<< Look, I'm not bashing financial advisors and the like (particularly since I spent many years in one of the more bashable professions), but financial advisors are a waste of money and time. >>While I understand this as an opinion and as far as I'm concerned anyone is welcome to such an opinion . . . .I might only agree if it were stated something more like “most or a great majority of financial advisors are a waste of money and time” or “or all the financial advisors I know of are a waste of money and time” . . .etc. etc. In my own experience, I know that statement is not true all the time. << Anyone with sufficient intelligence to read simple magazines can do as well or better than they otherwise would have done with so-called professional advice. >>I agree that they “can” or might do as well or better. While the past historical numbers can support such a hypothesis, the empirical evidence shows that people on the whole tend to do better WITH advisors. This doesn't mean they're getting the maximum returns that you might expect. It simply means they tend not to do as well on their own for one reason or another; often having to do with how their emotions play into their financial habits and fears. The more education about these things the better people can do as places on the Internet like the Motley Fool and people like you can be a good resource. << Folks who aren't able to read usually don't have enough money to interest finacial advisors in the first place. >>Aside from not trying to equate intelligence with an ability to read, I would agree with the point here. If a financial advisor or advisor is going to provide for his or her family, it's good business to be careful where their valuable time is spent.<< Folks who are too old to know any better make the best custormers, of course, since they are suckers waiting to be sucked dry of funds. >>If I were a Senior (well, some people might view me as a Senior . . . a young one <grin>), I might be insulted by this. I know quite of few who are quite old and still remain very intelligent and very sharp on these kinds of matters. What I think you're referring to is the difference in current knowledge between the younger generations and the older ones. The younger generations as a group tend to have more knowledge and are better informed than the oldest generations alive.And as far as I'm concerned, whether the customer is “too old” or not, the one's that make the “best customers” are those who are well informed, can think clearly and logically and remain sharp. My worst customers tend to be those who aren't that way and tend to take up a LOT of my time every time we get together to review the same things over and over.<< This is why the adult children of the elderly should take a more active role in helping their aging parents invest wisely. >>Hmmm??? I see. . . .the adult children acting as financial advisors would be better advisors than letting the aging parents do it themselves??? I'm having a difficult time understanding just where one would draw the line there. I would think it would just depend. And doesn't that go against the position of using advisors at all . . .or is it just about advisors who are paid for their work (assuming they do any work at all <grin>)?
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra