View more on these topics

Advisers face ‘tough decisions’ after Old Mutual Wealth replatform shift

Questions being asked about how replatforming project got so far along before action was taken

Old Mutual Wealth 2014

Advisers using the Old Mutual Wealth platform could face some “tough decisions” after the provider cancelled a contract with IFDS to complete its replatforming project at an estimated cost of £800 per client.

Old Mutual Wealth announced yesterday it was dropping IFDS as its technology provider and will start working with rival technology firm FNZ instead.

Of the £330m spent on the IFDS replatforming project to date, £110m relates to “heritage business”. Old Mutual Wealth had previously estimated the cost of the replatforming project with IFDS could reach £450m.

It says cost estimates for the rest of the project with FNZ are between £120m and £160m.

The Lang Cat principal Mark Polson calls the sums involved in the project “eye-watering”.

He says: “We reckon, based on Old Mutual Wealth’s own cost predictions, the replatforming cost so far for each customer is in the region of £800; with 400,000 customers that’s a hefty bill.”

Polson questions how the replatforming project got so far along before the “hard decision” was made.

He adds: “We’ve said before there is no recorded instance of replatforming going well. There are lessons to be drawn from this – one of which is an open question about whether it is better to concentrate on the fundamentals of getting client custody, trading and administration right, or whether it’s better to try and win the functionality war.”

Zurich retail platform strategy head Alistair Wilson says advisers should not underestimate the scale of a replatforming project and the potential for it to go wrong, resulting in reduced service levels.

He says: “So what should advisers do? The most obvious conclusion is the platforms they are using must be able to meet the needs of their clients’ today. And if they’re don’t, some tough decisions need to be taken.”

Wilson adds: “Therefore, advisers should take a hard look at their platform partners to assess, or reassess, the impact of these changing market factors and whether their original choices still stack up.”

Platforum head Heather Hopkins says: “The estimated costs and timeframe, while seemingly ambitious, are in line with the original forecasts.

“One concern we have is the timeframes for some fairly standard functionality is out of step with the market. In particular, cash account functionality but also discretionary model portfolios and exchange-traded funds – that are standard offering on most platforms already.”

Recommended

Feeney-Paul-2013-700x450.jpg
5

Old Mutual cancels replatforming contract with IFDS

OMW says new agreement with FNZ “considerably de-risks” its replatforming programme Old Mutual Wealth has terminated its contract with IFDS for its replatforming project and is now partnering with FNZ instead. In a statement, OMW says the move “considerably de-risks” its platform transformation programme. At the end of April, the replatforming project had cost OMW […]

Feeney-Paul-2013-700x450.jpg
11

Old Mutual Wealth: Why we pulled out of IFDS deal

Chief exec Paul Feeney says project has been difficult but costs proved “unacceptable” Old Mutual Wealth chief executive Paul Feeney has admitted the company’s replatforming project has been “a difficult journey” as he sets out why IFDS has been dropped as its technology provider. Old Mutual Wealth announced this morning it had terminated its contract […]

The Rubik’s Cube: China’s policy trilemma

By Douglas Turnbull, Investment Director, Head of Chinese Equities China faces a ‘Rubik’s Cube’ policy trilemma, whereby it needs to sustain a minimum acceptable level of growth, deal with issues such as overcapacity and reform the financial system to make it a far more efficient allocator of capital. Given the contradictory nature of these objectives, […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Don’t know why but the Clash “should I stay or should i go” seems to resonate very much with the choices for those advisers that have stuck with OMW.

  2. Not a wise decision, low price means low quality. ensure that should not affect financial advisers.

  3. There is a distinct correlation between platform profitability and the software suppliers to those platforms, with the users of the two software partners chosen so far by OWM clustering at the negative/nil/low end of that table.

  4. Stewart Antrobus 10th May 2017 at 11:11 pm

    Worked there for 26 years. Skandia were great at projects. Omw and theIr toy selestia were a joke. Sad outcome for a great company.

Leave a comment