000
<v Speaker 1>for most people to become an excellent financial planner. Hmm,

0:40:45.120 --> 0:40:48.719
<v Speaker 1>that's that's fascinating. I'm glad I asked that question because

0:40:48.800 --> 0:40:51.920
<v Speaker 1>we uh we missed it. UM a couple of questions.

0:40:51.960 --> 0:40:55.080
<v Speaker 1>We talked a little bit about UH FINRA. One of

0:40:55.160 --> 0:40:57.600
<v Speaker 1>the things I wanted to ask about was the so

0:40:57.800 --> 0:41:00.719
<v Speaker 1>called hybrid model that seems to exist at some of

0:41:00.800 --> 0:41:04.800
<v Speaker 1>the big brokerage firms. So they have a suitability standard

0:41:05.360 --> 0:41:09.279
<v Speaker 1>most of the time, but to sell certain products they

0:41:09.480 --> 0:41:13.120
<v Speaker 1>use a an r A, so someone's both an r

0:41:13.280 --> 0:41:17.320
<v Speaker 1>A and a broker. So sometimes it's a fiduciary standard

0:41:17.800 --> 0:41:21.960
<v Speaker 1>and sometimes it's just suitability. How do you resolve that

0:41:22.239 --> 0:41:25.320
<v Speaker 1>that conflict of interest? You can't. You can't not for

0:41:25.400 --> 0:41:27.200
<v Speaker 1>the same client if you're if you're trying to be

0:41:27.280 --> 0:41:29.960
<v Speaker 1>a fiduciary to a client and at the same time

0:41:30.040 --> 0:41:34.000
<v Speaker 1>in trying to sell them something. No person can wear

0:41:34.080 --> 0:41:36.080
<v Speaker 1>two hats at the same time. It's it's an old

0:41:36.120 --> 0:41:40.799
<v Speaker 1>adage that goes back really millennia. Basically says no man

0:41:40.920 --> 0:41:45.120
<v Speaker 1>can serve two masters that one time, So you cannot

0:41:45.960 --> 0:41:49.919
<v Speaker 1>reconcile those functions. You can also remember under fiduciary law,

0:41:51.200 --> 0:41:55.719
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary is a status. You become a fiduciary to that client,

0:41:55.800 --> 0:41:59.279
<v Speaker 1>which means the entire relationship should be subject to that

0:41:59.360 --> 0:42:02.200
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary can't be a part time thing. It has to

0:42:02.280 --> 0:42:06.000
<v Speaker 1>be correct and and and if people get sued, if

0:42:06.080 --> 0:42:08.640
<v Speaker 1>if brokers get sued, they don't get sued under the

0:42:08.719 --> 0:42:11.560
<v Speaker 1>Advisor's Act and the way the sec applies that they

0:42:11.600 --> 0:42:14.360
<v Speaker 1>get sued under state common law and how that's applied.

0:42:15.120 --> 0:42:20.080
<v Speaker 1>And fiduciary status attaches to the entirety of the relationship

0:42:20.719 --> 0:42:23.920
<v Speaker 1>and and it really constrains what you're able to do.

0:42:24.480 --> 0:42:27.000
<v Speaker 1>So wait, if if someone's working at a big brokerage

0:42:27.000 --> 0:42:29.759
<v Speaker 1>firm that is a hybrid model where some of the

0:42:29.800 --> 0:42:32.440
<v Speaker 1>work they do is brokerage and commission based and some

0:42:32.600 --> 0:42:36.120
<v Speaker 1>of it is are i a fee based you're saying

0:42:36.280 --> 0:42:40.320
<v Speaker 1>you really can't have both standards with the same client,

0:42:41.239 --> 0:42:44.520
<v Speaker 1>because if they sue you, your brokerage behavior is going

0:42:44.560 --> 0:42:47.440
<v Speaker 1>to be governed under the fiduciary standard. Is that what

0:42:47.560 --> 0:42:50.440
<v Speaker 1>happens in certain states? Am I hearing that right? That

0:42:50.640 --> 0:42:53.480
<v Speaker 1>is that is likely to be applied in certain states.

0:42:54.040 --> 0:42:55.960
<v Speaker 1>The rules are not the same in every state the

0:42:56.040 --> 0:42:59.480
<v Speaker 1>way the common law has developed. Of course, you're you're

0:42:59.520 --> 0:43:01.480
<v Speaker 1>being sub it to arbitration here too. That I was

0:43:01.520 --> 0:43:03.920
<v Speaker 1>about to ask that. So if you have the arbitration

0:43:04.719 --> 0:43:07.520
<v Speaker 1>um agreement, so really that's the way out? Is that

0:43:07.600 --> 0:43:10.600
<v Speaker 1>a way out of the arbitration agreement is to basically say, hey,

0:43:10.800 --> 0:43:13.600
<v Speaker 1>I'm subject to arbitration rules, but there's a conflict because

0:43:13.640 --> 0:43:17.200
<v Speaker 1>there's a fiduciary standard here, and therefore you're out. I

0:43:17.280 --> 0:43:19.879
<v Speaker 1>haven't seen a lot of those cases. One would think

0:43:20.000 --> 0:43:24.239
<v Speaker 1>that's a ripe area of for litigation. In fact, our

0:43:25.600 --> 0:43:28.760
<v Speaker 1>complaint of breach of fiduciary is the most common complaint

0:43:28.840 --> 0:43:32.719
<v Speaker 1>in arbitration, but but not that many of those make

0:43:32.800 --> 0:43:36.480
<v Speaker 1>it forward because you have to overcome this threshold is

0:43:36.520 --> 0:43:38.960
<v Speaker 1>the person of fiduciary, then you have to apply the

0:43:39.000 --> 0:43:42.160
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary standard. One of the big problems in arbitration is

0:43:42.360 --> 0:43:46.400
<v Speaker 1>is arbitrators are trained to do what's fair, and in essence,

0:43:46.800 --> 0:43:50.640
<v Speaker 1>they're trained to ignore some of the procedural hurdles that

0:43:50.719 --> 0:43:53.960
<v Speaker 1>it takes to get into arbitra to make a lawsuit

0:43:54.400 --> 0:43:57.879
<v Speaker 1>under the thirty four Act, the Exchange Act, and they're

0:43:57.920 --> 0:44:01.520
<v Speaker 1>trained to do what's fair with clients. But that application

0:44:01.600 --> 0:44:05.920
<v Speaker 1>of fairness actually works to lower the fiduciary strict the

0:44:06.040 --> 0:44:08.680
<v Speaker 1>strictness of the fiduciary standard in the way it's applied.

0:44:08.840 --> 0:44:13.400
<v Speaker 1>How is that well, the fiduciary standard says, for example,

0:44:13.480 --> 0:44:15.000
<v Speaker 1>when you have a conflict of induct you have to

0:44:15.080 --> 0:44:19.480
<v Speaker 1>do all these things, and even then the transaccident you

0:44:19.840 --> 0:44:23.239
<v Speaker 1>propose to a client must remain substantially fair even with

0:44:23.360 --> 0:44:29.279
<v Speaker 1>informed consent. Well broker's the arbitration process. A lot of

0:44:29.360 --> 0:44:32.960
<v Speaker 1>the arbitrators come from the industry, but they don't come

0:44:33.000 --> 0:44:36.120
<v Speaker 1>from the r A side of the industry. They come

0:44:36.280 --> 0:44:39.920
<v Speaker 1>mainly from the broker side of the industry. And if

0:44:39.960 --> 0:44:42.440
<v Speaker 1>you haven't operated in a fiduciary environment orhere, you have

0:44:42.600 --> 0:44:46.239
<v Speaker 1>not studied fiduciary law and what it requires and why

0:44:46.360 --> 0:44:50.520
<v Speaker 1>fiduciary standards are applied. Your perception of what is fair

0:44:51.000 --> 0:44:53.719
<v Speaker 1>is going to be dramatically different. Take a look at

0:44:53.760 --> 0:44:58.120
<v Speaker 1>William Cohen's um work on the arbitration issues with FINRA.

0:44:58.680 --> 0:45:01.880
<v Speaker 1>He's absolutely been brutal. He and I know that they've

0:45:02.400 --> 0:45:05.120
<v Speaker 1>changed up some of the things they've done, but if

0:45:05.120 --> 0:45:07.759
<v Speaker 1>you look in the ninety nineties and the two thousand's,

0:45:08.840 --> 0:45:12.279
<v Speaker 1>it was not a pleasant situation to be a planiff in.

0:45:12.880 --> 0:45:16.360
<v Speaker 1>Even if you were egregiously ripped off, it wasn't a

0:45:16.400 --> 0:45:20.439
<v Speaker 1>place to go get justice. And Cohen just scorched earth

0:45:20.560 --> 0:45:24.080
<v Speaker 1>columns on this, both here at Bloomberg and elsewhere. Um.

0:45:24.360 --> 0:45:26.000
<v Speaker 1>You read some of his and it's like, how is

0:45:26.040 --> 0:45:29.279
<v Speaker 1>this even allowed to exist? The New York Times just

0:45:29.440 --> 0:45:33.279
<v Speaker 1>had a massive series on the problems with arbitration and

0:45:33.400 --> 0:45:36.719
<v Speaker 1>how inherently unfair it is and how biased it is.

0:45:37.080 --> 0:45:39.600
<v Speaker 1>Not just in finance, but any industry that has a

0:45:40.239 --> 0:45:45.800
<v Speaker 1>arbitration clause they're running the arbitration process. It's very industry friendly.

0:45:46.360 --> 0:45:48.480
<v Speaker 1>Arbitrators come in because they want to be rehired over

0:45:48.560 --> 0:45:51.400
<v Speaker 1>and over again. It's amazing that this has developed the

0:45:51.440 --> 0:45:54.520
<v Speaker 1>way it has. Yeah, we need to do away with

0:45:54.719 --> 0:45:58.040
<v Speaker 1>mandatory arbitracition, there's no question about it. Wow, that that

0:45:58.360 --> 0:46:00.440
<v Speaker 1>and what are the odds of that happening anytime arm soon?

0:46:01.000 --> 0:46:04.200
<v Speaker 1>The SEC actually has authority to do that. But who

0:46:04.239 --> 0:46:09.480
<v Speaker 1>controls the SEC? It's five commissioners, three three from the

0:46:10.160 --> 0:46:13.160
<v Speaker 1>party that controls the White House to from the opposition party.

0:46:13.640 --> 0:46:15.600
<v Speaker 1>And like you said, there's a lot of a lot

0:46:15.719 --> 0:46:19.719
<v Speaker 1>of influence from Wall Street over the SEC. And it's

0:46:19.800 --> 0:46:25.279
<v Speaker 1>really gonna take an extremely strong SEC chair and two

0:46:26.040 --> 0:46:29.600
<v Speaker 1>at least two commissioners who are also extremely strong to

0:46:29.920 --> 0:46:33.480
<v Speaker 1>to really start protecting consumers instead of protecting Wall Street

0:46:33.520 --> 0:46:37.280
<v Speaker 1>in finer quite quite fascinating. So there was an article

0:46:37.640 --> 0:46:41.279
<v Speaker 1>in the Wall Street Journal earlier this this month that

0:46:41.480 --> 0:46:48.160
<v Speaker 1>specifically talked about the outflow of brokers two advisors. Have

0:46:48.400 --> 0:46:51.960
<v Speaker 1>you noticed any trends in the industry about people leaving

0:46:52.040 --> 0:46:54.680
<v Speaker 1>the money center banks and the big brokerage firms and

0:46:54.800 --> 0:46:59.399
<v Speaker 1>either going to independence shops or gonna our a advisors

0:46:59.480 --> 0:47:03.120
<v Speaker 1>where they're is a fiduciary standard? Hey, what's what's going

0:47:03.160 --> 0:47:05.120
<v Speaker 1>on with that? Why is that happening? And what does

0:47:05.160 --> 0:47:09.279
<v Speaker 1>this mean for investors? Uh? You see that and you

0:47:09.360 --> 0:47:12.279
<v Speaker 1>see it accelerating. I think there's been several reasons for that.

0:47:13.120 --> 0:47:15.719
<v Speaker 1>One is there's there's firms out there that are roll

0:47:15.840 --> 0:47:18.880
<v Speaker 1>up firms we call them, that are actually recruiting brokers

0:47:18.960 --> 0:47:22.560
<v Speaker 1>out of the wirehouse environment that the good teams. Uh,

0:47:22.840 --> 0:47:28.000
<v Speaker 1>and they are fostering the process of getting out beyond that.

0:47:28.960 --> 0:47:32.400
<v Speaker 1>As the article mentioned, a lot of the ties that

0:47:32.520 --> 0:47:36.920
<v Speaker 1>they have in these deferred compensation packages are going away. Uh,

0:47:37.080 --> 0:47:42.600
<v Speaker 1>and that's really gonna give brokers the freedom. Uh. When

0:47:42.640 --> 0:47:46.160
<v Speaker 1>brokers do leave, about of the clients typically follow them.

0:47:46.280 --> 0:47:50.000
<v Speaker 1>That's pretty healthy. Yeah, it's not to say that there

0:47:50.040 --> 0:47:53.759
<v Speaker 1>aren't fights about that, but uh, they end up with

0:47:53.800 --> 0:47:56.719
<v Speaker 1>about eight of the clients on average. That's a pretty

0:47:56.760 --> 0:48:00.719
<v Speaker 1>healthy number. So despite all the anti solicitation provisions that

0:48:00.880 --> 0:48:07.279
<v Speaker 1>you see and brokerage broker firm broker agreements UM, a

0:48:07.400 --> 0:48:09.759
<v Speaker 1>lot of the clients are following them. I bet, I

0:48:09.920 --> 0:48:13.080
<v Speaker 1>bet the average listener is not familiar with the broker's

0:48:13.160 --> 0:48:19.280
<v Speaker 1>protocol which governs the process of hiring and recruiting brokers

0:48:19.520 --> 0:48:24.000
<v Speaker 1>from UM major brokerage firms. Talk about that for a second,

0:48:24.000 --> 0:48:26.560
<v Speaker 1>if you if you would, well, I was designed to

0:48:26.719 --> 0:48:31.440
<v Speaker 1>eliminate the lawsuits that were flying between brokerage firms. And

0:48:31.520 --> 0:48:33.880
<v Speaker 1>there's about four hundred brokerage firms that have signed on

0:48:33.960 --> 0:48:36.920
<v Speaker 1>to that agreement, and for the life of me, I

0:48:37.040 --> 0:48:41.560
<v Speaker 1>can't imagine why any investment advisory firm or even a

0:48:41.640 --> 0:48:44.840
<v Speaker 1>smaller broker dealer who wants to recruit would sign that

0:48:44.920 --> 0:48:48.200
<v Speaker 1>protocol because it's basically say, Okay, we get this team,

0:48:48.280 --> 0:48:50.359
<v Speaker 1>we have to pay you some money and and that's

0:48:50.400 --> 0:48:54.080
<v Speaker 1>how we resolve it. And and if if a team

0:48:54.200 --> 0:48:58.120
<v Speaker 1>from a wire house wants to go independent, they can

0:48:58.200 --> 0:49:00.440
<v Speaker 1>do that. They can start you on firm and go independent.

0:49:00.880 --> 0:49:03.600
<v Speaker 1>Nobody's gonna pay for their clients. They just take the

0:49:03.640 --> 0:49:08.239
<v Speaker 1>clients perhaps with them. So the way i've I've read

0:49:08.320 --> 0:49:12.279
<v Speaker 1>the protocol rules are, if you hire somebody from a

0:49:12.360 --> 0:49:16.719
<v Speaker 1>brokerage firm, here are the rules that the brokers must file.

0:49:16.960 --> 0:49:20.120
<v Speaker 1>They can't take any documentation out with them. It's like

0:49:20.200 --> 0:49:23.799
<v Speaker 1>a whole run of things. They could take names, email addresses,

0:49:23.880 --> 0:49:27.360
<v Speaker 1>phone numbers, but in theory they can't take account numbers.

0:49:27.400 --> 0:49:31.759
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of crazy, but it means when these people leave,

0:49:32.239 --> 0:49:38.000
<v Speaker 1>there's no litigation. So to some degree it encourages or

0:49:38.040 --> 0:49:41.920
<v Speaker 1>allows brokers to go without causing a lawsuit or a

0:49:42.000 --> 0:49:45.680
<v Speaker 1>fear of a lawsuit from where they land. If they

0:49:45.760 --> 0:49:48.160
<v Speaker 1>join another brokerage firm that's a member at the protocol,

0:49:49.000 --> 0:49:51.120
<v Speaker 1>but a lot of them are going independent and not

0:49:51.480 --> 0:49:53.680
<v Speaker 1>going that way, and that's where you still see the litigation.

0:49:53.920 --> 0:49:56.040
<v Speaker 1>So this is not for the benefit of the investors.

0:49:56.120 --> 0:49:57.960
<v Speaker 1>This is strictly for the benefit of the broker. It

0:49:58.080 --> 0:50:00.560
<v Speaker 1>hurts the investor. And and here's a better a way

0:50:00.600 --> 0:50:03.680
<v Speaker 1>of explaining why why does it hurt the investors? Well,

0:50:03.960 --> 0:50:07.040
<v Speaker 1>what happens is your broker leaves, you want to follow them.

0:50:07.239 --> 0:50:12.080
<v Speaker 1>The broker since transfer forms back over the broker firm

0:50:12.200 --> 0:50:15.120
<v Speaker 1>is upset about this. They'll slow down the transfer process,

0:50:15.200 --> 0:50:19.120
<v Speaker 1>they won't return calls. The client is not being served

0:50:19.200 --> 0:50:22.520
<v Speaker 1>in the middle of all of this most of the time. Yeah,

0:50:22.680 --> 0:50:26.399
<v Speaker 1>then the old firm is still calling the client trying

0:50:26.440 --> 0:50:30.560
<v Speaker 1>to establish a relationship with another advisor at that firm,

0:50:31.000 --> 0:50:35.120
<v Speaker 1>while the other broker who left is is out there

0:50:35.440 --> 0:50:38.880
<v Speaker 1>also trying to deserve the client but can't get information.

0:50:39.360 --> 0:50:41.800
<v Speaker 1>And it's just a mess for a client to be in.

0:50:42.160 --> 0:50:44.760
<v Speaker 1>So what what should be that what should exist instead

0:50:44.800 --> 0:50:47.360
<v Speaker 1>of this protocol? What's the proper way for this to happen?

0:50:48.280 --> 0:50:53.839
<v Speaker 1>I think the solution is to recognize that financial advisors

0:50:54.480 --> 0:50:57.440
<v Speaker 1>have investments in these client relationships just as much as

0:50:57.520 --> 0:51:01.640
<v Speaker 1>firms do. And perhaps this client relationships should not be

0:51:01.800 --> 0:51:05.200
<v Speaker 1>owned by the firm itself but ought to be shared

0:51:05.320 --> 0:51:09.200
<v Speaker 1>with the financial advisor. And if a financial advisor leaves,

0:51:10.200 --> 0:51:15.160
<v Speaker 1>whatever clients are taken, the financial advisor has to remit

0:51:15.400 --> 0:51:17.640
<v Speaker 1>part of the fees from those clients for a certain

0:51:17.719 --> 0:51:20.960
<v Speaker 1>number of years. But if those clients stay with the firm,

0:51:21.520 --> 0:51:24.319
<v Speaker 1>the firm has to pay for part of that client

0:51:24.440 --> 0:51:28.440
<v Speaker 1>relationship over to the financial visor. That's a fair way

0:51:28.480 --> 0:51:31.719
<v Speaker 1>of doing it, and and it eliminates all this litigation.

0:51:32.239 --> 0:51:36.839
<v Speaker 1>I can't imagine that ever happened that that that's amazing. Um.

0:51:37.520 --> 0:51:40.200
<v Speaker 1>So as we see more people exiting the brokerage world,

0:51:40.239 --> 0:51:42.919
<v Speaker 1>to the to the r I A side of things,

0:51:43.000 --> 0:51:47.040
<v Speaker 1>to the fee only advisor side, that also is going

0:51:47.080 --> 0:51:53.440
<v Speaker 1>to drive more assets into the fiduciary standard. That's fair state, absolutely.

0:51:53.600 --> 0:51:57.600
<v Speaker 1>And advisors are leaving because a lot of times that

0:51:57.680 --> 0:52:01.160
<v Speaker 1>the brokers firms then being sold told push this proprietary

0:52:01.280 --> 0:52:05.200
<v Speaker 1>mutual fund, or push these bonds out that maybe long

0:52:05.360 --> 0:52:10.080
<v Speaker 1>term bonds, or push this investment i p O initial

0:52:10.120 --> 0:52:13.880
<v Speaker 1>public offering. The greatest commercial was the Schwabs put a

0:52:13.920 --> 0:52:17.920
<v Speaker 1>little lipstick on this pig. I remember that. That's got

0:52:18.000 --> 0:52:19.880
<v Speaker 1>to be ten years ago when it stayed with me

0:52:20.360 --> 0:52:23.160
<v Speaker 1>because you recognize those people if you worked in the

0:52:23.239 --> 0:52:25.440
<v Speaker 1>industry for any length of time. It's like, I know

0:52:25.640 --> 0:52:27.560
<v Speaker 1>that guy. I watched people stand in front of the

0:52:27.680 --> 0:52:31.320
<v Speaker 1>room and say something similar to that. It was quite amazing.

0:52:32.080 --> 0:52:34.880
<v Speaker 1>There's really a difference between what brokers want to do.

0:52:35.160 --> 0:52:38.200
<v Speaker 1>Most individual brokers want to do the right thing for

0:52:38.239 --> 0:52:42.000
<v Speaker 1>their clients. Most brokerage firms are worried about their top

0:52:42.080 --> 0:52:46.000
<v Speaker 1>line and bottom line, and and it's really this this

0:52:46.160 --> 0:52:49.360
<v Speaker 1>huge disconnect there, that's a tent, that's an inherent tension

0:52:49.480 --> 0:52:53.080
<v Speaker 1>between the employee and the employer the investor right, and

0:52:53.120 --> 0:52:54.719
<v Speaker 1>it's going to get worse with the d O L

0:52:54.840 --> 0:52:58.040
<v Speaker 1>role because the d O L roule says individual advisors

0:52:58.160 --> 0:53:01.239
<v Speaker 1>cannot be paid more to ending on what they recommend,

0:53:01.880 --> 0:53:04.719
<v Speaker 1>but at the firm level, the firms can still receive more.

0:53:05.520 --> 0:53:09.200
<v Speaker 1>And and this this disconnect is going to become a

0:53:09.960 --> 0:53:13.600
<v Speaker 1>much bigger And the result of that is brokers are

0:53:13.680 --> 0:53:16.560
<v Speaker 1>not going to be happy when they go to work,

0:53:17.040 --> 0:53:18.920
<v Speaker 1>and they want to go someplace where they will be

0:53:19.000 --> 0:53:21.120
<v Speaker 1>happy going to work, where they will be on the

0:53:21.200 --> 0:53:23.879
<v Speaker 1>same side of the table as their clients, and they'll

0:53:24.000 --> 0:53:26.759
<v Speaker 1>enjoy working with their clients and in a more or

0:53:26.880 --> 0:53:30.200
<v Speaker 1>less conflict free environment, put them on the same side

0:53:30.239 --> 0:53:33.040
<v Speaker 1>of the table as a client and not have so.

0:53:33.360 --> 0:53:36.400
<v Speaker 1>One would think market forces would have forced this to

0:53:36.480 --> 0:53:40.719
<v Speaker 1>take place decades ago, but it really hasn't happened for

0:53:40.800 --> 0:53:44.480
<v Speaker 1>a long long time. I mean this, this, this tension

0:53:44.600 --> 0:53:49.040
<v Speaker 1>has existed for a while, and yet there's a certain

0:53:49.120 --> 0:53:52.759
<v Speaker 1>comfort level with big name brand ferns who have a

0:53:52.960 --> 0:53:58.080
<v Speaker 1>legal fiducial obligation to their shareholders, not their outside clients.

0:53:58.960 --> 0:54:01.560
<v Speaker 1>I was at a a conference of large firms are

0:54:01.600 --> 0:54:05.400
<v Speaker 1>speaking at it a couple of years ago Rotten Tomatoes,

0:54:05.520 --> 0:54:09.040
<v Speaker 1>and I was talking about their need to evolve UH

0:54:09.200 --> 0:54:12.680
<v Speaker 1>and how they could evolve to embrace the fiduciary standards,

0:54:13.000 --> 0:54:15.560
<v Speaker 1>set up different divisions and the like. And at the

0:54:15.640 --> 0:54:19.000
<v Speaker 1>end of that the first question was, but but run,

0:54:19.320 --> 0:54:22.239
<v Speaker 1>we have a fiduciary duty to our shareholders. And my

0:54:22.400 --> 0:54:25.520
<v Speaker 1>reply to that was simple and straightforward. Yes, you do.

0:54:26.360 --> 0:54:29.879
<v Speaker 1>Your market share as a large firm is going down

0:54:30.040 --> 0:54:33.600
<v Speaker 1>every year. Every day you keep up this trend, you

0:54:33.719 --> 0:54:36.759
<v Speaker 1>won't have a firm for your shareholders. If you have

0:54:36.840 --> 0:54:39.839
<v Speaker 1>a fiduciary duty to your shareholder. You have an obligation

0:54:39.920 --> 0:54:42.800
<v Speaker 1>to change who moves by cheese people. This is this

0:54:42.960 --> 0:54:46.080
<v Speaker 1>is not that difficult. Did it resonate or they still

0:54:46.160 --> 0:54:49.240
<v Speaker 1>stuck in the look, if anybody's stuck in the quarterly

0:54:50.040 --> 0:54:52.640
<v Speaker 1>dash for profits, it's got to be Wall Street farms.

0:54:53.040 --> 0:54:56.040
<v Speaker 1>Did was a glimmer of recognition from any of the

0:54:56.120 --> 0:54:59.600
<v Speaker 1>farms because, by the way, these aren't dumb people. These

0:54:59.640 --> 0:55:04.480
<v Speaker 1>are I've met with, spoken to, interviewed a lot of

0:55:04.560 --> 0:55:09.000
<v Speaker 1>these folks. They're wicked sharp, they're very smart, and yet

0:55:09.040 --> 0:55:11.160
<v Speaker 1>it seems this is an issue that's a blind spot

0:55:11.239 --> 0:55:13.600
<v Speaker 1>for a lot of them. It's it's hard to take

0:55:13.960 --> 0:55:18.000
<v Speaker 1>a salesperson and adopt a fiduciary culture, and a fiduciary

0:55:18.000 --> 0:55:20.360
<v Speaker 1>culture needs to be driven from the very top of

0:55:20.440 --> 0:55:24.600
<v Speaker 1>the firm. And and there's such a big difference between

0:55:24.600 --> 0:55:27.719
<v Speaker 1>a sales culture and a fiduciary culture. It's a big transformation.

0:55:27.760 --> 0:55:30.560
<v Speaker 1>But I will say this, just over the last couple

0:55:30.560 --> 0:55:35.520
<v Speaker 1>of years, we have seen some large firms adopt fiduciary platforms,

0:55:37.120 --> 0:55:40.080
<v Speaker 1>some of them kind of halfway. We still have some

0:55:40.160 --> 0:55:42.480
<v Speaker 1>conflicts of interest, but we're gonna eliminate bost of them.

0:55:43.680 --> 0:55:47.240
<v Speaker 1>One firm, one platform, and one firm is almost completely

0:55:47.320 --> 0:55:50.600
<v Speaker 1>conflict for it's an asset under management using E T

0:55:50.840 --> 0:55:54.879
<v Speaker 1>f s, no proprietary products. Uh that has that firm

0:55:54.920 --> 0:55:57.279
<v Speaker 1>has a history of not doing underwriting. But it's a

0:55:57.320 --> 0:56:00.719
<v Speaker 1>fairly large firm. So I see the movement, but it's

0:56:00.800 --> 0:56:02.680
<v Speaker 1>not to use names if you want to use names,

0:56:03.840 --> 0:56:06.920
<v Speaker 1>all right. Uh so you know, I see the movement,

0:56:07.400 --> 0:56:10.279
<v Speaker 1>and I see that they were recruiting a lot of

0:56:10.320 --> 0:56:13.480
<v Speaker 1>the firms are recruiting individuals to teams now that the

0:56:13.640 --> 0:56:18.400
<v Speaker 1>newer teams that the younger brokers are are forming. Teams

0:56:18.440 --> 0:56:23.719
<v Speaker 1>are financial planners and entrepreneurs and uh those who go

0:56:23.800 --> 0:56:26.279
<v Speaker 1>out and get clients and those who help run run

0:56:26.320 --> 0:56:30.400
<v Speaker 1>the portfolios. Uh, much more fiduciary base, much more asset

0:56:30.440 --> 0:56:35.160
<v Speaker 1>on the management base. Uh So there's some happening. But

0:56:36.000 --> 0:56:38.239
<v Speaker 1>if you want to, you can't do a part way.

0:56:38.600 --> 0:56:41.120
<v Speaker 1>If you do a part way, you're just you're just

0:56:41.200 --> 0:56:44.440
<v Speaker 1>going to continue to see your market share shrink. So

0:56:44.719 --> 0:56:47.520
<v Speaker 1>so I've drank the kool aid. So I it's hard

0:56:47.560 --> 0:56:51.360
<v Speaker 1>for me to get back into a brokerage head mentality.

0:56:51.400 --> 0:56:53.719
<v Speaker 1>I spent the first half of my career for us,

0:56:53.719 --> 0:56:56.560
<v Speaker 1>not a trading desk and then as a strategist at

0:56:56.600 --> 0:57:01.520
<v Speaker 1>a brokerage shop. So flipping to a fiduciary side was

0:57:01.600 --> 0:57:04.520
<v Speaker 1>really a very easy transition for me. It's really hard

0:57:04.600 --> 0:57:06.800
<v Speaker 1>to go back to that old way of thinking. But

0:57:07.040 --> 0:57:09.600
<v Speaker 1>I would imagine at the biggest shops in the world,

0:57:09.680 --> 0:57:13.560
<v Speaker 1>the Merrill Lynches and Morgan Stanley's and ubs is, isn't

0:57:13.600 --> 0:57:18.000
<v Speaker 1>it so much easier for them to manage a fiduciary platform.

0:57:18.120 --> 0:57:21.680
<v Speaker 1>You would think their compliance overhead and the costs and

0:57:21.760 --> 0:57:25.600
<v Speaker 1>the arbitrations and all that stuff that practically goes away.

0:57:26.120 --> 0:57:28.320
<v Speaker 1>You don't have to worry about guys running around doing

0:57:28.400 --> 0:57:32.440
<v Speaker 1>stupid things, all the things we've seen, all the big scandals,

0:57:32.520 --> 0:57:36.560
<v Speaker 1>the I p O spinning stuff, the after hours market

0:57:36.640 --> 0:57:41.200
<v Speaker 1>trading stuff, the mutual fun timing nonsense, like everything about

0:57:41.320 --> 0:57:43.880
<v Speaker 1>all the major scandals we've seen over the past decade

0:57:44.000 --> 0:57:48.000
<v Speaker 1>or two outside of Bernie made Off. Had there been

0:57:48.160 --> 0:57:53.120
<v Speaker 1>a pretty straightforward the only r I a fiduciary standard,

0:57:53.600 --> 0:57:58.760
<v Speaker 1>all that stuff practically disappears, and the administrative and and

0:57:59.080 --> 0:58:02.040
<v Speaker 1>compliance call us for these Look, if you have ten

0:58:02.200 --> 0:58:08.800
<v Speaker 1>or advisors, that administrative compliance overhead and legal overhead is monstrous.

0:58:09.320 --> 0:58:13.120
<v Speaker 1>You get rid of that incentive. Granted, your fees are

0:58:13.200 --> 0:58:16.920
<v Speaker 1>dropping dramatically, but your costs are dropping much more dramatically.

0:58:17.320 --> 0:58:20.760
<v Speaker 1>Or am I just naive and I've already drank from

0:58:20.840 --> 0:58:23.160
<v Speaker 1>that from that bowl. If you get away from the

0:58:23.240 --> 0:58:26.360
<v Speaker 1>door registrant and you go to a strict fee only,

0:58:27.080 --> 0:58:34.760
<v Speaker 1>conflict free environment, the amount of complaints falls dramatically. Your

0:58:34.880 --> 0:58:40.600
<v Speaker 1>your liability insurance per per advisor goes down dramatically because

0:58:40.640 --> 0:58:43.600
<v Speaker 1>it's just not that much exposure. As you said, your

0:58:43.640 --> 0:58:46.760
<v Speaker 1>compliance cost fall. You still need compliance systems, but they're

0:58:46.760 --> 0:58:49.760
<v Speaker 1>set up differently, and and really the only way for

0:58:49.880 --> 0:58:52.800
<v Speaker 1>the wirehouses to make this transformation is to really create

0:58:53.560 --> 0:58:57.080
<v Speaker 1>units of feel only advisors and only. You're only going

0:58:57.120 --> 0:58:59.280
<v Speaker 1>to be a registered investment advisor. You're not gonna sell

0:58:59.320 --> 0:59:02.920
<v Speaker 1>any products. We're gonna set up some Chinese walls when

0:59:03.000 --> 0:59:07.320
<v Speaker 1>it comes to, for example, buying bonds, uh, in buying

0:59:07.360 --> 0:59:10.040
<v Speaker 1>it out of our own inventory. UH, we'll have a

0:59:10.120 --> 0:59:14.920
<v Speaker 1>different trading desk that surveys the universe, including our offerings.

0:59:14.960 --> 0:59:19.440
<v Speaker 1>So that you really need to to take a look

0:59:19.520 --> 0:59:23.840
<v Speaker 1>at your structure and pretty much commit to having a

0:59:23.920 --> 0:59:27.480
<v Speaker 1>completely different division UH. For these people to work under.

0:59:27.560 --> 0:59:30.120
<v Speaker 1>Are any of the big firms experimenting with their own

0:59:30.320 --> 0:59:32.800
<v Speaker 1>all right, let's set up a skunk works project project

0:59:33.280 --> 0:59:36.920
<v Speaker 1>and just do an r I only fiducial only division,

0:59:37.240 --> 0:59:39.800
<v Speaker 1>because that's where the wind is blowing or has has

0:59:39.880 --> 0:59:42.520
<v Speaker 1>no one tried that yet? I think there are teams

0:59:42.640 --> 0:59:45.880
<v Speaker 1>that are doing that in firms, but I haven't seen

0:59:46.080 --> 0:59:48.880
<v Speaker 1>an entire division set up that way. One one would

0:59:48.920 --> 0:59:52.560
<v Speaker 1>think that that sort of experiment is look for guys

0:59:52.640 --> 0:59:54.520
<v Speaker 1>like you and me, this has let them keep doing

0:59:54.560 --> 0:59:57.560
<v Speaker 1>it wrong. It just means more more clients, more assets,

0:59:57.640 --> 1:00:00.680
<v Speaker 1>more advisors are coming over to our side of the street.

1:00:01.000 --> 1:00:03.040
<v Speaker 1>If I was a wirehouse right now, I'd be doing

1:00:03.120 --> 1:00:06.040
<v Speaker 1>what the roll ups are doing. I'd be buying registered

1:00:06.120 --> 1:00:10.160
<v Speaker 1>investment advisory practices that be taking the best of those practices,

1:00:10.680 --> 1:00:13.120
<v Speaker 1>forming a large r A firm out of it. I'd

1:00:13.160 --> 1:00:17.080
<v Speaker 1>be transitioning brokers out of the current environment or the

1:00:17.160 --> 1:00:20.920
<v Speaker 1>dual registered space, over to this feel only are a

1:00:21.200 --> 1:00:25.560
<v Speaker 1>only space, uh, and allowing that to happen. Allowing this

1:00:25.680 --> 1:00:29.320
<v Speaker 1>transition to happening, giving those people who say I don't

1:00:29.360 --> 1:00:32.840
<v Speaker 1>like this brokerage environment anymore a place to go. And

1:00:34.360 --> 1:00:36.200
<v Speaker 1>there's a little bit of that going home, But it's

1:00:36.280 --> 1:00:39.600
<v Speaker 1>not as pure as I would I would say it

1:00:39.680 --> 1:00:44.080
<v Speaker 1>needs to be, and it's not promoted as much as

1:00:44.120 --> 1:00:45.880
<v Speaker 1>it should be. It's tough to get a leopard to

1:00:46.000 --> 1:00:50.400
<v Speaker 1>change their spots, and it's tough to cannibalize your own business,

1:00:50.520 --> 1:00:54.360
<v Speaker 1>you know. Not a lot of companies have that ability

1:00:54.480 --> 1:00:57.600
<v Speaker 1>to engage in creative destruction of their own model. I

1:00:57.760 --> 1:01:00.840
<v Speaker 1>used to love watching Apple I'm out with a new

1:01:01.040 --> 1:01:04.040
<v Speaker 1>version of the iPod every year in the two thousands

1:01:04.560 --> 1:01:08.600
<v Speaker 1>that pretty much destroyed the previous version. Wait, why am

1:01:08.640 --> 1:01:11.080
<v Speaker 1>I gonna pay five hundred for this when half as

1:01:11.160 --> 1:01:14.160
<v Speaker 1>much money I get twice as much storage. And every

1:01:14.240 --> 1:01:16.720
<v Speaker 1>year they would do that, they wouldn't just introduce something

1:01:16.800 --> 1:01:18.240
<v Speaker 1>at the top of the line. On the bottom of

1:01:18.240 --> 1:01:21.560
<v Speaker 1>the line, they would destroy Not a lot of companies

1:01:21.720 --> 1:01:26.040
<v Speaker 1>have the long term perspective to say, we're gonna destroy

1:01:26.200 --> 1:01:27.800
<v Speaker 1>part of our own business because it's going to be

1:01:27.880 --> 1:01:30.840
<v Speaker 1>so much better for the rest of us. Look at

1:01:30.880 --> 1:01:33.560
<v Speaker 1>what they did with the iPad and then the iPhone.

1:01:33.600 --> 1:01:35.760
<v Speaker 1>Once they went to the big iPhone, they started losing

1:01:35.840 --> 1:01:40.240
<v Speaker 1>sales on the on the iPads. It's it's fascinating that

1:01:40.680 --> 1:01:44.959
<v Speaker 1>the finance industry that funds. All these companies never really

1:01:45.080 --> 1:01:50.480
<v Speaker 1>brought into that approach. The typical wirehouse firm on the

1:01:50.560 --> 1:01:53.080
<v Speaker 1>brokerage business wants to make about two percent a year,

1:01:53.800 --> 1:01:56.840
<v Speaker 1>two percent a year, two percent a year of the

1:01:56.880 --> 1:01:59.720
<v Speaker 1>assets that they manage. That's not going to happen. That

1:02:00.000 --> 1:02:02.880
<v Speaker 1>it's not gonna happen under a fiducry standard. That that's

1:02:03.520 --> 1:02:06.760
<v Speaker 1>pretty uh stiff. The I think of our I as

1:02:06.840 --> 1:02:11.160
<v Speaker 1>typically full service I as is one percent shops and

1:02:11.680 --> 1:02:14.760
<v Speaker 1>sometimes a little cheaper. And the way you look at

1:02:15.600 --> 1:02:18.320
<v Speaker 1>justifying that is, Okay, this is gonna be a better

1:02:18.400 --> 1:02:21.760
<v Speaker 1>portfolio than you're gonna have access to. That will cover

1:02:21.840 --> 1:02:24.080
<v Speaker 1>a third of your fee, and we're gonna talk you

1:02:24.200 --> 1:02:26.640
<v Speaker 1>off the ledge when things get really bad, and that'll

1:02:26.720 --> 1:02:30.440
<v Speaker 1>justify your fee. And by the way, here's all the planning,

1:02:30.520 --> 1:02:34.640
<v Speaker 1>the wealth transfer, the estate planning, the generational sale of

1:02:34.680 --> 1:02:37.240
<v Speaker 1>a business, all these different things that that a full

1:02:37.280 --> 1:02:41.320
<v Speaker 1>service are I A firm offers that helps to justify

1:02:41.440 --> 1:02:45.560
<v Speaker 1>their fees. But you can't really justify more than one

1:02:45.640 --> 1:02:48.200
<v Speaker 1>percent if you're a fiduciary. Two percent is really a

1:02:48.280 --> 1:02:53.640
<v Speaker 1>stiff fee. Yeah, for any for any substantial sized portfolio,

1:02:53.760 --> 1:02:56.600
<v Speaker 1>two percent is really getting up there. And what's interesting

1:02:56.720 --> 1:03:01.520
<v Speaker 1>is the feeling advisors they're prevailing in the marketplace. Just's

1:03:01.520 --> 1:03:04.360
<v Speaker 1>not enough of him right now? Is that true? There's

1:03:04.400 --> 1:03:07.880
<v Speaker 1>not enough? The only advisors there are about fifteen thousand

1:03:07.960 --> 1:03:11.120
<v Speaker 1>as far as we can figure out, the only advisors

1:03:11.360 --> 1:03:14.240
<v Speaker 1>out there. Uh, there's a lot more r A s.

1:03:14.320 --> 1:03:18.120
<v Speaker 1>But a lot of them sell insurance products. They focus

1:03:18.200 --> 1:03:21.840
<v Speaker 1>insurance or is the focus the investment or or a

1:03:21.880 --> 1:03:25.800
<v Speaker 1>little of each. Probably the majority of it is focus

1:03:25.880 --> 1:03:29.240
<v Speaker 1>of insurance. Because the state securiteous regulators said, listen, if

1:03:29.240 --> 1:03:33.680
<v Speaker 1>you're gonna go out and sell a equity index anuity

1:03:34.240 --> 1:03:36.200
<v Speaker 1>to some morning you're telling them to cash out of

1:03:36.240 --> 1:03:40.200
<v Speaker 1>their UH account or whatever, you have to have be

1:03:40.240 --> 1:03:42.520
<v Speaker 1>an investment advisor to give that advice to cash out.

1:03:43.240 --> 1:03:45.880
<v Speaker 1>So they get the investment advisor license to then turn

1:03:45.920 --> 1:03:49.640
<v Speaker 1>around and sell some annuity problems insurance license and insurance

1:03:49.760 --> 1:03:54.360
<v Speaker 1>is wildly profitable as a salesperson the entire I would

1:03:54.400 --> 1:03:57.280
<v Speaker 1>not want to be owning insurance company stock if I

1:03:57.400 --> 1:03:59.440
<v Speaker 1>was a stock picker right now. Really, well, I know

1:03:59.560 --> 1:04:02.600
<v Speaker 1>the first use premium, almost all of that is commissioned

1:04:02.720 --> 1:04:05.800
<v Speaker 1>pretty close to it, and you've got variable nuities have

1:04:06.000 --> 1:04:09.360
<v Speaker 1>very very high call structures and very high ongoing compensation

1:04:10.040 --> 1:04:12.480
<v Speaker 1>and equity index and nuities. Some of them paying ten

1:04:13.640 --> 1:04:18.360
<v Speaker 1>commissions are more. Uh. You apply a fiducry standards of this,

1:04:19.040 --> 1:04:22.960
<v Speaker 1>and you create this, You create this army of purchasers

1:04:23.040 --> 1:04:26.760
<v Speaker 1>representatives and kind of what you're alluding to, it's gonna

1:04:27.400 --> 1:04:31.640
<v Speaker 1>it's gonna cut the asset managers fees dramatically. Asset managers

1:04:31.720 --> 1:04:33.920
<v Speaker 1>are coming out with more and more products every day,

1:04:34.760 --> 1:04:37.520
<v Speaker 1>four fee only advisors, but the fees and costs have

1:04:37.600 --> 1:04:40.640
<v Speaker 1>to be transparent and they need to be a lot lower.

1:04:41.440 --> 1:04:44.000
<v Speaker 1>And the asset managers, some of them are realizing this.

1:04:44.520 --> 1:04:48.240
<v Speaker 1>Some of them are obviously stuck in quicksand some people

1:04:48.320 --> 1:04:52.080
<v Speaker 1>have been calling this the Vanguard effect that whatever sector

1:04:52.200 --> 1:04:56.200
<v Speaker 1>Vanguard plows its way into, in general, the fees tend

1:04:56.280 --> 1:04:59.960
<v Speaker 1>to go down because Vanguard is so inexpensive. We see

1:05:00.160 --> 1:05:05.280
<v Speaker 1>something comparable with Dimensional Funds. I had David Booth here

1:05:05.400 --> 1:05:08.840
<v Speaker 1>is the CEO of UM of Dimensional Funds. We also

1:05:08.920 --> 1:05:11.800
<v Speaker 1>had Bill McNabb from Vanguard. But there are another shop

1:05:11.920 --> 1:05:15.800
<v Speaker 1>that's very inexpensive, and any space they go into, their

1:05:15.880 --> 1:05:20.800
<v Speaker 1>competitors sort of see their their fees drop it and now,

1:05:20.920 --> 1:05:24.480
<v Speaker 1>I think the robo advisors they've done two things. They've

1:05:24.560 --> 1:05:27.880
<v Speaker 1>helped drive fees lower, but they've also made people realize

1:05:27.920 --> 1:05:30.400
<v Speaker 1>that sometimes you need to speak to a person if

1:05:30.480 --> 1:05:35.080
<v Speaker 1>you have anything more sophisticated than here's a quarter million dollars.

1:05:35.120 --> 1:05:36.959
<v Speaker 1>I want to invest this for the next twenty years.

1:05:37.480 --> 1:05:40.120
<v Speaker 1>So are we going to just continue to see fees

1:05:40.560 --> 1:05:44.680
<v Speaker 1>come under pressure both for products and advice or or

1:05:44.760 --> 1:05:47.760
<v Speaker 1>what does the future of that area look like. I

1:05:47.920 --> 1:05:51.400
<v Speaker 1>think the investment fees will come down, and I think

1:05:51.760 --> 1:05:54.280
<v Speaker 1>what we're gonna see is a split between investment advice,

1:05:54.760 --> 1:05:59.160
<v Speaker 1>which degree can be commoditized at least it's scalable, and

1:05:59.520 --> 1:06:03.360
<v Speaker 1>and finding interplanning advice, which really is not scalable. It's

1:06:03.480 --> 1:06:08.400
<v Speaker 1>very time intensive, it's expertise intensive. Uh. Yeah, you can

1:06:08.760 --> 1:06:12.440
<v Speaker 1>have basically the professional services model out there. We have

1:06:12.520 --> 1:06:14.680
<v Speaker 1>a lot of junior partners, a lot of associates, and

1:06:14.800 --> 1:06:18.000
<v Speaker 1>you give advice that way, and you take some of

1:06:18.080 --> 1:06:20.680
<v Speaker 1>their fees, and the senior partners make more money. A

1:06:20.760 --> 1:06:24.680
<v Speaker 1>professional services firm environment like a law firm, counterm and

1:06:24.800 --> 1:06:27.960
<v Speaker 1>and and the top senior partners may make a million

1:06:28.000 --> 1:06:31.280
<v Speaker 1>a year. But in a financial planning firm, but not

1:06:31.440 --> 1:06:34.440
<v Speaker 1>ten million a year because they get they're just great

1:06:34.480 --> 1:06:37.640
<v Speaker 1>at selling the high net worth clients. That's going to disappear.

1:06:38.920 --> 1:06:41.680
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I I see exactly what you're saying. We've

1:06:41.760 --> 1:06:44.840
<v Speaker 1>been watching this take place now for how many years.

1:06:45.640 --> 1:06:48.640
<v Speaker 1>In the nineties, I was saying to people who were brokers,

1:06:49.080 --> 1:06:51.480
<v Speaker 1>you should really think about moving to a feel only thing.

1:06:51.920 --> 1:06:54.800
<v Speaker 1>This whole broke re universe is going away. But here

1:06:54.840 --> 1:06:58.120
<v Speaker 1>it is. It's almost twenty years later, and they're still

1:06:58.560 --> 1:07:01.720
<v Speaker 1>the biggest, most powerful opts on the street. So has

1:07:01.920 --> 1:07:05.880
<v Speaker 1>has my forecast about this all moving to feel only

1:07:06.040 --> 1:07:09.400
<v Speaker 1>been wrong? Or is it just taking longer? And it's

1:07:09.440 --> 1:07:13.760
<v Speaker 1>eventually going in that direction. But you're fighting huge entrenched

1:07:13.880 --> 1:07:18.600
<v Speaker 1>forces with massive marketing budgets. There's a huge amount of

1:07:18.640 --> 1:07:22.120
<v Speaker 1>marketing going on there and that's hard to overcome. But

1:07:22.200 --> 1:07:24.840
<v Speaker 1>I think your forecast is right because it's been happening

1:07:25.000 --> 1:07:30.680
<v Speaker 1>gradually and and right now the investment independent investment advisory firms,

1:07:30.760 --> 1:07:33.480
<v Speaker 1>independent broker dealer firms are going to have as much

1:07:33.560 --> 1:07:36.960
<v Speaker 1>market share next year as the Wall Street firms, the

1:07:37.160 --> 1:07:40.160
<v Speaker 1>wirehouse firms are in terms of what as much market

1:07:40.920 --> 1:07:45.240
<v Speaker 1>assets on the management So you're talking about trillions, trillions

1:07:45.280 --> 1:07:48.680
<v Speaker 1>of dollars right now. Now you hit the Department of

1:07:48.800 --> 1:07:52.760
<v Speaker 1>Labor roll right, what's that going to do? One is

1:07:52.760 --> 1:07:55.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of the old brokers are going to say,

1:07:55.240 --> 1:07:57.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to deal with this. I'm out of here,

1:07:57.320 --> 1:07:58.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm retired. I don't want to give up. Oh you

1:07:58.920 --> 1:08:01.200
<v Speaker 1>mean they're just done, They're going away. You know, I

1:08:01.280 --> 1:08:03.280
<v Speaker 1>got all these clients with IRA accounts. I don't want

1:08:03.280 --> 1:08:05.440
<v Speaker 1>to practice on the fiduciary environment. I was going to

1:08:05.520 --> 1:08:08.880
<v Speaker 1>retire into I'm gonna I'm leaving. Let let me let,

1:08:09.080 --> 1:08:10.560
<v Speaker 1>Let me let a cat out of the bag, let

1:08:10.600 --> 1:08:13.160
<v Speaker 1>me let a secret out. It's not that hard to

1:08:13.280 --> 1:08:16.920
<v Speaker 1>be a fiduciary if and if anything, it's easier because

1:08:17.320 --> 1:08:19.960
<v Speaker 1>every time there's an issue, you just say to yourself, well,

1:08:20.040 --> 1:08:23.200
<v Speaker 1>what's in the client's best interest. I'll do that. The

1:08:23.400 --> 1:08:26.000
<v Speaker 1>rules on suitability are so much more complicated than just

1:08:26.080 --> 1:08:28.960
<v Speaker 1>saying what's in the client's best interest. So why do

1:08:29.080 --> 1:08:31.360
<v Speaker 1>these guys want to exit? They're just not used to

1:08:31.520 --> 1:08:35.759
<v Speaker 1>that world, or to me, I'm I'm astonished by that comment.

1:08:36.080 --> 1:08:42.840
<v Speaker 1>I've actually seen, Uh, the only affirms higher brokers, exceptional people,

1:08:42.920 --> 1:08:46.320
<v Speaker 1>smart people bringing them into the fionly fiduciary side, and

1:08:46.400 --> 1:08:50.680
<v Speaker 1>they never adopt to the fiduciary mindset. They never understand

1:08:50.760 --> 1:08:53.720
<v Speaker 1>what it means to really put the client's interest first.

1:08:54.360 --> 1:08:56.960
<v Speaker 1>They think that best interest means as long as I

1:08:57.080 --> 1:09:00.880
<v Speaker 1>recommend a decent product. I'm okay, But it is a

1:09:01.040 --> 1:09:04.519
<v Speaker 1>big transition from a sales culture to fiduciary culture, and

1:09:04.680 --> 1:09:07.519
<v Speaker 1>some people just simply can't make that transition. Huh. That

1:09:07.760 --> 1:09:11.000
<v Speaker 1>that that's quite astonishing to me. So I know I

1:09:11.080 --> 1:09:13.880
<v Speaker 1>only have you for a certain amount of time. Let

1:09:13.920 --> 1:09:17.559
<v Speaker 1>me get to some of my favorite, um my favorite

1:09:17.600 --> 1:09:20.919
<v Speaker 1>questions that I asked all my guests. So we discussed

1:09:20.960 --> 1:09:24.880
<v Speaker 1>your background. You worked as an attorney doing estates and

1:09:25.160 --> 1:09:28.679
<v Speaker 1>and trusts early in your career. UM, and you told

1:09:28.760 --> 1:09:33.520
<v Speaker 1>us how you moved into the to the financial services industry.

1:09:34.040 --> 1:09:36.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm still amused by the thought of you in a

1:09:38.840 --> 1:09:44.160
<v Speaker 1>blue bear costume in Disney walking around with a random

1:09:44.240 --> 1:09:47.519
<v Speaker 1>walk down Wall Street book under under your arm. What

1:09:47.920 --> 1:09:50.080
<v Speaker 1>was it really like that you were you were were

1:09:50.160 --> 1:09:53.120
<v Speaker 1>in the costume reading about stocks and bonds or or

1:09:53.240 --> 1:09:55.360
<v Speaker 1>is that an exaggeration? No, I had it tucked away.

1:09:55.920 --> 1:09:58.040
<v Speaker 1>You know, you have so much padding in those bear costumes.

1:09:58.080 --> 1:10:00.439
<v Speaker 1>It's easy to carry a book. You usually going from

1:10:00.479 --> 1:10:02.439
<v Speaker 1>one part of the park to or the other. When

1:10:02.479 --> 1:10:05.120
<v Speaker 1>you're in a costume, you get all stage. You remove

1:10:05.200 --> 1:10:07.360
<v Speaker 1>your costume where most of it And that's when I

1:10:07.400 --> 1:10:10.520
<v Speaker 1>pick up the book. And while i'm you know, rehydrating

1:10:10.600 --> 1:10:14.280
<v Speaker 1>myself and catching my breath for the next thirty minutes set,

1:10:14.360 --> 1:10:15.960
<v Speaker 1>that's when you you pull out the book and read it.

1:10:16.120 --> 1:10:18.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm trying to visualize you in a bear costume with

1:10:18.760 --> 1:10:21.400
<v Speaker 1>the head on a table, with like a cup of

1:10:21.439 --> 1:10:26.280
<v Speaker 1>coffee and a cigarette reading a book. That's a great visual. Well,

1:10:26.520 --> 1:10:33.280
<v Speaker 1>it was more like twelve glasses of water and the

1:10:33.400 --> 1:10:37.280
<v Speaker 1>book is wrapped up in a plastic bag. Why because

1:10:37.360 --> 1:10:40.000
<v Speaker 1>you you sweat so much. You're in a giant for

1:10:40.680 --> 1:10:44.680
<v Speaker 1>costume in Orlando and it's ninety degrees in July, and

1:10:45.000 --> 1:10:48.640
<v Speaker 1>and you're rehydrating and you're having so much fun. I

1:10:48.720 --> 1:10:51.840
<v Speaker 1>can imagine. I can imagine that. Um, so we know

1:10:51.960 --> 1:10:55.040
<v Speaker 1>what you did before you worked on Wall Street. Other

1:10:55.120 --> 1:10:58.400
<v Speaker 1>than Walt Disney, who are some of your early mentors?

1:10:59.360 --> 1:11:02.640
<v Speaker 1>Oh my, uh, you know, I think I think we

1:11:02.760 --> 1:11:04.920
<v Speaker 1>take a little bit, if we're smart, we take a

1:11:04.960 --> 1:11:09.080
<v Speaker 1>little bit of all the good things from almost every

1:11:09.120 --> 1:11:14.439
<v Speaker 1>person that we have a significant relationship with. People that

1:11:14.640 --> 1:11:19.080
<v Speaker 1>probably influenced me the most. I'd say one was Harold Levinski.

1:11:19.280 --> 1:11:23.080
<v Speaker 1>You know, okay, who is he? So? Harold has a

1:11:23.160 --> 1:11:26.240
<v Speaker 1>firm of Vinsky and Cats down in Coral Gables. I

1:11:26.360 --> 1:11:28.719
<v Speaker 1>like to call him the Whites or the y Sage

1:11:28.760 --> 1:11:31.840
<v Speaker 1>of the profession. He was chaired the CFB board probably

1:11:31.880 --> 1:11:35.720
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years ago. Uh. He's a professor of Texas Tech

1:11:35.800 --> 1:11:39.599
<v Speaker 1>and the masters program there, Masters of Financial Planning. Uh.

1:11:40.000 --> 1:11:43.799
<v Speaker 1>He's just full of insights. He's written several books. Fifteen

1:11:43.880 --> 1:11:46.120
<v Speaker 1>years ago, I'm sitting at an A I c P

1:11:46.280 --> 1:11:51.479
<v Speaker 1>A conference on financial planning, thinking about getting into the industry.

1:11:51.520 --> 1:11:55.360
<v Speaker 1>And he said, something I'll never forget is if you're

1:11:55.400 --> 1:11:59.000
<v Speaker 1>going to become a financial advisor, commit to it fully

1:11:59.800 --> 1:12:03.200
<v Speaker 1>the do this part time. And and I meaning that

1:12:03.360 --> 1:12:06.120
<v Speaker 1>the life insurance salesman and accounts and others who are

1:12:06.200 --> 1:12:09.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of dabbling in it really shouldn't be right. And

1:12:09.640 --> 1:12:12.920
<v Speaker 1>I think that's completely true. This is a very time

1:12:12.960 --> 1:12:16.760
<v Speaker 1>consuming profession to stay abreast of what's of what all

1:12:16.840 --> 1:12:19.519
<v Speaker 1>the changes that happen. It's it's it's a nice challenge actually,

1:12:20.160 --> 1:12:23.799
<v Speaker 1>And and this this need to make a full commitment

1:12:23.880 --> 1:12:28.880
<v Speaker 1>to being an excellent financial planner. Uh, those words, those

1:12:28.920 --> 1:12:32.639
<v Speaker 1>words meant a lot. And I think some other people

1:12:32.720 --> 1:12:36.960
<v Speaker 1>that probably influenced me, probably a couple of the professors

1:12:37.000 --> 1:12:39.320
<v Speaker 1>that I worked with now, one is Andrew had his

1:12:39.520 --> 1:12:43.519
<v Speaker 1>Young Professor really the reason I joined Western Kentucky University.

1:12:43.720 --> 1:12:48.160
<v Speaker 1>H he has this way of captivating the students in

1:12:48.240 --> 1:12:51.679
<v Speaker 1>his classes. I've seen him do this and also connecting

1:12:51.720 --> 1:12:54.519
<v Speaker 1>with students on a one on one basis that I'm

1:12:54.600 --> 1:12:58.000
<v Speaker 1>just absorbing his lessons on that, on that. And then

1:12:58.040 --> 1:13:02.840
<v Speaker 1>there's a Dr India Chaci, who you know, probably the

1:13:03.000 --> 1:13:07.600
<v Speaker 1>toughest finance professor in the world, um in terms of

1:13:07.840 --> 1:13:11.040
<v Speaker 1>the assignments that the case study methodology he uses, the

1:13:11.400 --> 1:13:15.519
<v Speaker 1>amount of workload, and yet the students, when they have

1:13:15.720 --> 1:13:18.640
<v Speaker 1>this enormous respect for him, they want to please him.

1:13:19.800 --> 1:13:23.400
<v Speaker 1>They come out of his class learning so much and

1:13:23.600 --> 1:13:25.920
<v Speaker 1>and just to be around these two individuals and and

1:13:26.040 --> 1:13:30.760
<v Speaker 1>the other finance faculty at Western Kentucky University, it's it's really,

1:13:32.240 --> 1:13:35.519
<v Speaker 1>it's been already just one semester there has been this

1:13:35.840 --> 1:13:39.960
<v Speaker 1>tremendous experience and I'm looking forward to more interesting. Um.

1:13:40.080 --> 1:13:42.720
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about investors who might have influenced you,

1:13:42.880 --> 1:13:48.639
<v Speaker 1>What investors have changed your thought process either about being

1:13:48.680 --> 1:13:51.839
<v Speaker 1>a fiduciary about putting money at work in the market.

1:13:52.240 --> 1:13:56.599
<v Speaker 1>Who who has influenced your thinking on the fiduciary front,

1:13:56.840 --> 1:14:01.240
<v Speaker 1>without a doubt, the single most influences Professor Tomorrow Frankel,

1:14:01.400 --> 1:14:05.519
<v Speaker 1>Boston University College of Law. And and she's been writing

1:14:05.520 --> 1:14:09.800
<v Speaker 1>about fiduciary law. She's in her eighties now still teaching. UH.

1:14:10.080 --> 1:14:13.800
<v Speaker 1>And she's just a wonderful writer and fiducier all things fiduciary.

1:14:13.960 --> 1:14:17.920
<v Speaker 1>Who gave you the two thousand eleven Tomorrow Frankel Fiduciary

1:14:17.960 --> 1:14:22.120
<v Speaker 1>Standard Award was that the Committee for the Fiduciary Standard. UH.

1:14:22.280 --> 1:14:25.160
<v Speaker 1>That award is now given by another organization called the

1:14:25.200 --> 1:14:28.280
<v Speaker 1>Institute for the Fiduciary Standard. I involved with both of them,

1:14:28.439 --> 1:14:32.640
<v Speaker 1>both grade groups UH and UH. So it was the

1:14:32.720 --> 1:14:36.320
<v Speaker 1>first time they gave that award. I had done some

1:14:36.760 --> 1:14:41.439
<v Speaker 1>assistance with some of their projects and relating to lobbying

1:14:41.640 --> 1:14:44.920
<v Speaker 1>the SEC or working educating the SEC. I should say,

1:14:45.840 --> 1:14:47.839
<v Speaker 1>so it was a nice it was a nice surprise

1:14:47.920 --> 1:14:53.000
<v Speaker 1>to get that year. UH. But you know, come back

1:14:53.160 --> 1:14:56.560
<v Speaker 1>to the to some the questions you know, other influencers

1:14:56.600 --> 1:15:01.720
<v Speaker 1>on the on the finance side, uh Gene Fama. Without

1:15:01.760 --> 1:15:07.280
<v Speaker 1>a question, I admire David Boothford for taking this academic

1:15:07.360 --> 1:15:10.320
<v Speaker 1>approach to investing and building this huge firm out of it.

1:15:10.560 --> 1:15:14.040
<v Speaker 1>Dimensional Funds Advisors now a four billion dollars, right, that's

1:15:14.080 --> 1:15:17.440
<v Speaker 1>a huge pile of money. And if you're an advisor

1:15:17.600 --> 1:15:20.639
<v Speaker 1>and you're not working with Dimensional Funds Advisors, I'm like saying,

1:15:20.880 --> 1:15:24.439
<v Speaker 1>why aren't you? You know, I look at the universe

1:15:24.520 --> 1:15:29.439
<v Speaker 1>and say, we're Dimensionals at the top. Vanguard is number two.

1:15:30.120 --> 1:15:32.560
<v Speaker 1>And then there's a huge follow off after that in

1:15:32.760 --> 1:15:37.439
<v Speaker 1>terms of the way that the mutual funds, for example,

1:15:37.560 --> 1:15:42.160
<v Speaker 1>or other investment products are designed engineer the whole run off, right,

1:15:42.439 --> 1:15:45.720
<v Speaker 1>And and there are some specific products that are pretty good.

1:15:45.760 --> 1:15:51.320
<v Speaker 1>But but in terms of the overall platform, and I know,

1:15:51.520 --> 1:15:54.680
<v Speaker 1>I know it takes takes something to be able to

1:15:54.880 --> 1:15:58.880
<v Speaker 1>access Dimensionals Funds, but you have to be an advisor.

1:15:59.000 --> 1:16:00.960
<v Speaker 1>They make you go through a bunch of hoops to

1:16:01.840 --> 1:16:07.240
<v Speaker 1>understand what dimensions mean, small cap value, etcetera. All the

1:16:07.320 --> 1:16:13.200
<v Speaker 1>different factors. They really don't randomly take people and their crew.

1:16:14.120 --> 1:16:17.360
<v Speaker 1>They're the advisors who work with Dimensional They are not

1:16:17.640 --> 1:16:20.960
<v Speaker 1>active traders, meaning that even in the O eight oh

1:16:21.040 --> 1:16:24.680
<v Speaker 1>nine collapse, these guys are sitting tight and saying, hey,

1:16:24.760 --> 1:16:26.439
<v Speaker 1>we're never gonna be able to time this, so we're

1:16:26.479 --> 1:16:29.360
<v Speaker 1>just gonna ride it out. And they had almost no

1:16:30.000 --> 1:16:33.120
<v Speaker 1>they may even had to have had inflows during that period,

1:16:33.720 --> 1:16:36.120
<v Speaker 1>So it's not for So would you say you don't

1:16:36.200 --> 1:16:41.120
<v Speaker 1>understand why my office is a dimensional shop, But I

1:16:41.240 --> 1:16:43.559
<v Speaker 1>could see why some people would look at his scans

1:16:43.640 --> 1:16:47.000
<v Speaker 1>and say this isn't for me. Again, I've drank the

1:16:47.040 --> 1:16:50.920
<v Speaker 1>kool aid, so I have no objectivity with this. But

1:16:51.160 --> 1:16:54.120
<v Speaker 1>there are people who say, we want to pick stocks,

1:16:54.240 --> 1:16:56.600
<v Speaker 1>or we want to try and time the market, or

1:16:56.800 --> 1:17:00.280
<v Speaker 1>we want to have more flexibility, and if our clients

1:17:00.320 --> 1:17:02.120
<v Speaker 1>want out, we're not going to tell them not to

1:17:02.200 --> 1:17:05.880
<v Speaker 1>get out. I think one of the things I'm fond

1:17:05.960 --> 1:17:09.080
<v Speaker 1>of saying is your clients don't know what they want,

1:17:09.200 --> 1:17:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and it's your job to tell them what they need.

1:17:12.040 --> 1:17:14.280
<v Speaker 1>They think they know what they want because they read

1:17:14.320 --> 1:17:17.400
<v Speaker 1>a headline so many on TV said something, but that's

1:17:17.479 --> 1:17:21.400
<v Speaker 1>just a momentary lapse of reason. What they need is

1:17:21.479 --> 1:17:25.120
<v Speaker 1>to someone is for someone to say you may think

1:17:25.200 --> 1:17:28.400
<v Speaker 1>you want this now, but let me explain what you needed,

1:17:28.760 --> 1:17:32.000
<v Speaker 1>because what just happened in China last month has nothing

1:17:32.080 --> 1:17:34.559
<v Speaker 1>to do with the thirty year plan you put together

1:17:35.000 --> 1:17:38.120
<v Speaker 1>about your kids going to college and your retirement and

1:17:38.240 --> 1:17:41.760
<v Speaker 1>a generational length transfer. This is a temporary thing, not

1:17:42.000 --> 1:17:44.960
<v Speaker 1>part of your plan. They need someone to tell that,

1:17:45.439 --> 1:17:48.960
<v Speaker 1>even though they want to hear whatever the craziness that

1:17:49.080 --> 1:17:51.960
<v Speaker 1>happens to be on television that moment. You know, every

1:17:52.040 --> 1:17:57.000
<v Speaker 1>investor needs to have this this plan investment policy that says,

1:17:57.120 --> 1:17:59.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, we we don't know if the market is

1:17:59.240 --> 1:18:01.760
<v Speaker 1>going to go up or down, but we know how

1:18:01.840 --> 1:18:03.880
<v Speaker 1>we're going to react to it, and we know that

1:18:04.800 --> 1:18:07.560
<v Speaker 1>we need to keep these four words in mind. And

1:18:07.880 --> 1:18:10.800
<v Speaker 1>I used to hold client conferences. I was working in

1:18:10.840 --> 1:18:13.439
<v Speaker 1>a firm, and you know, you do the luncheon, and

1:18:13.520 --> 1:18:15.519
<v Speaker 1>you bring in thirty clients and you have a nice

1:18:15.880 --> 1:18:18.879
<v Speaker 1>luncheon or dinner, and I would have all the clients

1:18:18.960 --> 1:18:22.519
<v Speaker 1>stand up and repeat after me, very loudly. These four

1:18:22.600 --> 1:18:27.160
<v Speaker 1>words become some solemonic wisdom, right, buy low, sell high.

1:18:27.680 --> 1:18:30.439
<v Speaker 1>That's simple, okay. And they would be beating that to me.

1:18:30.800 --> 1:18:34.559
<v Speaker 1>And and of course getting them to sell usually wasn't

1:18:34.680 --> 1:18:37.640
<v Speaker 1>very difficult. Taking gains off the table. Of course, the

1:18:37.720 --> 1:18:42.400
<v Speaker 1>downturn happens by low a little bit more difficult when

1:18:42.600 --> 1:18:45.360
<v Speaker 1>they don't think the world is going to exist next week.

1:18:45.439 --> 1:18:47.320
<v Speaker 1>To get them to buy when things are really low.

1:18:49.000 --> 1:18:50.880
<v Speaker 1>If the world isn't gonna exist, so what so go

1:18:51.000 --> 1:18:52.960
<v Speaker 1>buy stocks? What do you care if we're all gone

1:18:53.000 --> 1:18:54.640
<v Speaker 1>in a week? What does it matter? So at the

1:18:54.720 --> 1:18:58.200
<v Speaker 1>time the firm, I was with UH, and when I

1:18:58.240 --> 1:19:00.680
<v Speaker 1>went to teaching, I sold my interest in the firm

1:19:00.920 --> 1:19:04.599
<v Speaker 1>to my partners. UH. We had a hundred and thirty clients,

1:19:04.720 --> 1:19:07.400
<v Speaker 1>a hundred and twenty seven of them. Did what we

1:19:07.479 --> 1:19:10.920
<v Speaker 1>asked was the market was going down, we bought and

1:19:10.960 --> 1:19:14.439
<v Speaker 1>went down further. We bought on March nine, just by

1:19:14.640 --> 1:19:18.360
<v Speaker 1>fortunate luck, we bought again, you know, and and the

1:19:18.520 --> 1:19:23.280
<v Speaker 1>clients reaped the benefits of that. UH and a lot

1:19:23.400 --> 1:19:27.360
<v Speaker 1>of a lot of the financial behavior side of this,

1:19:27.600 --> 1:19:29.600
<v Speaker 1>And it doesn't matter if you're a roaber advisor or

1:19:29.680 --> 1:19:33.720
<v Speaker 1>if you're hands on have a deep relationship with a

1:19:33.840 --> 1:19:38.479
<v Speaker 1>few clients. Is preparing clients for what's going to happen

1:19:39.320 --> 1:19:42.880
<v Speaker 1>and in advance and getting them to remember that they

1:19:43.040 --> 1:19:47.559
<v Speaker 1>committed to following this plan regardless of what happens. Look

1:19:47.640 --> 1:19:51.120
<v Speaker 1>you said, markets go up, markets go down, well pretty

1:19:51.200 --> 1:19:53.920
<v Speaker 1>much all the time. That's what's gonna happen. Markets will

1:19:53.960 --> 1:19:57.400
<v Speaker 1>go up and down. Are you emotionally ready to ride that? Right?

1:19:57.439 --> 1:20:00.280
<v Speaker 1>You know, we had clients who who were going to

1:20:00.360 --> 1:20:04.240
<v Speaker 1>cancel their vacation trips. Uh, you know, seven years old,

1:20:04.840 --> 1:20:07.400
<v Speaker 1>gonna go on a cruise down the river in Europe,

1:20:07.960 --> 1:20:11.760
<v Speaker 1>and in our response to them is absolutely not okay, No,

1:20:12.600 --> 1:20:14.920
<v Speaker 1>we We've looked at your portfolio. You can still do this,

1:20:15.120 --> 1:20:18.799
<v Speaker 1>your retirement still secure. Go do this, Go enjoy yourself.

1:20:19.160 --> 1:20:21.160
<v Speaker 1>The market will be here when you get back. And

1:20:21.320 --> 1:20:24.400
<v Speaker 1>and that's delivering value to a client is when you

1:20:24.439 --> 1:20:26.920
<v Speaker 1>can do that. You know. One of the questions I

1:20:27.320 --> 1:20:29.800
<v Speaker 1>did not ask you earlier, but let's let's bring it

1:20:29.920 --> 1:20:33.439
<v Speaker 1>up here. You mentioned a hundred and seven out of

1:20:33.479 --> 1:20:39.080
<v Speaker 1>a hundred and how often should an advisor fire a client?

1:20:39.400 --> 1:20:42.680
<v Speaker 1>Meaning how often is there a bad fit? Where I'm

1:20:42.720 --> 1:20:45.240
<v Speaker 1>gonna I'm gonna phrase it differently, how often is it

1:20:45.320 --> 1:20:48.599
<v Speaker 1>in everybody's interest to say, hey, listen, we do acts

1:20:48.880 --> 1:20:51.680
<v Speaker 1>you want, why let's part as friends and go our

1:20:51.760 --> 1:20:55.160
<v Speaker 1>separate ways. I think screening clients to make sure that

1:20:55.280 --> 1:20:58.479
<v Speaker 1>they fit with you, fit with your firends philosophy, but

1:20:58.560 --> 1:21:01.479
<v Speaker 1>also fit with your personality. There there are clients that

1:21:01.560 --> 1:21:03.559
<v Speaker 1>came to our firm that I wasn't a very good

1:21:03.600 --> 1:21:06.280
<v Speaker 1>fit with personality wise, but one of my partners was

1:21:06.320 --> 1:21:09.200
<v Speaker 1>a good fit with them. And I think that the

1:21:09.320 --> 1:21:12.040
<v Speaker 1>idea of having a firm that you have shared client

1:21:12.120 --> 1:21:17.920
<v Speaker 1>relationships with is a tremendous opportunity to secure more clients.

1:21:18.479 --> 1:21:22.680
<v Speaker 1>But there they are probably the people out there who

1:21:23.320 --> 1:21:28.040
<v Speaker 1>who will never embrace the investment philosophy that you might

1:21:28.080 --> 1:21:31.679
<v Speaker 1>be using or the manner in which you serve clients.

1:21:31.760 --> 1:21:33.840
<v Speaker 1>And you have just got to be honest and say

1:21:34.280 --> 1:21:36.960
<v Speaker 1>we think you might be served at elsewhere. And if

1:21:37.040 --> 1:21:39.679
<v Speaker 1>you take on those clients, if you if you're screening process,

1:21:40.160 --> 1:21:42.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, I like to say, clients, will any of

1:21:42.160 --> 1:21:46.560
<v Speaker 1>you us? We interview them absolutely. And if if you

1:21:46.640 --> 1:21:48.160
<v Speaker 1>take on those clients and it turns out to be

1:21:48.240 --> 1:21:51.639
<v Speaker 1>a mistake, then fix that mistake right away. It's people

1:21:51.680 --> 1:21:54.920
<v Speaker 1>don't realize to say, okay, we're not gonna be your

1:21:54.920 --> 1:21:59.440
<v Speaker 1>adviser anymore. That's time consuming, it's a headache, it's a disruptive.

1:22:00.040 --> 1:22:01.800
<v Speaker 1>You have to file a certain thing every time a

1:22:01.880 --> 1:22:04.400
<v Speaker 1>client leaves you have to have a note in a file.

1:22:05.080 --> 1:22:08.679
<v Speaker 1>Here's why this relationship terminated, here's where the money met went.

1:22:09.240 --> 1:22:11.439
<v Speaker 1>So there's no money laundering issues, there's a whole bunch

1:22:11.479 --> 1:22:15.920
<v Speaker 1>of regulations. You're you're much better off screening that issue

1:22:16.040 --> 1:22:19.720
<v Speaker 1>out beforehands, rather than saying, well, we'll just bring them

1:22:19.760 --> 1:22:21.559
<v Speaker 1>in and they'll fire us in two or three quarters.

1:22:21.800 --> 1:22:24.200
<v Speaker 1>But in the meanwhile, we've collected the fees. It's not

1:22:24.280 --> 1:22:26.800
<v Speaker 1>worth it to do that. It takes time to too.

1:22:27.160 --> 1:22:30.519
<v Speaker 1>It takes a huge amount of paperwork, time and also

1:22:30.720 --> 1:22:33.519
<v Speaker 1>educating the client and training the client in that first year.

1:22:34.160 --> 1:22:37.040
<v Speaker 1>And you simply don't make that investment with a client

1:22:37.560 --> 1:22:40.120
<v Speaker 1>unless you're really really confident that that's going to be

1:22:40.200 --> 1:22:44.360
<v Speaker 1>good fit for you. I mentioned the email that wasn't

1:22:44.640 --> 1:22:46.960
<v Speaker 1>made up, that was a real email. Hey, I have

1:22:47.240 --> 1:22:49.800
<v Speaker 1>X number of millions of dollars. I want to spread

1:22:49.880 --> 1:22:53.040
<v Speaker 1>this money around five people, and whoever does the best

1:22:53.120 --> 1:22:55.479
<v Speaker 1>gets all the money. And I wrote this guy, Hey,

1:22:55.920 --> 1:22:59.200
<v Speaker 1>you're clearly a bad fit for us, but I have

1:22:59.360 --> 1:23:02.040
<v Speaker 1>to tell you what you're setting up is a disaster.

1:23:02.160 --> 1:23:06.680
<v Speaker 1>And here's why. Think about how you've just incentivized not me,

1:23:06.800 --> 1:23:10.040
<v Speaker 1>because I would never do that. How you've incentivized these

1:23:10.200 --> 1:23:13.679
<v Speaker 1>five managers. First, the odds are five to one against

1:23:13.720 --> 1:23:16.800
<v Speaker 1>any of them winning, So you've now created this huge

1:23:16.840 --> 1:23:20.560
<v Speaker 1>incentive for them to be reckless with your money in

1:23:20.760 --> 1:23:25.559
<v Speaker 1>hopes of winning the big account. You've created a lose

1:23:25.680 --> 1:23:29.040
<v Speaker 1>lose situation for these guys aren't going to get the account,

1:23:29.160 --> 1:23:31.960
<v Speaker 1>so they're gonna do god knows what. And the fifth,

1:23:32.280 --> 1:23:34.360
<v Speaker 1>if he wins the account, it's gonna be because he

1:23:34.479 --> 1:23:38.360
<v Speaker 1>got lucky doing really risky things to show you the

1:23:38.439 --> 1:23:41.720
<v Speaker 1>best performance. Why would you do this? And it was

1:23:42.040 --> 1:23:45.320
<v Speaker 1>to me, it's so obvious. That's a person said, well,

1:23:45.360 --> 1:23:48.280
<v Speaker 1>you don't want to compete, so obviously, and we get

1:23:48.400 --> 1:23:50.639
<v Speaker 1>I get emails all the time. What's your sharp ratio?

1:23:51.200 --> 1:23:54.519
<v Speaker 1>My sharp ratio is see you later, that's my sharp ratio.

1:23:55.120 --> 1:23:58.200
<v Speaker 1>You know, economic incentives matter, and they manner a huge

1:23:58.200 --> 1:24:02.400
<v Speaker 1>amount in financial services. And if you're a fiduciary, you

1:24:02.640 --> 1:24:06.559
<v Speaker 1>have got to set yourself up that you're not driven

1:24:06.640 --> 1:24:09.880
<v Speaker 1>by these incentives to do something bad for a client.

1:24:10.479 --> 1:24:14.160
<v Speaker 1>And that remans removing conflicts, because if you have a

1:24:14.240 --> 1:24:19.879
<v Speaker 1>conflict of interest that is going to infect your judgment.

1:24:20.560 --> 1:24:26.800
<v Speaker 1>Maybe unconsciously, you're going to somehow over time, self justify

1:24:27.439 --> 1:24:29.960
<v Speaker 1>doing something bad to a client if you have an

1:24:30.000 --> 1:24:33.040
<v Speaker 1>economic incentive to do it. And and that's the purpose

1:24:33.120 --> 1:24:37.000
<v Speaker 1>of the fiduciary standard is to remove those economic incentives

1:24:37.040 --> 1:24:40.960
<v Speaker 1>to still be paid as an expert, as a professional.

1:24:41.640 --> 1:24:46.400
<v Speaker 1>You you deserve professional level compensation, no question about it, right,

1:24:46.600 --> 1:24:51.439
<v Speaker 1>but to remove the economic incentives that really would cause

1:24:51.520 --> 1:24:54.400
<v Speaker 1>you to do things that would harm the client and

1:24:54.960 --> 1:24:56.880
<v Speaker 1>to put you on the same side of the table

1:24:57.040 --> 1:25:00.720
<v Speaker 1>absolute client. Um, let's keep plowing through my last few

1:25:00.840 --> 1:25:03.800
<v Speaker 1>questions while I while I have you, how about some books?

1:25:03.840 --> 1:25:07.599
<v Speaker 1>What are your favorite books, either on investing or non

1:25:07.720 --> 1:25:13.639
<v Speaker 1>fiction or anything else that you think is worth sharing. Uh? Well,

1:25:13.680 --> 1:25:16.240
<v Speaker 1>I've always been a Tom Clancy fan on the side,

1:25:16.320 --> 1:25:20.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, I'm what's your favorite Clancy some of all years?

1:25:20.439 --> 1:25:24.080
<v Speaker 1>Is how I found him? Uh? I would say Cardinal

1:25:24.160 --> 1:25:27.280
<v Speaker 1>to Kremlin probably the first one I read, so you

1:25:27.360 --> 1:25:30.479
<v Speaker 1>know that remains one of my favorites. Uh. The Hunt

1:25:30.520 --> 1:25:32.559
<v Speaker 1>for Red October was a good one, no doubt about

1:25:32.560 --> 1:25:37.080
<v Speaker 1>that was great without a great On the nonfiction side, uh,

1:25:37.160 --> 1:25:39.080
<v Speaker 1>the investment side of you know, I like authors like

1:25:39.280 --> 1:25:43.479
<v Speaker 1>Peter Bernstein, of course, So let's back up, is that

1:25:43.600 --> 1:25:47.800
<v Speaker 1>Peter Bernstein. When I was on vacation last month, I

1:25:47.920 --> 1:25:52.519
<v Speaker 1>brought with me Against the Gods and sitting on my

1:25:52.640 --> 1:25:55.800
<v Speaker 1>desk at home on top of Against the Gods as

1:25:55.840 --> 1:25:59.840
<v Speaker 1>good as gold, amazing. Yeah, great books. You know, I

1:26:00.000 --> 1:26:04.719
<v Speaker 1>go back and reread uh those books. Uh. And Larry

1:26:04.720 --> 1:26:07.360
<v Speaker 1>swad Rows stuff. He sends to come out with about

1:26:07.400 --> 1:26:10.120
<v Speaker 1>a book a year or so. Swedrow is another scorched

1:26:11.040 --> 1:26:13.280
<v Speaker 1>just nothing gets him. And he was on the show.

1:26:13.840 --> 1:26:16.800
<v Speaker 1>He was great. You meet him. He looks like such

1:26:16.840 --> 1:26:19.840
<v Speaker 1>a quiet guy and then he starts speaking and there

1:26:19.920 --> 1:26:24.240
<v Speaker 1>are no lots of colladal damage, no survivors. He just

1:26:24.439 --> 1:26:27.080
<v Speaker 1>mows everything down in front of him. What what book

1:26:27.120 --> 1:26:30.519
<v Speaker 1>of his is on your recommended list? I guess for

1:26:30.880 --> 1:26:35.080
<v Speaker 1>for beginning investor? Uh, I like what Wall Street doesn't

1:26:35.080 --> 1:26:36.720
<v Speaker 1>want you to know. I think it's like his first

1:26:36.800 --> 1:26:39.840
<v Speaker 1>or second book. You know, I actually have my had

1:26:39.880 --> 1:26:44.719
<v Speaker 1>my students read uh The Incredible Shrinking Alpha. Last semester.

1:26:45.000 --> 1:26:48.639
<v Speaker 1>He has been on a tear about hedge funds private equity.

1:26:49.160 --> 1:26:52.920
<v Speaker 1>He just recently and I'll see if I find the

1:26:53.000 --> 1:26:57.519
<v Speaker 1>link did something that basically says sixty performs private equity.

1:26:57.960 --> 1:27:01.880
<v Speaker 1>Just he's just been achen but but if I had

1:27:01.920 --> 1:27:04.880
<v Speaker 1>to say two books that are to be if you

1:27:04.960 --> 1:27:08.360
<v Speaker 1>had only two books on your bookshelf, one of them

1:27:08.400 --> 1:27:13.040
<v Speaker 1>are to be Roger Gibson's Ascid Allocation Roger Gibson's Asset Allocation,

1:27:13.720 --> 1:27:16.439
<v Speaker 1>fifth Edition. Now that's a that's a pretty thick tone,

1:27:16.520 --> 1:27:19.120
<v Speaker 1>isn't it pretty thick book? You know. It's that's on

1:27:19.240 --> 1:27:21.400
<v Speaker 1>my that's right over my desk in the office, right,

1:27:21.479 --> 1:27:25.320
<v Speaker 1>it's it's like Rick Ferry on stboards. Okay, it's uh

1:27:26.439 --> 1:27:28.800
<v Speaker 1>so you take Rick Ferry's Acid Allocation Book, which is

1:27:28.800 --> 1:27:32.400
<v Speaker 1>another very accessible and very readable. I use that on

1:27:32.560 --> 1:27:35.919
<v Speaker 1>undergraduate you know, and Roger Gibson's more of a graduate

1:27:36.080 --> 1:27:40.120
<v Speaker 1>level professional type view of that. But the other one

1:27:40.200 --> 1:27:42.400
<v Speaker 1>is a book that's almost a hundred years old. Now

1:27:42.600 --> 1:27:44.320
<v Speaker 1>it's you can find it on the web for free.

1:27:44.360 --> 1:27:48.479
<v Speaker 1>It's a George Clayian's The Richest Man in Babylon. Oh sure,

1:27:48.560 --> 1:27:50.160
<v Speaker 1>I read that a little time ago. You know you

1:27:50.200 --> 1:27:52.560
<v Speaker 1>ought to reread it. Really, you ought to reread it

1:27:52.800 --> 1:27:55.720
<v Speaker 1>about once every five years. I do that with Mark

1:27:56.280 --> 1:27:59.080
<v Speaker 1>Market Wizards by Jack Schweger. I reread that every five

1:27:59.200 --> 1:28:02.280
<v Speaker 1>or seven years. So the Richest Man in Babylon is

1:28:02.360 --> 1:28:06.639
<v Speaker 1>a parable, Yes, a series of parables supposedly true from

1:28:06.960 --> 1:28:11.439
<v Speaker 1>from the days of Mesopotamian what have you, and tell

1:28:11.560 --> 1:28:13.080
<v Speaker 1>us that there are by the way, there are a

1:28:13.200 --> 1:28:18.320
<v Speaker 1>few books like that, um, that are essentially parables. But

1:28:18.840 --> 1:28:22.479
<v Speaker 1>tell us about the richest man in Babylon. Seven major themes,

1:28:22.560 --> 1:28:24.760
<v Speaker 1>and I'll just go into two of them. One is

1:28:24.840 --> 1:28:29.000
<v Speaker 1>investing yourself, but the but the other one is probably

1:28:29.240 --> 1:28:32.120
<v Speaker 1>the best illustration of how to do this. The best

1:28:32.200 --> 1:28:36.200
<v Speaker 1>explanation is live below your means that the parables that

1:28:36.280 --> 1:28:38.519
<v Speaker 1>are surround that, and they're actually two or three on

1:28:38.680 --> 1:28:42.880
<v Speaker 1>that theme, are are fantastic. And I will buy that

1:28:43.040 --> 1:28:46.439
<v Speaker 1>book and give it to clients or the sons and

1:28:46.560 --> 1:28:49.160
<v Speaker 1>daughters are clients, especially those who are getting ready to

1:28:49.200 --> 1:28:52.920
<v Speaker 1>graduate from college, and and say you really need to

1:28:52.960 --> 1:28:56.560
<v Speaker 1>read this, and hopefully they do and and some do

1:28:56.840 --> 1:29:00.880
<v Speaker 1>and they gain knowledge from it. It's also pretty interesting

1:29:00.920 --> 1:29:05.600
<v Speaker 1>wedding gift, by the way, that's fascinating. UM. So we

1:29:05.760 --> 1:29:08.360
<v Speaker 1>talked about all the things that changed in the industry,

1:29:09.280 --> 1:29:14.599
<v Speaker 1>UM since since you joined the join the industry. Anything

1:29:14.680 --> 1:29:16.720
<v Speaker 1>else you want to reference as to what might be

1:29:16.840 --> 1:29:20.160
<v Speaker 1>the next major shifts or recent changes of note, or

1:29:20.280 --> 1:29:24.960
<v Speaker 1>have we beaten that horse. Well, you know, I think

1:29:25.280 --> 1:29:30.599
<v Speaker 1>going forward, it's fairly predictable that as the fiduciary standard

1:29:30.640 --> 1:29:33.360
<v Speaker 1>comes into play, high cost variable nuities are going into sphere.

1:29:34.439 --> 1:29:38.920
<v Speaker 1>Equity index annuities, I love the concept of them as

1:29:38.960 --> 1:29:43.120
<v Speaker 1>a fixed income alternative. I think they're marketing incorrectly. The

1:29:43.240 --> 1:29:47.120
<v Speaker 1>cost structure is not transparent at all. The the control

1:29:47.160 --> 1:29:49.719
<v Speaker 1>of the insurance company has over it is not correct.

1:29:50.000 --> 1:29:52.559
<v Speaker 1>Isn't that true with all insurance products? The cost structure

1:29:52.640 --> 1:29:55.560
<v Speaker 1>is not transparent, uh, to a large degree. You know,

1:29:55.720 --> 1:30:01.440
<v Speaker 1>variable life variable nuities, the call structure is more transparent

1:30:01.520 --> 1:30:05.320
<v Speaker 1>than whole life universal life equity index and duties. There's

1:30:05.360 --> 1:30:09.880
<v Speaker 1>really no transparency. It's a great concept, that the implementation

1:30:09.960 --> 1:30:12.320
<v Speaker 1>of it has been poor, and it makes it tough,

1:30:12.640 --> 1:30:15.679
<v Speaker 1>really tough for a fiduciary to recommend an equity index

1:30:15.720 --> 1:30:18.320
<v Speaker 1>and nuity Right now, I haven't found one that that

1:30:18.400 --> 1:30:22.200
<v Speaker 1>I'm uncomfortable recommending. Immediate and nuties they are to be

1:30:22.280 --> 1:30:24.679
<v Speaker 1>used a lot more often. What sort of a nuties?

1:30:24.800 --> 1:30:30.040
<v Speaker 1>Immediate fixed income annuities? Okay, so retirees should probably take

1:30:30.080 --> 1:30:33.120
<v Speaker 1>a portion of their wealth and annuities. It maybe not

1:30:33.320 --> 1:30:36.880
<v Speaker 1>all in one chunk. Maybe over times early retirees with

1:30:36.960 --> 1:30:40.080
<v Speaker 1>an inflation writer. Uh So, this way they know they

1:30:40.120 --> 1:30:43.080
<v Speaker 1>have a guaranteed income no matter what happens in the market,

1:30:43.720 --> 1:30:46.680
<v Speaker 1>and the real risk at that point becomes inflation, not

1:30:47.120 --> 1:30:51.040
<v Speaker 1>running out of money exactly. We move that, you know.

1:30:51.200 --> 1:30:54.680
<v Speaker 1>And I'm a little suspect about the whole concept of

1:30:54.840 --> 1:30:58.919
<v Speaker 1>longevity and nuities. I think that it's a great concept.

1:30:59.040 --> 1:31:02.840
<v Speaker 1>You can pick up them mortality credits and it does

1:31:03.400 --> 1:31:06.479
<v Speaker 1>assuage the fear of that, But I think you're giving

1:31:06.560 --> 1:31:10.160
<v Speaker 1>up a lot and and a lot more research I

1:31:10.240 --> 1:31:12.320
<v Speaker 1>think is needed in that area as to whether or

1:31:12.360 --> 1:31:16.200
<v Speaker 1>not that is really fits very well with the rest

1:31:16.240 --> 1:31:18.720
<v Speaker 1>of her portfolio. Well, what we It's funny there was

1:31:18.720 --> 1:31:22.720
<v Speaker 1>an article in Barrens about this. In our fixed income portfolio,

1:31:23.400 --> 1:31:25.400
<v Speaker 1>we're in the midst of trend, so every year we

1:31:25.439 --> 1:31:27.800
<v Speaker 1>do a big look see and say what do we

1:31:27.920 --> 1:31:31.280
<v Speaker 1>wanna keep, what what's better, what's and usually we don't

1:31:31.280 --> 1:31:33.920
<v Speaker 1>do a whole lot of anything. But over the past year,

1:31:34.840 --> 1:31:39.200
<v Speaker 1>the bond dated ETFs have come out and there was

1:31:39.280 --> 1:31:41.960
<v Speaker 1>just an article in Barrens. And we started doing looking

1:31:42.000 --> 1:31:44.760
<v Speaker 1>at this a while ago, where you could create a

1:31:45.040 --> 1:31:50.479
<v Speaker 1>laddered fixed income portfolio using low qust ETFs. So if

1:31:50.560 --> 1:31:53.760
<v Speaker 1>someone's concerned about what one of them if rates rise, well,

1:31:53.800 --> 1:31:57.400
<v Speaker 1>look when the O sixteen ends, you take that cash

1:31:57.479 --> 1:31:59.799
<v Speaker 1>and you buy the O nineteen, and when the O seventeen.

1:31:59.840 --> 1:32:02.720
<v Speaker 1>And that's the sort of technology, that's a sort of

1:32:02.800 --> 1:32:05.560
<v Speaker 1>product which is a dirty word on Wall Street. You

1:32:05.760 --> 1:32:10.679
<v Speaker 1>could not do that two years ago. It didn't really exist. Yeah,

1:32:10.720 --> 1:32:13.280
<v Speaker 1>you could have, you know, target date funds in a

1:32:13.400 --> 1:32:15.960
<v Speaker 1>four oh one K, but you couldn't say I want

1:32:15.960 --> 1:32:19.840
<v Speaker 1>to take X amount of my fixed income portfolio and

1:32:20.040 --> 1:32:24.200
<v Speaker 1>have it constantly be rolling. It's really a fascinating innovation

1:32:24.280 --> 1:32:26.479
<v Speaker 1>that I think a lot of people don't understand. If

1:32:26.520 --> 1:32:29.120
<v Speaker 1>you can remove interstate risk or at least manage it

1:32:29.720 --> 1:32:33.639
<v Speaker 1>substantially in this type of environment, with this laddered approach

1:32:33.680 --> 1:32:37.800
<v Speaker 1>that you're talking about, that is probably the best fixed

1:32:37.840 --> 1:32:41.880
<v Speaker 1>income strategy for the next decade. It's quite fascinating. If

1:32:41.960 --> 1:32:43.679
<v Speaker 1>it was. If you go a little longer, it would

1:32:43.680 --> 1:32:45.600
<v Speaker 1>be great. But I think right now you could go

1:32:45.680 --> 1:32:48.800
<v Speaker 1>out three or four years using ice shares. I don't

1:32:48.800 --> 1:32:51.160
<v Speaker 1>know if you go out much further um, But it

1:32:51.280 --> 1:32:55.960
<v Speaker 1>really another one of those issues that the technology just

1:32:56.080 --> 1:32:59.840
<v Speaker 1>didn't the products didn't exist a few years ago. Um.

1:33:00.040 --> 1:33:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Next question, So we talked about major shifts. Let's let's

1:33:03.880 --> 1:33:06.960
<v Speaker 1>talk about my favorite two questions, my last two questions.

1:33:07.120 --> 1:33:09.000
<v Speaker 1>So you work with a lot of students, You work

1:33:09.040 --> 1:33:11.720
<v Speaker 1>with a lot of millennials, and and I don't know

1:33:11.800 --> 1:33:14.960
<v Speaker 1>what we're calling the generation after millennials, if if they've

1:33:15.000 --> 1:33:18.719
<v Speaker 1>renamed them yet. What advice would you give to somebody

1:33:18.840 --> 1:33:23.519
<v Speaker 1>graduating school this year who was interested in looking into

1:33:23.600 --> 1:33:28.439
<v Speaker 1>a career in finance. Find a firm that's going to

1:33:28.560 --> 1:33:33.040
<v Speaker 1>invest in you. Uh, you don't say I'm gonna go

1:33:33.160 --> 1:33:36.879
<v Speaker 1>hit the ground running and be able to do everything

1:33:37.040 --> 1:33:41.040
<v Speaker 1>that I have full blown financial advisor needs. Really think

1:33:41.080 --> 1:33:44.720
<v Speaker 1>about the first year, the first perhaps the second year

1:33:45.280 --> 1:33:49.360
<v Speaker 1>as a residency process. Work extremely hard, get your certified

1:33:49.400 --> 1:33:54.080
<v Speaker 1>financial planner certification done in that first year. Uh, probably

1:33:54.120 --> 1:33:55.600
<v Speaker 1>by the end of the first year, in addition to

1:33:55.920 --> 1:34:00.960
<v Speaker 1>whatever licenses that you need. Uh. Work hard. To think

1:34:01.000 --> 1:34:06.160
<v Speaker 1>about it as a medical residency, working not perhaps that hard,

1:34:06.240 --> 1:34:10.040
<v Speaker 1>but but hard, and learn all that you can, absorb

1:34:10.200 --> 1:34:14.240
<v Speaker 1>whatever you can. Once you have that couple of years

1:34:14.280 --> 1:34:17.280
<v Speaker 1>of experience in this industry and you've invested in yourself,

1:34:17.360 --> 1:34:20.439
<v Speaker 1>that way, you can write your own ticket and and

1:34:20.520 --> 1:34:23.080
<v Speaker 1>hopefully you'll stay with the firm that you join and

1:34:23.160 --> 1:34:27.160
<v Speaker 1>they will have a career path for you, and you

1:34:27.320 --> 1:34:30.000
<v Speaker 1>see your future with that firm. You enjoy that firm.

1:34:30.080 --> 1:34:33.080
<v Speaker 1>But if if that doesn't work out, and you have

1:34:33.200 --> 1:34:35.600
<v Speaker 1>invested in yourself and the firm is invested in you,

1:34:36.360 --> 1:34:39.439
<v Speaker 1>then you will You are a very marketable person right

1:34:39.439 --> 1:34:43.000
<v Speaker 1>now in terms of the demand for experience financial planets

1:34:43.080 --> 1:34:46.120
<v Speaker 1>right now. And my final question, what is it that

1:34:46.240 --> 1:34:49.280
<v Speaker 1>you know about investing today that you wish you knew

1:34:49.840 --> 1:34:56.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty years ago when you when you began. One thing uncertainty, Uh,

1:34:56.400 --> 1:35:00.559
<v Speaker 1>it is prevalent. It is with us, it will always

1:35:00.640 --> 1:35:05.799
<v Speaker 1>be with us. I'm amazed at how many financial planning

1:35:05.880 --> 1:35:09.519
<v Speaker 1>programs are set up to say, or we design the

1:35:09.600 --> 1:35:12.840
<v Speaker 1>portfolio so that you can retire by the time you're

1:35:12.840 --> 1:35:17.880
<v Speaker 1>fifty eight. Right, Well, guess what you know. There's a

1:35:18.000 --> 1:35:23.639
<v Speaker 1>lot of uncertainty about the future returns. I think innovation

1:35:23.760 --> 1:35:25.599
<v Speaker 1>is going to be great in the United States as

1:35:25.680 --> 1:35:28.160
<v Speaker 1>long as we fuel it with a lot of capital.

1:35:28.800 --> 1:35:32.080
<v Speaker 1>We apply for diucry standard. We removed this this rent

1:35:32.160 --> 1:35:36.080
<v Speaker 1>extraction that Wall Street does over time, that's going to

1:35:36.240 --> 1:35:39.320
<v Speaker 1>lead to greater capital accumulation in the United States and

1:35:39.400 --> 1:35:44.920
<v Speaker 1>help propel our economy forward. Uh So, I'm very optimistic

1:35:45.280 --> 1:35:48.120
<v Speaker 1>about the U. S economy compared to I guess most

1:35:48.160 --> 1:35:51.120
<v Speaker 1>of my fellow colleagues over the next decade, over the

1:35:51.200 --> 1:35:57.960
<v Speaker 1>next two three decades. But this whole concept that there's

1:35:57.960 --> 1:36:00.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot of uncertainty out there still, and we shouldn't

1:36:01.000 --> 1:36:04.080
<v Speaker 1>be telling clients you're gonna retire. We ought to be

1:36:04.160 --> 1:36:09.880
<v Speaker 1>telling clients, I can help you retire early. I don't

1:36:10.000 --> 1:36:13.960
<v Speaker 1>know when that will be, but I know that if

1:36:14.000 --> 1:36:18.360
<v Speaker 1>you followed my advice over the long term, if you

1:36:18.479 --> 1:36:21.879
<v Speaker 1>stick with this discipline process that we're going to implement,

1:36:22.640 --> 1:36:25.280
<v Speaker 1>did I know that you will be able to achieve

1:36:25.960 --> 1:36:31.920
<v Speaker 1>whatever your lifetime goals are, faster and better. And and

1:36:32.120 --> 1:36:33.760
<v Speaker 1>that's the type of promise that we ought to be

1:36:34.000 --> 1:36:38.000
<v Speaker 1>telling our clients, not giving them such a hard line.

1:36:38.520 --> 1:36:41.559
<v Speaker 1>This is when you're gonna accomplish something. Ron. This has

1:36:41.640 --> 1:36:43.920
<v Speaker 1>been great. Thank you so much for being so generous

1:36:43.960 --> 1:36:46.200
<v Speaker 1>with your time. If people want to find more of

1:36:46.280 --> 1:36:49.879
<v Speaker 1>your writings, where would they go? Uh my blog scholar

1:36:50.080 --> 1:36:53.720
<v Speaker 1>FP dot blog spot dot com and on Twitter. You

1:36:53.880 --> 1:36:57.320
<v Speaker 1>are one four zero LTD. I don't know where you

1:36:57.400 --> 1:37:02.280
<v Speaker 1>came up with that limited characters. I want to thank um,

1:37:02.560 --> 1:37:05.519
<v Speaker 1>my head of research, Mike bat Nick, and my producer

1:37:05.720 --> 1:37:08.680
<v Speaker 1>Charlie Volmer for help putting this together. Be sure and

1:37:08.800 --> 1:37:11.240
<v Speaker 1>look Up an Inch or Down an Inch on iTunes

1:37:11.360 --> 1:37:15.479
<v Speaker 1>to see the other seventy five or so podcast we've done.

1:37:16.120 --> 1:37:19.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm Barry Ridhults. You've been listening to Masters in Business

1:37:19.160 --> 1:37:20.200
<v Speaker 1>on Bloomberg Radio