Elon Musk is going to end me

Dominic Thomas
May 2024  •  3 min read

Elon Musk is going to end me

We have all marvelled at the advances made in technology and scientific breakthroughs. Most of us will have seen at least a handful of dystopian films about the end of humanity as we know it as the robots rise to power. Our screens and media in all forms are predictably full of alarm, after all – nothing grabs attention quite as well as fear.

Mr Musk or let’s just call him Mr X, a reductionist term that he appears to enjoy. It is hard to ignore the fact that he aspires to be a rival for a Bond villain with his odd sense of over importance and world domination. Anyway, Mr X thinks that financial advisers need to be worried about the threat of AI. There are many in my field who agree.

I am mindful of not wanting to take the Kodak approach to life, ignoring the rapid changes in consumer demands as technology improves and changes the landscape. Indeed I welcome it, from improvements to efficient data gathering and report writing, to better and clearer understanding of issues and options. To reduced operating costs and greater transparency. I am all in favour.

So am I to believe that a series of prompts from a cyborg will replace me? Well I suspect that s/he will be better looking, be able to perform some tasks much more quickly, but in terms of time spent with you and for you, that remains to be seen. I struggle to believe that empathy is little more than coding.

I am not fool enough to believe that change is not coming (some is already here) but I would like to remind you of some basic truths that, despite our enormous advances in technology, continue to frustrate and make life worse rather than better.

I wonder if you have tried to pay for a parking permit with a London Borough lately?  Or attempted to get the NHS appointment system to operate?  Tried to call a telecom company to discuss the problems with your line or change an error on your pre-flight check-in? To have had your mobile phone lost or locked and successfully restored all your data and applications, especially the authenticator. To book tickets online for an event in the milliseconds after they go on sale or simply try to check your National Insurance number when your surname or suffix has altered and are shocked to realise that you do not exist, perhaps we are living in the Matrix after all. Perhaps you have an old-style pension with an old-style pension company and you simply cannot obtain the right information, or you are an employee trying to retire and your employer’s pension scheme administration is, well… stuck in what seems to resemble something out of spoof BBC series from the 1980s Allo, Allo.

The commonality with these examples is that they are instances where technology has been deployed and is utterly hopeless – and they are all very common experiences. Your call definitely is not as important as you are being told, otherwise someone senior would have done something about it. As for the virtual assistants on most banking sites, well forgive me if I scream and wish for the mortal failure of swathes of the Banking sector. Yet these are all rather straightforward instances where simple technology really ought to be delivering the changes promised by the Consultants that sold them for multimillion sums, yet fail every single day.

The basics of scheduling, such as a routine, repeat order (anything from pet medication to your wine club) really should not be quite so hard to amend. A refund from the DVLA who collect your road tax each month from your bank account by direct debit yet insist on sending an oversized cheque that your banking app cannot cope with, so you have the joys of finding a local branch of your bank to deposit it the ‘old-fashioned way’. Perhaps that train ticket that you bought online is wrong and it’s too onerous to change or you now struggle with touch screens due to a medical condition that you cannot even book a ticket without joining the queue at the ticket desk now operated by someone who clearly thinks that online capability means there is now no requirement for the excesses of any human interaction.

When Amazon manage to master packaging an item into an appropriately sized box or when the next DPD driver asks if you are over 18 and if you could provide your date of birth (why?). When your washing machine, fridge, doorbell, health tech all are savvy enough to appreciate that you really couldn’t care less if they have finished their task and can dispense with the notification of the mundane. When the weather forecast is right or indeed the economic one, or a politician says what they mean rather than what they believe you want to hear.

I imagine that you assume that we use technology here at Solomon’s, and that we do so with thought and regard. I know it isn’t perfect and we all get fed up repeating some of the exercises. I also assume that you want to speak to a human who can help you grapple with sometimes dull, sometimes painful, sometimes stressful, sometimes embarrassing (really?) and sometimes joyful elements of helping you figure out how to make the most of your time and money and the relationship between them.

Whilst I do agree technology offers the possibility of enormous benefits, I respectfully remain unconvinced that either utopia or dystopia are arriving anytime soon.

Elon Musk is going to end me2024-05-03T14:13:04+01:00

Anti social media

Dominic Thomas
April 2024  •  4 min read

Anti-social media

Confession, I am a hypocrite. As with most things, nuance is often lost in the polarity of opinion. My ability to pontificate is at least as good as yours, so I start with an apology and an admission … that I am far from perfect.

Social media is something I enjoy and loathe. In reality, it is designed for precisely this experience, to push your buttons of joy and despair. I used to be a regular Twitter user but as it became increasingly incendiary, I gave up the habit. Some things lost, but mainly time gained. I kept my Facebook and Instagram accounts open, which I largely use to share images that are born from a love of photography, you can see these if you wish.

Judging by most people’s terrible profile pictures, it would seem that many people use their phone’s camera much like they used their film camera, apparently unaware of the tools to edit or help. In short, the art of re-presentation. We are all aware of this idealisation towards perfection, it’s nothing new and whilst many think of glossy magazines and advertising, perhaps the foundations lie in early religious art, the Renaissance and the hundreds of portraits of the ruling classes.

In many respects, social media is nothing new. Ancient frescos are the Facebook of their day. More time was spent in their crafting, so arguably more deliberate with their nuanced messaging.

Scroll forward to the present day and we have opinion offered as fact by people who have little (if any) training or qualification in their chosen subject. ‘Finfluencers’ are the group that garner my attention. Those who talk about money whilst evidently unqualified to do so. We can of course pass this off with a “so what, I’m not mug enough” which may be true; maybe. To my mind it’s the speed of the message and lack of processing that is done; accepting as true without challenge. Life is too short, but I wonder what the long-term impact is on those less able to distinguish … after all, the impact is already a problem in politics.

By way of example, recently I saw a video post about building a deposit for a house and how saving £40 a day would enable you to buy a house in the north-east of England after 12 months. This is aimed at those aged under 35. £40 a day saved over a year is £14,600.  If we assume this is for a 10% deposit for a house. That would imply a 90% mortgage of £131,400 and an income of £37,542 to borrow that amount.

Someone earning £37,542 (which is above the national full time median wage £35,464*) should have a personal allowance of £12,570 but would pay income tax, national insurance and pension payments. At best, opting out of the workplace pension and having no student loan, the net (after tax and NI) take home monthly income would be £2,504 (£2,323 if you have a student loan and 5% auto-enrolment pension).  If you save £40 a day that’s £1,216 a month, leaving £1,288 (or £1,107) to live on each month.

Of course to earn £37,542 you need to work (and get to work) which means to retain your employed position, be healthy, rested and clothed and for any sense of a balanced life you probably have a holiday, buy presents for loved ones and perhaps attend a celebratory event, maybe the wedding of a friend. I am sure that it is possible to do all this on £297 a week, but it isn’t easy and if you happen to live in the South East it’s probably impossible unless you are living rent-free somewhere.

It’s also a challenge to find a home, flat or garage to buy for £131,400 but more possible in the North East. I ran a search on property for sale in Surrey, excluding buying schemes (which are a false economy at best, scam at worst, don’t get me started on leasehold v freehold) these started with listing a £175,000 which is basically a static home (shed). The cheapest listed terraced house £400,000, bungalow £315,000 and semi-detached £395,000. As ever, location is all and context is everything.

Even if you can buy for say £350,000 you would need a £35,000 deposit and a mortgage of £315,000 requiring an income of £90,000. Heck let’s try £200,000, you would still need a mortgage of £180,000 and income of £51,428. The deposit is only part of the problem, the other is your income to justify (qualify for) the loan. A smaller deposit simply means a larger mortgage, which needs a higher income to justify it. Of course this is much easier for a couple who both earn than someone who’s single. The entire housing market then relies on properties rising in value (as well as increased incomes) to ‘move up the ladder’, making it even harder for the next tranche of first time buyers.

Money provides choices, the lack of it limits options considerably.  Yes it is possible to save £40 a day and build a deposit of £14,600 over 12 months or £29,200 over 24. Short-term pain can be bearable, but is it realistic when we all know that food and energy inflation are much higher than stated by Government figures. This requires the sort of discipline that few of us actually possess (even fewer in Government!). Spending money is easy, saving it is really quite hard.

*Median UK wage April 2023 data, based on earned income ages 16-State Pension Age – reference HERE

You can follow me on Instagram here

Anti social media2024-04-13T15:18:01+01:00

NFT – NEW FAIRYTALE

TODAY’S BLOG

NFT – NEW FAIRYTALE

Perhaps you haven’t heard about NFTs, if not give yourself a pat on the back. However, it’s possible that you have seen something online or had a younger person mention it to you and perhaps it left you a little perplexed. I am not a fan. To me this is yet another of “The Emperors’ New Clothes”. I am concerned that a lot of people will say goodbye to their hard earned savings for fear of missing out and not understanding investing, in a culture that appears to tell us not to invest in the stock markets. Give me a moment and I will try to explain why.

One of the main reasons for people being scammed is due to a fear and lack of understanding about the stock markets. The market volatility is regularly reported by what passes as news, keeping you informed about the latest FTSE100 movement. “Billions were wiped off the markets today” is a phrase that regularly rolls off news presenters’ tongues, yet rare is the day (have I ever?) when we hear the “billions wiped on”. We are all kept in a state of anxiety about impending doom and it is quite deliberate. It gets your attention.

SO WHAT… HOW DOES THIS ENCOURAGE SCAMS?

Well, fearing the investment of your money in the most regulated, scrutinised exchange, where data is published and reviewed every day of the year and has been for decades, it seems that the volatility and the anecdotal “I lost money” or “my dad lost money” triggers the big red panic button that most of us have. So many turn to alternative forms of investing in the mistaken belief that they are less ‘risky’ (in fact some seem to be a ‘sure thing’). Oh, and for good measure, we humans are impatient, we love a happy ending and have a tendency to ignore the hard work that went into creating one (if it even is an ending). Or to put it another way, to approve of and want successful investments once they have happened.

NFTs The New Clothes

INVESTING IN REAL COMPANIES

When you invest money into the stock market or funds of equities (as is more likely) you buy shares in companies that trade internationally. They do so by making or providing goods and services that we want, need or require. As markets are generally competitive, they strive to improve what they do to ensure their own sustainability. Where companies often go wrong is cutting corners to reduce costs and increase profit rather than improving what they do and communicating this properly. On occasion, you may have an objection to the company, or its sector or the people that lead it. So you can (we can) screen out some of these based on ethical, environmental, social or governance standards. At the same time, you know that ‘cheap’ is unlikely to be high quality, but you also know that we don’t all need our weekly shopping from Harrods. There is a range; a spectrum. Sometimes we pay more for things because of the feelings that it evokes, sometimes we do so because we instinctively know it to be better.

Your investment appreciates in time as the company you invest in grows. You also receive a share of the profits made (dividends). Quite how much and how well these companies ‘perform’ is largely down to how well they run and… luck. By luck I mean – the right place at the right time, for example being a PPE manufacturer and a pandemic arrives.

You get your money back when you sell your investment. In the interim, you’ve hopefully had some dividends and an improvement in the value of the share. If you hold a handful of companies and one or two fail (such as the Kodaks of the world) then you have a proper loss. If you hold thousands, perhaps an entire market, then the impact of any failure is significantly reduced.

INVESTING IS NOT GAMBLING

Placing a sporting bet or a stake in a casino, you are hoping for a win, or something close to that to get your money back, plus the incentive to make the bet in the first instance. You may get back nothing – which is far more likely. That’s gambling – the risk of complete loss. For some people this is a small bit of fun (I can think of many better things, but I won’t judge), for others it becomes an addictive habit that can destroy families.

When you consider investment in proper companies (shares in them) over time, going back to the start of your lifetime, there is only one direction of travel for the combined value of your investments. Upwards. Yes there are bumps along the way (volatility) but you own real assets (companies) making and providing real products and services.

THE NEW CLOTHES

The digital world and our obsession with it, has given some people the idea that a digital image is worth something. These NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) are in my opinion the equivalent of the Emperor’s new clothes. The value is talked up by nefarious online forums and chatrooms and ‘traded’.  I would not touch them with the proverbial barge pole. If in the event I am wrong about this in say three decades time, that’s fine with me as I will be holding assets that provide regular income from actual profits from making real products and services. I can and will happily live with that and until proven otherwise, I will not aid anyone into deliberate folly.

HMRC’s NFT SEIZURE IS A WARNING TO ‘INVESTORS’ AND TAX CHEATS

The UK tax authorities have confirmed their first ever seizure of a non-fungible token (NFT) following a probe into an alleged £1.4million VAT fraud. Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC) said it had confiscated three NFTs, along with £5,000 in other crypto-assets, and arrested three people as part of a fraud investigation concerning around 250 sham companies. It claims the three suspects, who have not been publicly named, used a variety of ‘sophisticated methods’ to try and conceal their identities, such as false invoices, pre-paid unregistered mobile phones and virtual private networks.

NFTs are tokens representing the ownership of a digital asset, which could be an artwork, an image, music, or even a tweet that have their own unique signature and cannot be exchanged for another asset of the same type. But there has been increasing worries that these digital tokens, as well as cryptocurrencies, are being used by criminals to hide their illicit financial gains. Nick Sharp, the Deputy Director of Economic Crime at the HMRC, said: “Our first seizure of a Non-Fungible Token serves as a warning to anyone who thinks they can use crypto-assets to hide money from HMRC.”

Understand the real risk and buy real assets. You have been warned.

Dominic Thomas
Solomons IFA

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk 
Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk    Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

NFT – NEW FAIRYTALE2023-12-01T12:12:53+00:00

JUST THE FACTS?

TODAY’S BLOG

JUST THE FACTS

One of the big electronic billboards that I pass on the way to and from the office has an advert for a London radio station with the strapline “Just The Facts – Headlines Every 20 Minutes”. I’m not against facts, quite the reverse, however they are never in isolation (unlike many of us now).

The facts are truths, but they always require a context. We know this of course, but in an age of constant bombardment of anything either audio, visual or both we are so assaulted by a stream of imagery that we are often left to engage with it in its rawest and poorest form – without a context.

We are all deeply concerned, alarmed and bewildered at some of the scenes we have witnessed lately, particularly in the supermarkets. Then of course there are the stock markets where the same panic has been rife. The incredible thing about this is the speed at which society seems to implode.

YOUTH GROUP 2007

DO YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE?

However, as of right now, I wonder if my last sentence is even vaguely true. Society has not imploded, people that I interact with on social media, peers, clients, industry bods, anyone, all seem to have the same bewilderment. They also have the same determination to do what they can to help each other, the exact opposite of the majority of the images we see.

I SEE ALIVE PEOPLE

I am a huge believer in people, in my time I spent many years leading youthwork in my free time. The thing I like about young people is that your input has fairly prompt results and they have a longer future (hopefully) ahead of them. Whilst for a teenager, everything feels like an eternity, it’s all over within a few years. The picture above was taken in the summer of 2007, (that’s me in the corner on the phone) when we took part of the youth group to a festival. Two of them are both due to get married this summer. We’ve been invited but sadly one, perhaps both of them might need to rearrange or adjust their plans given the current pandemic. I’m sure that is disappointing, frustrating and possibly expensive, but they are robust and happy together, more focused on the years ahead together than on the first official day…

COMMUNITY RESPONSES

The road I live on has just started a WhatsApp group. It goes without saying that some of the residents had never heard of WhatsApp. We moved to the area nearly 4 years ago and know a handful of people around us, but suddenly we have all been introduced to each other. Call me sentimental, but I think that’s rather a good thing – the premise has been to help those most impacted and vulnerable with shopping and so forth, but I dare say it will be rather more far reaching.

ALL IS NOT LOST – LOOK AHEAD

So, the markets have fallen. We have all “lost money” (we have not lost money, the value of the assets we own has temporarily reduced – that is all). This is uncomfortable, I don’t wish to understate the problems, but there are already lots of positive and encouraging signs – you just need to look in the right places.

I’m here, still minding the fort and building the bridges and looking forward to tomorrow.  Feel free to get in touch, comment, ask a question, pick up the phone or ask for an online meeting. I will do my best for you.

Dominic Thomas
Solomons IFA

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk 
Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk    Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

JUST THE FACTS?2023-12-01T12:13:21+00:00

WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE TO GO BACK IN TIME?

TODAY’S BLOG

WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE TO GO BACK IN TIME?

The concept of time is something that we all like to play around with. We recall memories, sometimes embellished, some highly accurate and others somewhat muddled. We encounter the present with our baggage and sense of identity based on the past and have hopes for our future.

To travel through time is what we all do, on a daily basis, yet to time-travel, well that is something for the writers of science fiction. As we all know, there would be some significant advantages to be gained if we could “correct” our own actions and perhaps those of others in the past. The chance to have another, better attempt at anything with the advantage of hindsight is the fuel of regrets and if only…

Time flies, The Old Bakery, Solomons IFA

Do we ever learn?

History is a great teacher, it is in many respects the best way we can apply “hindsight”. Yet we so readily ignore its lessons. Human behaviour has not really altered much over the years. We are having to adapt to new things all the time, but our nature seems slow to learn. The repetitive nature of war, division and “inhumanity” are sadly familiar. We don’t seem to learn.

Long-term thinking

The same is true of investing. We don’t learn very easily. Investing in equities (shares) has been proven time and again to provide the most likely way of increasing wealth above the rate of inflation. Looking at any long-term horizon, when considering the total returns (increase in capital value and income paid out by way of dividends) there is ample evidence to hold the very firm belief that over time, years and decades, equities are the obvious choice.

I can already hear you thinking “but…” and that’s what I have come to appreciate. We are not built for investing. Human nature has been built around the very useful instinct to flee at the sight of threat. This is helpful in a world of beasts and the beastly, but not in the sophisticated world of long-term equity investment. Every sign or signal of “downturn” is met with fear and panic. Pundits and journalists alike are designed to be storytellers, having something to say is better than the alternative. We hear “billions wiped off the market” yet we never hear “billions wiped on the market”. The news is skewed, we thrive on drama. Yet this passes and is arguably a vital aspect of equity markets, which always recover. Always. The crash comes, recovery comes, repeat, but we never seem to learn. Human nature is not our friend when it comes to successful investing. It is utterly inept.

These days the better part of my skill set is employed to remind you not to blow up your own financial plan. Indeed, it is to prevent you from doing so, which means confronting your own worst enemy… you. Some days will be very difficult. A 50% fall in markets is huge, but it will recover, not if, but when. The only measure for success with your financial planning is whether you reach your goals, not those of others. This is your story.

As for time travelling, there is a decent little series on Netflix called “The Umbrella Academy” which has some interesting ideas. Here is the trailer for the series.

Dominic Thomas
Solomons IFA

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk 
Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

GET IN TOUCH

Solomon’s Independent Financial Advisers
The Old Mill Cobham Park Road, COBHAM Surrey, KT11 3NE

Email – info@solomonsifa.co.uk    Call – 020 8542 8084

7 QUESTIONS, NO WAFFLE

Are we a good fit for you?

WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE TO GO BACK IN TIME?2023-12-01T12:17:32+00:00

What can investors learn from sport?

What can investors learn from sport?

I apologise to those of you that do not like sport, the purpose of this post is not to bleat on like some bloke at the pub who is attempting to name his best eleven… again… but to make an observation about the way people behave and in particular what investors can learn from sport.

I wonder if you watched the final of the T20 World Cup at the weekend. It was a thrilling match – (spoiler alter) England were eventually beaten by the West Indies. The “English” team (nationality in sport is debatable) started badly, losing Roy, Hales and Morgan very quickly. At 23 for 3 things looked pretty bad.

These days I delude myself that I can multi-task, so flicked between TV stations, watching football, Grand Prix, the cricket and keeping an eye on the social media (yes it would appear that I’m rather sad and lacking an attention span). However, getting to my point – social media exposes an array of reactions (commentators term them emotions) that people reveal as they experience an event.

Too early to call

Many had written off England with the fall of the third wicket, several used terms like “game over” before the team had even completed their attempt to score as many runs as possible within 20 overs. The game had not even reached its half-way point, but thousands had already conceded victory.

Its not over until its over

The English fortune turned around equally as quickly once the West Indies began to bat, crumbling to 11 for 3 and struggling for runs. Suddenly there was “hope”. Indeed by the end of the 19th over (of 20) another 19 runs were needed, which seemed out of reach for Carlos Brathwaite, the facing West Indies batsman, who had 10 runs to his name. England were in the proverbial “driving seat” and now expected to win. Brathwaite had other ideas and promptly smashed each of the next deliveries for six runs, resulting in a dramatic victory and tournament win. Of course sad and desperate for Ben Stokes, the English bowler.

Investor behaviour is invariably no different from those on social media at the weekend. Reacting too quickly, feeling depressed, exasperated, then gaining some hope , followed by over confidence, followed by…. Repeat.

Your goals, not someone else’s

Investing is not a hobby, it is not a sport (unless you really are very rich). It is no way to learn about yourself and no place for reactive emotions. We approach the end of the 2015/16 tax year tomorrow. The deadline invariably pushes prices up. Whilst I am obviously (I hope) of the view that allowances ought to be used when appropriate, any investing should only be done if it helps you to reach your goals, not those set by HMRC.

Part of my job is to keep clients disciplined, avoiding mistakes and sticking to their own plans (not mine). This has been termed “adviser alpha” and adds an unquantifiable amount of value, though many attempt to quantify this.

The media in all its forms constantly stirs feelings of anxiety or missing out on opportunity. The vast majority of commentary about investing is about as relevant to your financial plan as any sporting event – completely irrelevant! Trying to perfectly time the market (the opportune moment to buy and sell) is frankly impossible to achieve with consistency. In practice few do so and fewer still can demonstrate this as skill rather than luck.

Have a Successful investing experience

Unlike sport, investing does not have to be about “winner takes all”. Everyone can win if they are investing in a way that fulfils their financial planning goals. They key is remaining calm, disciplined and clear about what you are really trying to achieve.

Dominic Thomas
Solomons IFA

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

What can investors learn from sport?2023-12-01T12:19:18+00:00

Dawn French 30 Million Minutes

Dawn French 30 Million Minutes

I recently saw Dawn French perform 30 million minutes at London’s Vaudeville theatre. Most will know Dawn as something of a national treasure from her portrayal as the wonderful Vicar of Dibley which continues to be repeated on television. She is of course part of the double-act French and Saunders and has been one of the leading people behind Comic Relief (who are 30 this Christmas).

30 Million Minutes

The new show called 30 Million Minutes is essentially her story so far. The 30 million minutes being roughly how long she has been alive (there are 524,160 minutes in a 365 day year) the 30 million point passed once 57 years 85 days and 8 hours old, Dawn turned 58 in October. Like most of our stories, hers contains both wonderful moments, some hilarious and some plainly deeply painful. However most of us do not have our stories splattered across mainstream media, neither, thankfully, do we suffer the abuse about our appearance.

Confessions of a Comic?

This is a personal and revealing performance, exposing her self-confessed need for attention and affirmation, which seems to be insatiable. Tremendous credit for her bravery and self-exposure, however I am left to wonder quite why she would revisit this each night in her performances, perhaps therapy through retelling or partly confessional. Her story is moving, and at times desperately sad, whilst being littered with familiar and familial references.

Quite how revealing the story is can only be judged by those that know her best, but clearly the impact of a life in the media has a high price with some very personal attacks, however I was left with the nagging feeling that whilst to some extent the performance is akin to a story between friends, something deeper was missing in the nightly retelling… such as her motivation for becoming the consummate clown.

Despite valiant efforts to convince both herself and audiences in all formats that being comfortable in your own skin and acceptance of body image, I wonder how many are sufficiently convinced within a culture of appearance is all.

Perhaps obviously, but I don’t know Dawn but like most of the population I have a very warm place in my consciousness for her, the new show has merely built upon this. We are reminded that time is fleeting and for a financial planning angle? …. well, reflect on your own story and where you’d like to take it.

Dominic Thomas
Solomons IFA

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

Dawn French 30 Million Minutes2023-12-01T12:19:42+00:00

It happened on the way to Essex (warning: dangerous information)

 I was in the car, on the way to a client listening to the radio. Possibly I should have stuck with my own music, but decided to listen to some “news”. It was Thursday (yesterday) and the media was agitated about pension charges. The panel discussion was about as badly informed as it gets and if this was designed to reduce or remove confusion about pensions, then it failed spectacularly even on explaining the difference between a Defined Benefit and a Defined Contribution pension and proving the adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”. Why a sensible IFA wasn’t asked to speak I have no dangerous-to-knowidea. So I had better explain.

Firstly there are broadly two types of pension. A Defined Benefit, so called because it defines what you will get. More commonly known as a final salary scheme. This sort of pension is based entirely on your service and your final salary. Each year of service in such a scheme is built up at the rate of a fraction each each. So take a doctor or nurse, 1/80th each year. So a doctor or teacher that works for 30 years, the sum is 30/80ths (37.5%) of their final salary = annual pension (for life). Ok these schemes are changing, but the principles are remaining pretty much the same.

The other type of pension is an investment based pension. If you are employed and in such a scheme it is often called a defined contribution scheme… it won’t surprise you to learn that it is aptly named, because the contribution (the amount paid in by you and/or the employer)  is defined – eg 5% of salary. However as its just an investment, the value of the pot will change… daily. So the value you end up with is based on what the pot is worth.

The row is over the charges applied to investment based schemes and whether they actually offer value for money as a result. A lot of hot air on the radio resulted in my exasperation fogging my windscreen, not a good idea on the M25 when it is grey and wet. There were a lot of inaccurate statements and very little placed into a context. So at the risk of boring you, I will attempt to do so.

Back in the 1980’s investment based pensions began to take the place of final salary schemes. Why? because of the liberated stock market (big bang) and a desire for people like you and I to capitalise on capitalism. There was also a growing (albeit muted) appreciation that people are living longer and therefore the old style final salary pensions were going to have to pay out for longer, costing employers a lot more money. Divorce rates were also rising, meaning that the spouses (and ex-spouses benefits) might also last a very long time. The rise of retail investment funds (Unit Trusts) which only began life in 1931 (thanks to M&G)  became more widely available. Pension companies (a considerable number back then) ran their own investment funds using their own fund managers. Financial advisers were largely sales people that worked for pension providers. They were paid to sell pensions (and other products) from commission in the same way that pretty much every other type of selling works… the more you sell the more you earn (as a salesman/person)

Now you and I might think it a pretty bad idea that people are paid a commission to sell financial products. The advantage of hindsight is a wonderful thing isn’t it. However, most people, even in 2013, do not wake up and think that they should start a pension, or take out life assurance and sadly some people (most) need to be “sold” the wisdom of doing so (unless it isn’t appropriate for them = very few people). So “advisers” needed an incentive to incentivise the public. Yes it was a silly system, but in January it all changed. Every adviser must charge fees – properly. Surprisingly people are not jumping up and down with enthusiasm about this (on both “sides”).

Taking a step back in time, commission was paid based on the products type, the premium and the term of the “policy”… more for more. Then factor in some pension companies thought that they could offer a bit more for the “same thing” .  This led to bias (you are not surprised). Bias between financial product and also financial provider. Simple example… you have £300 a  month to invest. You could do so into a variety of “products” a pension, an endowment or a PEP (old form of ISA). The commission might range from £5,000 to £9 for a PEP.

Eh? well endowments paid very large commissions, they were generally 25 year policies and if I recall paid more than a pension. A pension though has tax relief but couldn’t be touched until 50 (back then) most though retired at 65, an extra 15 years on the policy term (commission is related to policy term too). A PEP, well it doesn’t have a term, its not a policy. It was a single investment of £300 that happened to recur. 3% of £300 is £9… each month. Not many advisers were going to advise a PEP not because they thought it was bad, but you would have to sell a lot of them to make a living. Other products though were “contracts” so you were agreeing to pay for 25 years. The product provider (names you know and possibly loathe for a variety of reasons) had a separate agreement with the adviser (well the adviser firm). Rather than pay £9 a month, they paid it upfront (£9x12monthsx25years = £2,700) for example. How? (with only £300 a month going into the pot)… it would surely take 9 months before £2,700 was even in the pot right? Well thats where some very “clever” accounting and charges and types of units comes into play. The details varied from provider to provider, making it hard for even good advisers to accurately compare one with another. In short, the commission was really a loan, if the investor (you) reduced or stopped paying, the commission loan would have to be back in full or in part.

This approach led to two key things. Firstly, people took out policies that they didn’t need or couldn’t afford. As a result advisers had to pay back commissions, invariably leading to a very high rate of staff turnover. Secondly there was an obvious pressure to sell, sell, sell… which meant a focus on new business and not servicing existing clients. The regulation at the time was as divided as the industry, independent advisers regulated by FIMBRA and Tied advisers by LAUTRO. The latter working for the insurance company, the former doing your shopping. However, even being independent did not prevent bias between solution (product) and provider selected. So in 1995… that’s 18 years ago!  commission disclosure was introduced and at around the same time a single regulator was introduced (the Personal Investment Authority – PIA). You (and the adviser) could both see what the adviser would be paid. However both relied on standard projected rates of returns to work out which provider was cheaper than the other. Still smoke and mirrors, but in all honesty, nothing to do with the advisers.

Stay, with me…if you can. The regulator then decided that advisers should write proper reports, “reasons why letters” and also provide better data about who they were placing business with. The profession of advice began to evolve (slowly catching up with the IFP Institute of Financial Planning, born in the UK in 1984).  The PIA became the FSA in 2001 and with it decided to end polarisation (tied/IFA) and added a third option “multi-tied” which confused things even more and enabled certain high street Banks to give the impression that they weren’t only peddling their own stuff. However to be independent, you had to at least offer clients the option of paying a fee rather than a commission. In January 2013, advisers were to be defined as either Independent or restricted and with both options, if you are arranging any form of investment, a fee must be agreed and paid – not a commission. Hooray, we finally got there and with another version of regulation – the FCA. In practice the regulator has said, your advice must not be biased and your client must agree the amount they pay for it. The results are yet to be seen, but in reality, most people cannot or will not pay for financial advice, because most people’s experience has been bad, sold duff products, that didn’t deliver and weren’t serviced.

The role of the adviser has altered dramatically, for all but the dinosaurs or stupid. A financial adviser is ADVISING you what you should do. A good adviser will be doing proper cash-flow planning, working with you on your actual goals and figuring out what you need to do to get there. A great adviser will also be helping you to assess risk and the returns you need, adjusting your portfolio and minimising the number of bad decisions you would otherwise make. A brilliant adviser will also keep you disciplined and focussed on what your goals are and help you avoid the 98% of the financial media that is a complete red-herring to your goals and life story. These people tend to call themselves financial planners, wanting to emphasise the planning work and disassociate themselves from selling products.

In short the skill set has evolved. You wouldn’t believe the level of research that is done these days. This is possible because of better technology and frankly better skills and a much better context. The truth, as painful and sad as it may be is that we have all messed this up at some point. Investors in believing in “free advice” and advisers in not being clear that it wasn’t, perhaps afraid to be. The product providers are guilty of making highly complex charging structures in order to pay for sales, and they have also effectively bought and bribed business. The fund management industry has overcharged and underperformed, manipulated data and set in motion a system that rewards big bets. The regulator has invariably focussed on the wrong things and hasn’t evolved as quickly to cope with some very complex financial instruments. In fairness though, it has had to take on more and more – now it is also taking on regulation of consumer credit – everything from a washing machines to a Ferrari (or Aston to Zanussi). However, the myth that is still perpetuated is that investing is easy and it is cheap. It is neither. I don’t care what massive “discount brokers” say or “money saving experts” they have all come from the same place and are focussing on the wrong things.

So (if you are still with me) back to the radio show. Statements about charges on pensions are very flawed, as flawed and silly as the charging structures themselves. Old style pensions were very pricey by today’s standards. Sometimes it is worth getting out of them, sometimes it isn’t. This needs careful consideration. Suggesting that 25% of a fund will be wiped out by charges is a foolish thing to say. It won’t, because you cannot invest for free. The charges are projections about a future that will not even happen. Returns are unknown. You are unlikely to have the same investment in 30 years time that you have now. The real menaces to investors are these:

1. Not reviewing your portfolio at least annually (and not being disciplined)

2. Not having clearly defined goals and objectives

3. Not assessing your attitude to risk and ability to cope with market volatility and therefore figuring out what returns you can accept and therefore what it will produce.

4. Running out of time, or money.

5. Not having a proper financial plan, that tells you when you have reached your goal and have “enough” (by your definition of “enough”)

6. The utter rubbish talked,written, recorded,filmed about money and investing

7. What the FTSE does is largely irrelevant to you

8. Government policy that messes with and creates a tax regime so complex that you need to pay an expert’s expert to decipher it.

9. Inflation, inflation, inflation, inflation…

10. The myth that you can get something for nothing, falling for the latest investment fad or fear.

You can have a successful investing experience, but you also need to be realistic. There are, and always have been some good advisers, some good fund managers, some good product providers and some good regulation. Life is not as binary as many would like to suggest. Over the years I have met some thoroughly decent people from all these camps. I have met advisers that I would trust with my own money – or my widows/children’s.

What’s more, this is not new. I set up my firm 14 years ago. I created a product neutral playing field, charging the same fee structure for investing in any form, in any product. I removed commission from new protection policies (which by the way is still available to advisers). I began to develop a proper investment philosophy and service and gradually began to use proper cash-flow planning. I have evolved, grown and learned. I made mistakes along the way, taking too long to improve in some areas and doing others too soon. That’s life. However I have remained consistent to the notion that my job is to improve my clients position, not make it worse. My long-term interests are best served by serving yours. Yes the financial services industry has a lot to answer for, it is miles from perfect.

One final point, here in Britain we seem to think that someone else will pay, that things are actually without cost. The very real and difficult truth is that we don’t really want to acknowledge that things have a price. Whether this is social security, care of the elderly, good education, quality teachers, good government, protecting children on the internet, a watchdog for the police, media, government, NHS, utility companies, stock market, financial advisers…or helping refugees and decommissioning weapons. Everything has a price and pretending that it doesn’t or it can be cheap is… well its like that big river in Egypt…. denial.

Footnote: By the way, the regulator does not think investors are capable of working out charges in a percentage format. They want charges expressed in monetary terms. So what hope do we have if people cannot even calculate what 1% is?

Dominic Thomas – Solomons IFA

It happened on the way to Essex (warning: dangerous information)2023-12-01T12:23:53+00:00

Glass Half Full

I imagine that almost everyone has heard of the “glass half full or half empty” metaphor. However, as with most metaphors, I find myself rather conflicted. Sometimes it is half empty, sometimes half full, but frankly of late I’ve been wanting to say “of what?”… as in full/empty of what? what are the contents? because frankly if they aren’t good for me, then I don’t want to drink from the glass…and don’t really care how much is in it.

I relay this tale at the end of July, one of the hottest for… well it hardly matters does it? The sunshine has reminded us that we do have four seasons, not just two, or three at a stretch. So in the context of a joyful summer, and a month in which many British sporting interests have found the heights of success, I find myself also frustrated by various administrative blunders that have met with my ire. I risk sounding like Victor Meldrew, but frankly you wouldn’t (believe it) if I relayed some of the problems that we have experienced this month, which were entirely due to Product Providers. I could not even say that these were lesser organisations, but are in fact some of those that I respect enormously. What made me both chuckle and tut at the same time was one email that contained the phrase “…. does not guarantee that the information shown is free from any errors, omissions or inaccuracies”. Well yes and no. Yes I accept that we all make mistakes, but no, I don’t think its quite ok to cover this with a phrase that seems to indicate a lack of responsibility.

My trade press, the financial media, are ready to dress up any old topic to create a punchy headline that creates a stir. Yet invariably, the headline is rather disappointing and as ever the detail is not terribly contentious. Perhaps more column inches (remember those?) will be dedicated to whether Gareth Bale will/won’t/will/won’t/definitively won’t, certainly won’t/probably… move to Real Madrid for the “right money”. Its all a game designed for amusement. The financial press is often gets caught up in the same game. What is more amusing and concerning frankly, is the comments by other advisers, invariably hiding behind anonymous/fictional names who pounce on any opportunity to unleash vitriol against the regulator. Now, I’m not suggesting that the regulator is right all or even much of the time, but many “advisers” are tempted to comment without thought or indeed research (by which I mean reading FCA papers)… which surely are two rather vital ingredients in the skill set of any adviser in 2013. Regulation is no easy task and we need good regulation. Why? well I’m fed up of rising compensation costs, which I have to stump up in order to pay for the bad work of “bad” advisers… nothing to do with me, other than the same “profession”. Good regulation will hopefully see this trend reversed. When I read some of the comments and blogs, I am tempted to say “methinks he doth pretest too much” (and yes invariably it is a he).

None of us want to be ripped off, but many of us pay more in order to get a better service or higher quality. Just think of the car you drive or the suit you wear or the perfume/aftershave etc etc. Price is not simply a sum of parts. Value is not easy to define. I may pay a very different price for a bottle or wine or even a pint of beer, but if I am being served the same thing, in the same place and charged very differently, then that is decidedly unfair, which is essentially all the regulator is saying. Treating customers fairly is not an optional extra.

Dominic Thomas Solomons IFA

Glass Half Full2023-12-01T12:23:49+00:00

Royal Baby worth £243m to UK economy… come again?

Well you certainly did not hear it here first. The Royal family has an new heir. The media coverage was and presumably continues to be… well, rather daft. Our “news” channels seem unable to deliver much to us these days other than speculation and anecdotal opinion from.. well pretty much anyone that wants to be on the airwaves.

So I was intrigued to see an estimate from the Centre for Retail Research based in Nottingham that suggested the new baby would generate “around” (seems like a fairly precise number to me) £243m for the UK economy. This is money spent on “stuff” that ultimately gets counted. Now, perhaps I’m out of touch on this, but I hadn’t noticed a whole lot of “festivities” which account for £87m. This is on extra food, drink and parties to celebrate the birth…I think I must be short of an invite or two, but really? An estimated 3m bottles of sparkling wine or champagne opened to celebrate this specific event…(where?) I suppose I’m not disputing the numbers, perhaps they are right, but 3m of a 60m population about 5% of people will actually go and buy an extra bottle of bubbly to celebrate, that’s one in twenty (aged 0 to 100+). Sound right to you? This is not bubbly that they already bought, or due to an anniversary (quite a lot of people marry in the summer)..or finish school or Uni…this is extra bubbly.

The CRR also allocate £80m for souvenirs and toys. Well this is plausible, have you seen the price of London trinkets lately? Add to this a further £76m for books, DVDs and “other media”. They even suggest that pram sales will rise 13%, which I find rather incredulous, do people really decide to have children as a result of a member of the Royal family having a baby? well apparently so.

As you may have gathered, I have some reservations about the accuracy of such forecasts and predictions. If they are correct, then perhaps we should request that the Royals reproduce every year! We would soon be out of our economic doldrums…or at least somewhat overcome by the festive hats and DVDs.

I’m not in anyway knocking the Royal family. Of course the birth of a baby is, in this instance, delightful news to his parents. What I get rather concerned about is the way our national governance and economic well-being is reduced to unproven figures, be it inflation, royal birth, benefit cheats, illegal immigration, crime, cost of the Olympic games or a BBC inquiry. I am of course mindful that the figures may well be right, but they certainly don’t sound remotely accurate.

Dominic Thomas: Solomons IFA

Royal Baby worth £243m to UK economy… come again?2023-12-01T12:23:48+00:00
Go to Top