View more on these topics

Aegon: Scrutiny of vertical integration will make it hard to sustain

Aegon is clear it does not intend to participate in distribution

Mark Till is chief distribution and marketing officer at Aegon

The level of scrutiny around the conflicts of interest in vertically integrated firms will make that business model hard to sustain in the future, according to Aegon.

Speaking at Money Marketing Interactive in Harrogate today, Aegon chief distribution and marketing officer Mark Till predicts challenges to vertical integrated models will be a significant change for the industry.

He says: “It is an attractive model if you are a shareholder because you use your influence in distribution to guide investments towards your platform and your investment solutions and therefore allow you to participate in profit generation from all parts of the value chain.

“That is increasingly an area where the level of scrutiny around conflicts of interest will make that model increasingly difficult to sustain.”

Till makes it clear that Aegon is a platform business and is not going to get involved into distribution: “It is very odd to say to advisers, we want to be your platform of choice and then on the other hand covet your customers and try and bring them into our business.”

Till also outlines three challenges facing the platform market in its next phase of development; the first being generating better returns for shareholders.

He says: “If you were to take the 28 platforms [in the market] and the £520bn of assets and they were one business, it would just about break even, probably turn a small loss.

“That is an unsustainable business model to not be able to make a profit when providing services to 10 to 15 million customers. That does not give safety and security to the users of that platform for the regulators.”

He adds: “There is going to need to be a phase where shareholders see certainty of return such that we all get the benefit of commitment to this sector going forward.”

The second challenge Till highlights is creating a better user experience for advisers and the third is lowering costs.

Till says at the heart of those challenges is consolidation.

In May, speaking at Money Marketing Interactive in London, Till predicted there will be just four large-scale platforms in the next three years alongside a smaller number of niche or boutique platforms.



James Hay parent downplays vertical integration concerns

IFG Group has said it is not concerned about its ownership of both platform James Hay and advice business Saunderson House as the regulator prepares to take a look at vertical integration in the advice market. IFG announced its half-year results this morning, showing increases in client acquisitions for both James Hay and Saunderson House. […]

Justin Cash, Editor of Money Marketing

Blog: What next for vertical integration?

Is it inevitable that all large life and pensions companies will look to become vertically integrated? It certainly seems the tide is shifting that way. Prudential, not content with quietly building up its advice arm to more than 300 advisers over the last few years, announced yesterday it wanted to fully integrate its asset manager […]

Survey cover

EEF/Jelf Employee Benefits Sickness Absence Survey 2015

EEF stated in its 2015 EEF Manifesto that the UK’s growth prospects depend on people being fit, working and productive. Keeping people in work and helping people return to work is very important for the manufacturing sector. It means boosting productivity by getting people back into work as early as is possible, as well as fostering workplace cultures and environments that proactively manage individuals’ health conditions so that all can benefit from lower sickness absence outcomes.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. About time,,, of course Vertical Integrations is exactly the Same as Continent Charging, nether will be tenable, viable for morally acceptable if given full scrutiny, If full disclosure was the basis of the RDR, then any of the above are completely diametrically opposed. Come on, Be Honest, In fact the above have massive VAT implications, as clearly the Fees being charged are not directly given for the advice nor a qualifying product as the “Fee” Includes the Provision of rebated services of one kind or another.

  2. Vertical Integration OR Pyramid Selling ?

  3. I have just looked at a case where a SJP salesman has stated to the client, when asked how much his fee would be, he is not charging her for the DB transfer advice, he said ” I am paid out of the plan charges” This can not be allowed, post RDR, and yes very happy to substantiate the facts, the client has put it on hold until he explains this to her, Six Years tied in at 1.7% AMC!!!

Leave a comment