I read your recent article “With Friends Like These…” (Clark at Large, IA July) with interest. I am not sure what to think about the regulatory aspirations of the CFP Board, but I did sense some animosity from the article that the Board is high and mighty and is attempting to monopolize the preservation and definition of a Financial Advisor. I am not a CFP certificant (flunked four times); so I am obviously bitter at an organization (slightly monarchist and extremely surreptitious) when a smidge better than 50% of the test takers pass this most unreasonable of exams. I don’t quite understand their “real intent.” I think their arrogance exceeds the rightful expectations of someone who should call themselves a “Financial Planner.”
So, I think I agree with you, although, I may have entirely missed your point.
I have the CRPC designation, love my work, and none of my clients care that I don’t have the credential. Does the Board want to monopolize the industry and by regulatory muscle determine who can practice and who can’t? And, will the powerhouse wirehouses stand for it?
Sagemark Consulting/Lincoln Financial Advisors
Raleigh, North Carolina
Great job on Mike Patton’s June 2008 article in Investment Advisor magazine, entitled “Lessons Learned.” His points about publicly owned companies were right on target. I always share the same points when speaking with prospective clients.
Prospective clients are not always aware that firms like ML, SB, UBS, RJ, Ameriprise (and maybe LPL in the not too distant future), and the like are obligated by law to act in the best interest of their shareholders–not clients or advisors.
Aaron Skloff, AIF, CFA, MBA
Chief Executive Officer
Skloff Financial Group
Berkeley Heights, New Jersey
IA Contributor upcoming Speaking Engagements