Six out of 10 financial advisers believe clients need at least $100,000 in investable assets for them to be worthwhile, according to research.
The proportion of advisers who work to this “valuable client” threshold has risen from 40 per cent last year, a Nielsen adviser poll commissioned by ING Australia found.
“I think a lot of that comes from the fact that advisers still tend to be remunerated by commissions, not that there’s anything wrong with that,” Sunshine Coast-based Universal Financial Solutions adviser and shareholder Warrick Bidwell said.
“Our business charges fee-for-service and so doesn’t matter if a client’s got $10,000 or $10 million. We get on-going income by engaging with clients as wealth coaches.”
At the bottom end, Bidwell’s business takes clients with $20,000 to $30,000 of equity in their home.
“It’s one of the myths we try and break down at our practice. You don’t need a lot of money to have your own financial adviser; you can get some really good advice, but you have to pay for it,” Bidwell said.
According to the survey, a more than a third of advisers’ (36 per cent) main remuneration method was based on percentage of assets under management. The same proportion predicted there to be no change by 2010.
Planners predicted growth in fee-for-service remuneration. In total 12 per cent said this was their main source of income and 18 per cent expected it to be by 2010.
“I have a simple philosophy. I regard everyone as an A-class client because you never know when they’re going to become more significant in terms of assets or investable income,” The Taggart Group managing director Jim Taggart said.
“Some of our smallest clients have picked up inheritances or started businesses and are now very important clients.
“Had I turned them away five or 10 years ago I wouldn’t have them today,” he said.
The full results will be presented at the FPA 2007 National Conference on November 30.
