E
Don't expect independent, professional advice in your best interests from a tied agent. If you want this then go to a good multi-agency intermediary or authorised advisor.These were recommended to us by our local branch investment manager.
Maybe you can get a better deal on charges by going through a discount (possibly execution only - i.e. no advice) broker rather than going direct.He quoted us an annual management charge of 1.5% & 1.75% depending on the fund. I have since read on this site that I can invest in some funds through myadvisor.com for a total charge of .75% per annum. Is this correct and if so, does the 1% addtional charge per BOI relate to comission? (because the BOI guy never mentioned commission).
On the other hand timing the market is a mug's game...
I've taken lots of advice recently from both tied agents and independent advisors. I paid a fee to one and the other my employer paid for as I am being laid off and its part of the seperation package. What I've learned is that nobody has all the answers and that you can get the same level of financial advice from doing your own research, this site is excellent in that regard. I'm not being critical of independent financial advisors, just making the point that you shouldnt take their advice blindly, use them for pointers and do the rest of the legwork yourself. Theres no such thing as a free lunch and all that.Thanks a million for your replies. They are much appreciated. We have decided to go with the funds I mentioned above along with a Friends first property fund because we just found that we were getting bogged down with all the different choices of products out there. We inherited the money earlier in the year and we are anxious to take it off deposit and invest it.
We thought that these three funds sounded very good - has anyone heard anything about them?
would it not be better to concentrate on the returns of the funds you are investing in rather than the charges? If a fund i invest in has high returns, i dont mind paying 1-2 % if the fund is performing above the average. Is this not relevant or am I missing the point....
The problem with that is that it is impossible to predict which funds are going to outperform in the future.
Looking at how they're doing now or have done in the past is of little or no use.
I suppose I get irritated when I see marketing blurb that screams - "We're the number one fund manager so invest with us!" and in small print says "...when measured against two other funds over a period of 241 days..."
Too many people fall into the trap of reading the past performance tables in the media and using them alone to pick a fund.
Consistently above-average performance - when measured by an independent source against a peer group across a number of time-frames that are not decided by the fund manager - can be useful in making a decision as to the skills of a fund manager.
Too many people fall into the trap of reading the past performance tables in the media and using them alone to pick a fund.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?