IFA Park Row is making a stand against multi-ties, not in principle but in practice.
The adviser says it cannot see any material benefit in going multi-tied at the moment.
It does not rule it out in the long term but says IFAs should be wary for the next 18 months.
Park Row's criticism is based at least partly on its view that multi-ties are of no benefit to the client or the adviser.Oh, and its advisers don't like them.
The crucial issue is technology. Park Row does not believe the systems are in place to make multi-ties operate efficiently.
We assume this means that they do not make the distribution of financial services any cheaper which means no cheaper product for the client, no extra cash for the adviser although presumably they may still benefit product providers by cutting down some of the competition.
So is it a case of wait and see for the current IFA community? Many IFAs want to remain independent. Views from figures such as David Harrison of Positive Solutions, Gareth Marr of Origen and Ken Davy of SimplyBiz represent quite a spread of opposition.
Other big players, such as Bankhall, Sesame and Millfield, are clearly in favour for parts of their business or, in two cases, parts of their members' businesses.
Advisers may be sticking to their independent guns or straining at the bit to cut their agencies down and streamline admin and IT.
But the latter group may have a new question – will it help them do their jobs or benefit their clients in practice?
Park Row may have provided a new yardstick by which to measure a multi-tie.