View more on these topics

Campbell Macpherson: The important platform questions to answer

In the second part of his crystal ball gazing into the future of platforms, Campbell Macpherson poses some answers to  questions  raised in a recent industry round table …

Campbell-Macpherson-MM-Peach-700x450.png

In my last instalment, I predicted five main types of platform businesses in the future – in fact they have already started to emerge:

  • Utility platforms
  • Conduits
  • Value add adviser platforms
  • Platform BPO providers
  • D2C platforms

In this instalment, I would like to have a go at answering some fundamental questions that people have lobbed in my direction of late. Feel free to add to the conversation.

 What is the future of platform pricing? The easy prediction would be “downwards”. The more useful expectation is that I believe that platform pricing will start to reflect the actual costs of delivery and we will begin to see more platforms charging account establishment fees and transaction fees rather than base the majority of their revenue on a slice of AUA.

More pounds, fewer bps. Alliance Trust Savings has been doing this for years and many more may be forced to follow suit. I wonder how many ‘retail’ platforms will be able to withstand such a fundamental shift in their revenue model …

Why does a financial planning or wealth management business need more than one platform? Did the FSA really command advisers to use more than one platform, or is this simply the industry’s short-hand interpretation of the often unclear and seemingly contradictory way that the regulator expresses itself?

I believe the regulator simply wants to ensure that any piece of advice and subsequent investment is suitable for each and every client.

This does not mean that advisers must use multiple platforms. It simply means that advisers can’t shoe-horn every client into a single solution. 

Let me put this another way – why on Earth would an advice business need more than one utility platform? It doesn’t. As Towry chief executive Andrew Fisher has been pointing out for years, if the platform is simply a trading mechanism (i.e. a utility), surely you only need one. As a business, you don’t have more than one electricity supplier.

A growing number of CEOs of large financial planning and wealth firms are moving to the situation where their proposition is powered by one core utility platform. Of course, those who have an adviser technology system at the heart of their proposition have the greatest flexibility of all. They can even take on a new adviser knowing that they can connect to whatever platform, or platforms, they are currently using. That’s the beauty of the utility platform model.

But surely the utility platform model may not be right for every firm? Agree. Some firms will value the services and personal guidance that the value-add retail platforms can provide, whether this is in the form of investment tools, model portfolios, assistance with transferring assets, or just general business development guidance. How much more will retail platforms be able to charge for these extra services?

Enough, I suspect, for those who excel at customer service and possess a genuine sense of community to build highly successful businesses. But they must add genuine value to advisers. My rule of thumb is … if they genuinely help advisers to be more successful, they will thrive.

Should advisers fear platforms providing D2C services? No. Quite the opposite. I would actively look for a partner with a D2C service I could white-label – but in a way that you could control. I would do this not just to provide a service to those parts of my client base that I may not be able to afford to service face-to-face, but for any client who may wish to access, or even trade, online. I think it was Platforum who revealed that 60 per cent of investors want advice and the ability to do some of the investing themselves. 

To me, this means that if you don’t offer this sort of service, 60 per cent of your clients will investing themselves anyway – and you may not even know about it. 

When is a platform not a platform? All lines in this industry will continue to blur at an increasing pace. Is Skandia a life company, a platform or an investment company? The answer is “Yes”. Is Nucleus a platform or a community? It’s both. Ditto for Transact. Standard Life is obviously both a platform and an asset manager.

Sesame, Intrinsic and Openwork are on their way to becoming all three – networks, platform providers and asset managers. Many lifecos have made the first tentative move into distribution and some retail platforms may even do the same. In the end, the power lies in having access to, and interaction with, customers (defined in my book as “advisers” if you are a platform business and obviously “end clients” if you are an adviser).

With today’s technology at their disposal, the organisation with the customer relationship has the ability to move in whichever direction it desires. 

As always, it comes down to influence over the end customer. Which simple fact is why the advice firm holds all the cards post-RDR, especially as more and more organisations begin to look at platforms as utilities.

 Campbell Macpherson is managing director of Campbell Macpherson & Associates. Previously, he has had executive roles at Zurich, Openwork and Sesame

Recommended

The-Co-operative-Cooperative-Bank-700x450.jpg

Co-op deputy CEO Rod Bulmer to step down

Co-operative Bank deputy chief executive Rod Bulmer has announced he will leave the company in 2014. A Co-op spokesman says the decision was taken solely by Bulmer after “playing a significant and successful role within the Co-op for seven years.” The Co-op announced a £1.5bn rescue plan in June which will see bondholders “bailed in” […]

Scotland-Flag-700x450.jpg

Local talent lifts Scotland’s financial services industry to recovery

The financial services industry in Scotland is showing signs of recovery, with permanent vacancies up by 34 per cent this year. According to Change Recruitment’s Financial Services 2013 Salary Survey, the jobs market over the last six months shows that activity by firms hiring across the board for financial services is strongly up this year. […]

Japan-Mount-Fuji-Pagoda-700x450.jpg

Japan is going for gold with its economic reforms

Last week, Japan was unveiled as the venue for the 2020 Olympic Games and the announcement is the latest instalment in the ongoing good news story of Japanese economic recovery. But will Japanese economic recovery be capable of lasting the distance? The news that Tokyo is to be the Olympic venue helped to push the […]

3

Chris Gilchrist: Dinosaur transactional advisers are a dying breed

Advisers who complain vociferously about the FCA, RDR and adviser charging are also those who talk loudly about ‘my clients’ and ‘my client bank’. They probably still take seriously the blandishments of agents who claim that such ‘client banks’ are worth 6 to 8 times the annual income they generate. Indeed, there are models that […]

Sierra Leone cover image - thumbnail

White paper — Sierra Leone International Insights

Jelf Employee Benefits assesses the areas that employers should be aware of when considering operating in Sierra Leone, including healthcare access, delivery and insurance provisions. This report draws on various sources to highlight specific considerations for this emerging jewel in West Africa.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. RDR is not the adviser’s enemy that many advisers have suggested in fact RDR is the adviser’s friend due to the fact that it shifted power from providers to advisers.
    I stated many times before RDR is financial services Tesco moment as Tesco’s effectively use their buying power to dictate terms to providers including farmers. When advisers eventually figure out how to provide advice on a mass scale there we will start to see some real downward pressure on suppliers costs. After all if an adviser firm starts to manage two or three billion of funds what competitive pricing will at adviser be able to demand from fund managers and even discretionary management services.

    We all know that advice is where the real cost is occurred in financial services so why are fund managers still charging between 0.25% and 1.5% for a service that effectively has no liability. After all fund managers can lose clients money is still have no liability for the actual advice, so I firmly believe that over the next few years we won’t be discussing the merits of multi-platforms or single platforms we will be discussing the influence the IFA’s have on industry charging structures.

    The challenge that all IFA practices have in a post RDR world is how we achieve scale in a highly compliant lead the industry.

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com