Odd
With all of the bigger rip off's going on in financial services, like retail banking margins, a set up on IFSRA, lack of disclosure enforcement, lack of disclosure rights on top ups, unregulated activities, over-blown drawdowns from unsmoothed funds that haven't been reviewed, leading to litigation etc etc, why is it that with profit funds applying MVR's in a severe bear market, is the principle heat on AAM judging from this and other threads?
While it's a worthy debate, isn't it the case that what we're really seeing is a debate between UL and WP going back into the 1970's. That really the WP critics couldn't give a stuff about the consumer, that it's merely a badge of convenience to go competitor bashing?
Because if there is a genuine interest in the consumer it certainly isn't registering in much more important other matters that count. This debate smells like a commercial one. If so at least let's be honest about the motivation, and stop shedding crocodile tears.