I can see lots of irrelevant comments charges and innuendos here. And very few seem to have followed Moneylife\\\'s progress and journey. As a reader let me share some facts which will answer the false allegations and attacks. Most people here have not followed how consistently pro-investor Moneylife has been and repeatedly critical of malpractices of mutual funds. I give only two examples:
1. Name games: http://www.moneylife.in/article/71/1212.......
2. Games Funds Play: http://www.moneylife.in/article/682.html.......
Please take some effort to read these and other articles in the site. Please compare this with other publications.
Moneylife has written enough of articles about mis-selling by mutual funds and distributors. It has repeatedly pointed out that bigger distributors are the bigger culprits, as this article also says. Moneylife is also the only publication which has the guts to name names. It also actively resolved grievances. Mint started a grievance redressal service and quietly dropped it. Motivated supporters of Sebi have carefully ignored all this and attacked Moneylife\'s supposed bias.
Moneylife seminar on mutual funds tells people not to invest in NFOs and points out that investors have to navigate between harmful and irrelevant products of mutual fund companies and harmful selling by the agents and distributors. It also advises that big names mean nothing in financial products like mutual funds.
Finally, Moneylife foundation is the only product-neutral financial literacy effort that speaks for investors and savers. http://foundation.moneylife.in/promotion......
More than 104 seminars in 2 years by a small magazine is a tremendous achievement which the regulator deliberately ignores, as someone pointed out? Interesting.
These are some facts worth keeping in mind as debate gets sidetracked from what I think Moneylife has clearly diagnosed and articulated - frequent and half-baked regulatory changes in the name of investor protection is really harming the investor. Its not about Fidelity. Its about the investor. Isn\\\\\\\'t it strange that this point was deliberately fudged by some of those who commented? Who is biased now?
over n above the points given so far, further they didn't allowed all IFAs registration.This might hv given them AUM above threshold level. And except Eqty fund and Tax fund, they had not any breakthrough schemes.Their payout was moderate.And inspite of their truly best efforts, it was considered foreign MF for affluent people and not for the masses.Their AMCs were at select places, hence penetration was not enough.
Mr Ramesh
BANG ON!! too the point.
too add to what you said, AMC was run by bankers worked in MNC banks din't have any idea about Retail and masses, they did open office but later closed them down.Look at franklin templeton, damn opposite of fidelity
Asset management/ MF is an industry that makes money even when you - the investor - loses money. If you held units in an equity MF for whole of last year (2011), you may have lost some 20% of your capital. But, the AMC or MF still got their 1.5 or 2%.
In sectors with open competition, usually the top 3 players gather the most revenues and profits. This is true for MF also. Fidelity losses increased last financial year (mar2011)- the same year when Reliance MF net profits increased 30%. HDFC MF profits also grew to > 240 Crores!
So, why is Fidelity losing money considering closing down in India? Look at the facts: In all businesses, there is a minimum scale required for sustained profitability. If you are too small, it is difficult to maintain profits because your revenues are not sufficient to allow the optimum costs (e.g. on sales, marketing, technology, staff). Or, as Indian small businesses know very well, you have to be very miserly on your costs to survive and beat the competition. Fidelity has neither managed to grow, nor shown the ability to be frugal on costs.
a.) Fidelity has been stuck in the region of 8,000Cr to 9,000 Cr AUM. You\\\'ll find MF houses that came in much later have higher AUMs - under the same SEBI regulations. In India, fixed income products are a far larger proportion of total MF assets than equity. Fidelity hasn\\\'t had any successful fixed income product in this market!
b.) Fidelity costs are much higher compared even to funds of similar size. e.g. expense ratios are almost double of Axis MF which has a a similar total AUM!
I guess they came in with the full cost base of high salaries & bonuses and systems.
On the other hand, Fidelity has been an honest fund. They have not played the NFO game and also gave long-term investors a bonus. So, I will be sorry to see them go. I hope they can control their costs and generate some innovative outreach programs to reach the investors and create a larger base.
YR SUPPORT OF HAVING ENTRY LOAD IS BAD. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BANNED 20 YRS. AGO, NOT 2! ALL & SUNDRY HAVE SUCKED OUT HUNDREDS OF CRORES OF INVESTOR WEALTH IN LOADS GOING TO THEM AS UNDESERVED COMMISSION!
INDUSTRY DOING BADLY IS TO DO WITH MANY THINGS, NOT NO ENTRY LOAD.
Yes, you are right Krish. I support your views. Industry is doing bad not because of entry load. Otherwise how HDFC is on the top and UTI once on the top, now at 6th position?
No. It is not a slap on SEBI,s face. Fidelity is a arrogant AMC and suffering from 'Superiority Complex'. That is why it did not allow IFAs to sell its products. It entirely depended upon Institutional Distributors. Without IFAs' support no AMC is surviving in India. This is also a warning to other AMCs.
Congratulations for the bold articles, which eagerly read by Ms.Monica Halan of The Mint.
Your article was published on 5.14pm on 31-jan-12 and Ms.Monica Halan took great effort the same evening/night and published article with counter arguement on 6.10am of 1-Feb-12.
True Mitul.See the difference between Monica's interpretation & ML on the same story.Monica has fixed BLAME whereas Debashish & Aditya have fixed the PROBLEM about what ails Mutual Fund Industry.Mainstream media is Anti social media need I say more?
For the benefit of readers please find link to Monica's piece in Mint http://www.livemint.com/2012/01/31212913...
what ever written is absolutely true.SEBI has not still learn the lesson that without intermediary any financial product which has complex model of understanding cannot more.Govt of India has seen this because it tried to sell NPS scheme without intermediary which has become a failure.SEBI had picked up fault of distributors/IFAs saying that they used to sell the product where the commission was more.I suggested SEBI to introduce such a regulation where there should be universal commission structure .
If that would have been the regulation distributors would sell only a good scheme instead of a bad scheme because commission would have been same.It is a simple judgement that if one can get good and bad apple at the same rate then only good apples would sell.This simple judgement didnot came into SEBI's mind which had learned directors on the board.Sebi's decision to ban entry load is like- because lot of road accidents happening so let us ban plying vehicle on the road.It is foolish to what extent cannot be expressed.Today Fidelity is searching somebody to sell it's business.Tomorrow one by one other Mutual Funds will search buyer of selling their stake.What SEBI will do for that.May be Sebi will take a sigh of relief when MF industry will totally be closed as Sebi's responsibility will come down to a great extent.
Dear Mr Basu,
You are praising the efforts of good IFAs in familatising the concept of investment in MFs and Fidelity didn't deal with IFAs they dealt with only Brokerages. Then how they will have access to the country side. Whereas desi fund houses are in profits. How is it?
SEBI's ban on entry load has not killed MF industry but its NFO business model which was making big distributors rich and killing small investors. In NFO selling, the advice part was completely missing as the only advice to be rendered was to say, this scheme is good and worth investing and the sale was through. Moreover high front commission allowed rebating for procurement of business from the prospective investors.
MF returns are market linked hence require advice in respect to timing of investment, its tenure and purpose based on one's need and asset allocation which was completely absent in NFO selling. SEBI's reforms are directed towards bringing this advice element into the selling process.
Under these facts Fidelity's exit is not a slap on SEBI's face but on Fidelity's own face as they are unable to reshape their business model according to changed scenario.
As I see it, the problem is more fundamental. Not enough Indians invest in equities or mutual funds. We have a fetish for gold and land. So, even though real estate is the most problematic investment with high transaction costs and a high probability of being ripped off, people dont mind all the hassles and invest in land.
Mutual funds too have contributed to the disinterest by having too many schemes of the same nature and by concentrating on the metros. Also, the help centres of even reputed MFs are not that helpful. For even a simple problem such as correcting the address, one has to jump through hoops. I had to send a dozen emails, a number of phone calls to get it done. It was enough to put anyone off.
I think you are right, Mr. Patil. We Indians want the safety illusion of FDs, NSC, KVP, Gold. The ones willing to take risks are often interested only in short-term speculation - that's the reason for high volume of day traders on the stock markets and 'investors' in land and reality when property markets are going up.
MFs tap this market via fixed income products but, unfortunately, fidelity failed to do so.
Fidelity did not play the NFO and 10-similar funds game, and I respect them for that. But, they also failed to take the message to their target investors even in major metros. Otherwise, the base would have been larger.
But, most importantly, when your business is smaller, you have to control costs to avoid making large losses. I think this is where Fidelity really missed the boat, coming from the culture of a large MNC financial institution.
Which other profession in the world works on such thin margins?
Where does it happen?, in which profession that the service provider has to disclose their quantum & sources of earnings to its clients?
If the evil lies entirely in the upfront commission & its abuse? Can the regulator not control it at the Fund level ie No fund / AMC / MF scheme can pay more than the competitor or a certain fixed percentage be set as a limit or all similar schemes are forced to pay a fixed sum only.
If the evil also lies in aggressive / unwarranted churning of the client's portfolio? Can the regulator not control it by taking such erring entities to task rather than hurting the entire industry in one go.
Sincerely I din't care to read the entire article initially as the title says so much, about what would be written inside(don't ignore mine). It is easier to blame regulation and regulatory body.but that's what business are suppose to do. It's your business and no one said it's going to come on a plate.
The idea to blame regulator is fine if the fidelity wouldn't have the first one to fall. But see it is.
Just remove that "bigger than the god" fake aura of Fidelity and look at it. In the light of stake sales (just a few weeks back) in Reliance Mutual Fund, IDFC and may be players like Vanguard trying to come in India.Now think is it fidelity or sebi who is wrong?
If Fidelity Exit was slap than Goldmansachs re entry was a kiss?
I cannot resist myself comparing MF industry with Airlines where likes of KINGfisher are struggling and INDIGO is doing amazingly well. They are working in same environment.
My questions to the editor(who let this article publish) and writer:
why did likes of axis and religare mf grew in the same "non friendly" environment grew and fidelity failed in same environment.
Look at the history of fidelity are they exiting from some country for the first time??
then What qualifies as 'solid long term investor". If wrter had put in effort they would have seen that this "solid long term invetsor" is used to churning in and out of countries.
The article clearly shows the birasness and shallowness of writer, as the fund house never had a systematic, planning and execution"
In the subject of International marketing,people would have read localisation and globalisation. This AMC never understood the Indian Market correctly for which the Indian SBU's top management is to be blamed. They neither understood nor were willing to be flexible.Fidelity with all their systematic planning and execution had employee cost of 51% of there exepnses which by any standards is MADNESS. (as this Industry is only about people).
When they started they had a berserk marketing expenditure which was highest Industry never seen never heard. There expenditure to the assets were 1.58% where as n largest (one time) AMC it's .85% only which had assets ten times that of Fidelity. and far larger than HDFC.
Fidelity as a fund house which always tried to position itself as one with cult status never made it big the times about which writer is cribbing, during the same time a fundhouse like HDFCwas rising like there is no tomorrow.
Reasons that they never understood Indian markets clearly can be found in
number of distributors empaneled, number of office they have than see it in the light of expenses they had.
For once writer and readers are requested to see fidelity as another fund house who couldn't understand Indian markets well and is thinking about exiting (if news articles to be believed)
But its a writing on the wall that They will come back. India with all its regulations and problems is a huge opportunity to be missed. After all Business is about making money out of needs, wants desires, Problem/Opportunites.
But SEBI still doesn't get a clean chit.
gosh... this illiterate stuff shows that Indians still have a long way to go before understanding the fund industry, its costs and the fact that there have to be investors to generate profits!
clearly, investor education is sadly lacking. was an interesting exercise wading through the messages from Indians. there are indeed some sensible ones, but the best is from Arun below who says "AMC of quality of Fidelity needs to be in india for our own good". quite frankly yes. as an outsider visiting here, if Fidelity is leaving India, I have to rethink about Indian markets, their quality, depth etc.
Dear Mr White
Entire world is not divided in just black and white, there are shades of grey as well. With all due respect to the brand. There process brought in just "above average" performance in their equity funds.
With due respect to Brand, My point is that the problem was with the management and the way business was run specifically in India about which you surely have no Idea. In last 7 years of operations they had reported loss of Rs 333 crores (if i am correct company was recapitalised as well ) AMCs with less than half of their age are making money not just for their investors but also for promoter.
I am sure Mr Johnson' family is also an Investor and surprisingly no one is worried about his portfolio's performance.
Fidelity's AMC business in India is not even 5% of their total stake in India.
Fidelity has neither closed down there India dedicated fund or exited completely from their India exposure in Asia fund.
It's pure, pure business sense to exit from a business which was making losses and had doubled them in last one year.
and yes Indians are "literate' enough to make that figure that out.
as far as you or your interests are concerned. you are welcome ass a guest have a happy stay in India.and yes on the matter of depth and quality, i would refer you to south china sea for "deep sea" diving as Indian Ocean is too shallow and lack quality for someone of your sense or understanding of business and the enitre issue.
Happy Investing
P.S:refer to today's mint
For the benefits of investor sebi regulation is good.it is also consent of some big & foreign amc. Problem is that foreign amc knows world better not to INDIAN .
A very strong indictment. I, as an investor, had thought that doing away with the entry load was a good act. Had this view mainly because of the impression that the entry load was "a bribe". I probably have a lot to learn.
At the same time I have always wondered why the entry load? I have invested in many funds and quite a few are languishing. There was never a word of advice from any agent. I hope you have not forgotten the time when the application forms were available at the footpath. And by the way what makes you think there is any difference in the attitude of the brokers, relationship managers et al.
He he... proves the point of the article. India has a population of over a billion. And 22 years after private mutual funds are allowed you can name 2 fund houses that are doing well!! tragedy as farce??
Finally,someone actually sees the big picture and the small distributor who survives only if his clients do well.Banks don't give a damn as the relationship executive skips jobs at the drop of a hat. It is the IFA who has to deliver a good and suitable product for a long -term relationship with his client.
Would you like that SEBI behaves like IRDA and allows unjust amounts to be passed to AMC like insurance companies' charges ?
The changes are good for the long term as it reduces the costs incurred on the investors funds and ushers more transparency.
Also note that the % figures may have decreased , however since the base is almost 10 times as compared to 10 years ago. Hence the total amount is more. In any business as the scale increases the % profit decreases. Everybody has to start living with that,
Fidelity's sell off is just another business decision. Just the same like Cairn Plc sold Cairn India to Fidelity. Do not continuously blame SEBI.
Fidelity was never Friendly to small Distributor in the first place,, it was always going in with Large National Distributors & banks, therefore SEBI moves must have nothing to do with its Exit, the reasons must lie elsewhere & mainly within the Ranks of Fidelity Itself.
Dear Vijay,
Its surely not situation to panic neither to relax.. You must wait for some time and take action.. We, advisors, are watching situation now.
Bhavesh Damania-9833778887
Some say that such a large AMC managing billions of dollars internationally, wanting to exit India does not forebode good for the industry. Should we blame SEBI alone for its woes? Let us look at what people have to say:1. Mergers happen, large players do exit, competition amongst AMC is tough and older players like Franklin Templeton, DSP BR are firmly entrenched, they don't seem to be going anywhere out of India. 2. Fidelity was not exactly distributor friendly. They generally teamed with larger distributors only. Hence the smaller ones did not do business with them.
3.The AMC also tried to reach the investors directly trying to bypass the intermediaries. 4. If Fidelity blames the regulator for over tightening, the regulator in its own country, after the 2007 financial scams, has virtually tightened all areas. Would Fidelity want to exit US too? 5.Too bad, Fidelity could not even garner the magical figure of Rs. 10,000 crores as AUM, considered by many as the figure that gets the AMCs going. The Indian arm of Fidelity had many internal issues. Don't you think that SEBI alone cannot be blamed for the woes of Fidelity? It may be too premature to write off the Indian Mutual Fund Industry.
Though I hailed the steps taken by SEBI initially, these are not productive and large distributors are still getting their due. Recently we made a mutual fund investment through a large distributor. Two people visited our place and spent nearly 2hrs. Legally they are bound to get only 150/- for this, but we were told that they get 0.5% commission from the AMC. Though, I do not oppose, but to educate a potential investor, a distributor at least need 2hrs and paying only 150/- does not even meet his salary.
I would suggest, instead of a fixed commission, probably SEBI can think of considering slab based commission, which will help both the investor and the distribution industry. At the sametime, SEBI should maintain the incentive given to those investors who continue to buy funds without the help of distributors by waiving off entry loads. I feel, this will help the investors, as only the distributors/agents who can really value add would remain in the business in the long-term.
A small clarification - there is no restriction on the fund house from paying upfront commission. The 0.5% - 1% commission paid is completely legal. Similarly, the advisor/broker also gets a trail commission every year, even the years when you make losses on your money.
The only thing SEBI changed in this regard is that it made it mandatory NOT to charge the commission as entry load on the investor's folio. The Rs 100-150 is additional as a transaction fee, on top of these initial and trail commissions.
Do NOT be under the impression that the advisor/broker is getting only Rs 100 on your investment.
The advisor/broker's real problem - earlier they used to earn 'free' money by simply churning your portfolio. Redeem the fund you bought last year and buy this latest and greatest fund. Many AMCs encouraged this to get customer accounts since the cost was not going out of AMCs pocket - it was being paid by the you, the investor!
Thank you for the clarification. The additional commission of 0.5%-1% that these fund houses are paying (legal), can be a reason for the fallout of Fidelity, as they have to give it from their own pocket. Would like to know if there is any cap as per SEBI rules on charges that a fund house can charge its unit holders. Very interesting
I feel now enough is enough with the distributors. Its a really high time when revenues are shrinking in the business and services demand is increasing day by day. I feel we already have thousands of distributors around 30 k + as per amfi those who have not renew there kyd update. make some fix target of business for distributor and give them incentives as per the AUM not only this but regulator has to take some more awards and perks for the distributors those who are doing financial education kind of activities done by this fraternity. so that more and more ppl ccould come into the system and make this asset class a real saving asset class for retail investors.
This is really interesting event & will prove a Milestone in Indian MF History.
Also Interesting Discussion going on,
But lot of bias is smelling out.
The first & foremost thing that is being blindly assumed that Distributors alone are responsible for Investors losses.
Investors / mainstream media / regulator / are not at all concerned about consistency and robustness in performance of Mutual Funds/AMCs
If the funds are consistent & robust performers then even 5% of Distribution charges will be affordable and admissible.
But unfortunately Regulator /Mainstream media / Investors at large & none of the AMCs have this VISION and hence they keep on defaming Distributor Community for misselling/ churning etc, simply to hide there non performance, inability & visionary impotency.
Secondly All are concerned about 1% - 2% distributors remuneration on this investment but rarely anyone is concerned about Returns/ performance as well as under performance of the fund/Fund Manager/AMC.
For properly managed/performing funds, 1 % or 2% commission is far less than the potential returns customers can get over & above inflation. And hence distributors need to be paid for demonstrating this Potential & convincing to invest in this opportunity and spreading this 'Holy Message'. Otherwise rest of Indian savers will loose this opportunity
Any how....,
I had observed that AMCs/Regulators/Bank/ and lot of investors were very happy & exited when upfront commissions were banned/direct investing was allowed, but Fidelity International has blown their ASS in the right way & at right time.
WAKE UP SEBI / SINHAJI - This is Real Wake Up Alarm
Its fine with distributors but now issue a concept paper on AMC / Fund Manager Performance by including following points
1) Fund must perform over & above their benchmark otherwise AMC will not be eligible to charge Fund Management Charges for that fund for the underperforming period and promoter will have to make over the expenses for the period, out of their own capital/pocket.
2) Funds consistently under-performing the benchmark for a stipulated period (say 3 or 6 months) must be Merged with performing funds of the same AMC
3) AMCs should not be allowed to introduce NFO if even a single Fund is underperforming the benchmark. It is not justifiable that most of funds are under performing and AMC is introducing NFOS
4) If all/ majority(more than 50%) of Assets of any AMC are under-performing their benchmark then AMCs should be banned from mobilising further investment/business.
5)MOST IMPORTANT: Most importantly Fund switching across AMC (i.e From 1 AMC to another AMC) should be allowed on highest priority. With this Investors will be able to migrate to performing AMCs with much ease and without waiting for the fund to achieve profit/better returns.
This will take the competition to a new height & will give ultimate benefit to Investors.
If SEBI is truly investor friendly then SEBI should wake up and consider the more important issues suggested by Mr MAYUR KULKARNI rather than blaming/punishing distributor community.
Very succinctly put....kudos to Debashish Basu.
I f this does'nt open SEBIs eyes,nothing will.
Unfortunately Fidelity too has operated very arrogantly in the MF space and they too have themselves to blame.
SEBI seems hell bent on crushing whatever few IFAs/ Distributors are left and finally ,it seems that only banks will be left to distribute MFs.
All these issues were brought in by an arrogant man called Vaidyanathan, who was Executive Director @ SEBI (I think he was a failed Fund Manager of Morgan Stanley) and know the exact receipe for the shut down of MF industry. Please find out the whereabouts of him and inform the investors.
Moneylife, didnt a fund in 2008 get sold for negative value.. ie they paid the buyer to take it off their hands. Lotus or something?? do enlighten. MFs in India have been dying for a few years, just as investors are rushing to bank FDs , gold or real estate! moneylife has been writing this for a long time
All this is related to Commission paid to MF distributors. They are blamed for selling wrong product for higher commission. I don’t understand why regulator don’t treat the root cause of this problem. AMC offering higher commission for non performing funds. Why sebi don’t regulate the commission paid to distributor. Why they don’t implement uniform commission structure across the industry?
If commission paid by all the AMC is same then certainly Agent will sell best suited product. When People earning lacs of rupees per month salary in government still accept bribes why only MF Agents are asked to follow the most appropriate path.?
Why all the norms only for Agents? Many MF schemes have underperform consistently sciences their inception. Many schemes have underperformed consistently for last 10years.but SEBI simply ignore these. Certain AMC has all the Equity Funds which underperform their benchmark. What action SEBI has taken against such AMC?
There are schemes who have invested beyond their mandate & suffer huge losses. What action SEBI has taken to protect the investor in such schemes?
Only regulating Distributor is not a solution. Commission structure should be regulator. MF distributor is certainly important accept of this business. Fidility is facing this problem because except last year they were not empanelling distributors. This has resulted in lower collection of Funds. Quantum despite having very good schemes not able to collect more than 100 cr AUM.
Hence don’t forget distributors contribution & pl remember your investment is average out only when there are fresh inflows in the fund & this is not possible without Distributors.
You have to understand AMFI. It is Association of MF of India. An association which has enough clout to influence SEBI. Do distributors have an association - Association of MF Distributors of India. No. It is this association AMFI which stood silently and watched the first step to kill the distributor. They then saw it as saving the money to be paid out as entry incentive to the distributor.
Now the same association is acting as if in support of a distributor b'coz it has hit their pockets.
AMFI and SEBI work in their own interest and not in the interest of common man. Can we blame them? No. They learn it from so called the great leaders sitting in the South and the North Block and the Round building next to it, in New Delhi.
We are in India. In India, common man should not grow rich. If he grown rich, AAM AADMI slogan for elections will not be there for our bloody politicians and leaders. It is not only SEBI rules killed mutual fund industry, Government of India also equally culprit for this in the cover of regulations under Money Laundering Act.
Ex: Meagre amount of 1000 per month as SIP, requires PAN.
After taking all this pain an IFA should not earn any incentive.
Starting from Bofors scam till 2G Scam including Abdual Kasab(Mumbai terror) no body got punished. But common man is punished. Genuine Corporates will be punished. That is India.I am proud to be Indian. Mera Bharat Mahaan.
I think the paystructure ofFidelity may be on the higher side also.Besides they had also lost ample business on account of not readily giving distributorship to 95% of the IFA community. In a way besides SEBI's actions it has itself also to blame for this situation
Dear Asha,
Maybe they should take my advice - I think u are right.
I am in the distributorship business for the last 8 yrs. and know for sure why they have lost so much of business..
I understand the pain in your article. By only banning entry loads an AMC cannot suffer. If at all entry load should being back there also should be some regulations for bad advise from advisors. When we pay them for there work they also should fall in some regulations. Not only receive commision and say it was duty of AMC and not us...
Small investor is the looser, How can we increase equity investment of indian household saving ? Will any distributor of any product sell without incentive however good the product maybe. Since long only 4 % of total savings of Indians is coming into equity markets. How long will India which is short of capital grow ? if deprived of capital ,we will not achive growth . Our growing young generation will not have jobs .
THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENTS TUSHAR.EXACTLY.BUT THESE SIMPLE FACTS SHOULD REACH THE CORNER OFFICE OF THE REGULATOR.THE IFA COMMUNITY CANNOT AFFORD TO REMAIN A SILENT SPECTATOR.IT IS THE IRONY OF INDIA THAT EACH TIME THE MARKET FALLS OR SHOULD I SAY CRASHES,A HAND FULL IF FII'S MAKE A KILLING WHEREAS RETAIL INVESTORS A LEFT HIGH AND DRY.SEBI WANTS EFFICIENT MARKETS BUT HOW SUCCESSFUL IT IS?WHAT IS SEBI DOING OR DONE ABOUT IPO'S.JUST SLAPPING A PENALTY OF A FEW LACS IS NOT ENOUGH.OTHERWISE DUPING SMALL INVESTORS WILL BECOME A RULE RATHER THAN AN EXCEPTION.
DOES SEBI REALLY WANT THAT THE SMALL RETAIL INVESTOR SHOULD MAKE MONEY OR CREATE WEALTH?
THE REGULATOR HAS AMDE A MOCKERY OUT OF THE MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY.FOR Eg."UPFRONTCOMMISSION SAHLLBE PAID DIRECTLYBY THE INVESTORTO THE AMFI REGISTERED DISTRIBUTORBASED ON THE INVESTORS ASSESSMENTOF VARIOUS FACTORS INCLUDING THE SERVICE RENDERED BY THE DISTRIBUTOR".THIS IN A MARKET WHERE MUTUAL FUND IS NOT WELL PENETRATED,WHERE AN AVERAGE PERSON DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS A MUTUAL FUND.HOW WOULD AN INVESTOR IN SAY,BADLAPUR ASSESS THE SERVICE GIVEN BY HIS DISTRIBUTOR.SUPPOSE THE INVESTOR IS SITTING ON A LOSS FOR AN INVESTMENT MADE 3YEARS AGO.FIRST WE SHOULD DEFINE THE PARAMETERS OF SERVICE.AND WORK ON A FORMULA TO MEASURE THE SERVICE RENDERED.FOR THIS THE INVESTOR SHOULD UNDERGO A TRAINING IN SERVICE MANAGEMENT SO THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THE SERVICE RENDERED AND HE WILL BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO JUDGE OTHER SERVICES ALSO.AND WHAT IF THE INVESTOR MAKES A DECENT PROFITS ON HIS INVESTMENT? SHOULD THE ADVISOR CHARGE A HIGHER FEE IN SUCH A CASE? WHAT ARE THE MOMENTS OF TRUTH IN THE CONSUMPTION OF A MUTUAL FUND SERVICE.
THAT'S ALL FOR NOW.AND PAINFULLY BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT FEDILITY'S EXIT IS JUST A BEGINNING OR IS IT.........
U need to do home work
The losses suffered are not because of MR BHave or MR Sinha .
just see the salary and remuneration of top 15 persons of the company.
Uti original had 65000 cr assets and their total payrollay be of 15 of FIdility or pramericas
No need to have dollar denominated or equivalent salaries and bonuses
U see the expenses incurred on platform development which has never seen the lite.
Madam all these MNC wants profits from day ZErO. and have unnecessary expenses and Fidility has biggest problem of" ARROGANCE ".their first sales head was to say "we the FIDILITY" attitude.
1. If cheque is from coop bank their agency will go to client and do due diligence and debit the expense to my brokerage account
2.we will not publish portfolio in every mOnth as there can be front running
3 v have selected u as our brokers only 150 in INdia
All these has backfired with their extra ordinary expenses and when paument to broker comes they show us the lease margin and cry for it
If they exit the story will be classic case study of self destruction
I agree with you, Fidelity had an internal issue and the top bosses at Fidelity in India have a lot of answering to be done to their own bosses in US. If they (other AMCs) continue to blame SEBI for their woes, they will also go the Fidelity way. But that does not mean that the Indian Mutual Fund Industry is down and out.
Hi Ashish,
No one is denying the misdeeds / faulty policies of the AMC. But one can not deny their funds have been doing well. However still incurring a loss means people are not investing in it. That has a lot to do with way SEBI has killed the small distributor. That is the essence of this discussion.
Sooner or later the AMC may/may not have switched to smaller distributor. But with existing sales network I wonder if someone would fairly price their business. As they will have tremendous effort in terms of setting the distribution right and creating a large sales team in an environment where no one wants to take up selling MFs. There is a similar story with IDFC AMC taking over erstwhile Std Chartered AMC, however, IDFC when it took over Std Chtd AMC did not face this problem. Its a different story IDFC too wants to get rid of the AMC now.
My opinion is a bit different . No diversified equity fund has positive growth in their NAV in the last one year. Bond/Debt funds are doing no better. Investors have lost their hard earned money. On the other hand, raising interest rate on Bank FD has given a rare opportunity to invest in safe area. MF is clearly out of favour now. Simple ,Demand determines supply.
As for the role of SEBI in the current turmoil is concerned , the less said the better. Lack of accountability enables to take all sort of decisions without a second thought . What is AMFI doing ? Is AMFI not supposed to take up matters that affect industry with SEBI ?
Sure fidelity has a high cost structure. But are we saying "piddly" assets should be what large global funds should aspire to?
I was surprised to see so many comments so fast - but they seem neatly divided between regular moneylife readers like me, who know its pro-reader stand and hard hitting style.
Then there are these aggressive SEBI defenders and their strident questions. Rest my case :-)
lage raho MLF... we r with u :-)
Definitely regulatory hurdles is one of the important reason. But dont tell us that that this is the "only" reason for exit. Please provide a balanced view. As per ET article, Fidelity AMC has one of the highest cost structure in the industry and hence cumulatively accumulated some 300 crores loss in its short existence. In Munger parlance, you guys are suffering from this syndrome "To the man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" by bashing regulators for everything under sun.
Between i wonder how quantum AMC with piddly AUM and lowest expense ratio to charge can produce 5 crores of profit!!! I know they get investment advisory income to other off-shore funds, but so do other Intl AMCs. The answer lies in the business model and cost structure too. Not squarely on regulators alone.
Yeah they have deep pockets, but i dont agree that future is completely bleak. See, when Franklin Templeton AMC came into india the future was even more uncertain than today. Over the years they methodically built a franchise with long term outlook and prospered. If you dont have clear business model and long term perspective then noboday can save you.
Definitely regulatory hurdles is one of the important reason. But dont tell us that that this is the "only" reason for exit. Please provide a balanced view. As per ET article, Fidelity AMC has one of the highest cost structure in the industry and hence cumulatively accumulated some 300 crores loss in its short existence. In Munger parlance, you guys are suffering from this syndrome "To the man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail"
Between i wonder how quantum AMC with piddly AUM and lowest expense ratio to charge can produce 5 crores of profit!!! I know they get investment advisory income to other off-shore funds, but so do other Intl AMCs. The answer lies in the business model and cost structure too. Not squarely on regulators alone.
What for AMFI is there, why should they have an association....
it is open secret How the So Called Relationship Managers from Banks sell Financial Products. . .
the Media is ineffective in this matte
Can moneylife explain why a lot of new AMC's are opening up MF businesses in India and only Fidelity is quitting it?
The article seems to show that moneylife has some grudge against SEBI (and unfortunately small investors)
I completely disagree with moneylife. I feel the statement "Investment advisors are neutral and usually give unbiased information" is about distributors. I do not agree to it. I have frankly never met an eager distributor who was unbiased. They used to keep on asking people to shuffle funds, always recommending selling of a fund bought sometime back and using the proceeds to purchased upcoming IPO's. Removing entry loads stopped misselling to a very large extent. In fact the AUM of good AMC's are increasing with regular investments from SIP (which are mostly long term).
The fact that on removal of entry load the distributors (IFA) moved to misselling of ULIP is ample proof of their intentions.
What proposal does moneylife have to stop misselling of MF even in presence of entry load?
It is not fair to blame ML.This site boasts of an educated,empowered and socially conscious people,In short just the kind of readership which any personal finance site would love to have.This site offers unmatched combination of robust personal finance news and insightful analysis.Money Life has always championed the causes of readers by anticipating crucial inflection points without hidden agendas.
Shashibhushanjee,
Any one missselling has to be dealt with punishment, but for few people missselling does not make all distributors are misselling.
If distributors are not copansated why should they sell the same?
You seem to be new here.
Moneylife is India's only voice of savers.
Please check out the Moneylife Foundation website. No media company will ever do all these product-neutral seminars free when Sebi is interested in funding corrupt big TV channels. Wake up and open your eyes before commenting http://foundation.moneylife.in/promotion...
Mr Shashibhusan,
That one sentence was an oversight while editing. We have removed it. I hope you have nothing to comment about all our previous stories and how we have been proven right as reflected in investor aversion to mutual funds.
Thanks
Editor
Money Life deserves sincere compliments for calling spade a spade.Mainstream media & Paid Elecronic media should be called Anti-Social Media for turning blind eye in killing mutual fund industry.They are only concerned about FDI & FIIs for investments but fail to take note of immense potential of investments by common man in this instrument.Both Bhave & Sinha have spared no efforts to paint distributors as "villains".IRDA is also following footsteps of them and similar situation exist in Life Insurance Industry also.All this is happening when we have economist as PM.The situation in mutual fund & life insurance sector is serious and alarming.The worse is yet to come.
In last 2 years plus, damage was happen to industry may take many years to repair, even SEBI wanted to repair. In India, LIC agents are available in rural areas where no post office is present, its because they are pillars of LIC and paid reasonably. Still most of investor believes products offered from LICs are better and message communicated to them by their Agents.
Variable Load option may be the best way to repair, but it may take ages to repair the industry
I could not have agreed with anyone more. We have two great blind org bumping off everything that can benefit a common man. First is Indian Govt second is SEBI. Bosses of SEBI and our Govt have lost the touch and feel of the ground realities. Govt has an analogy of petrol being rich man's fuel to increase its price as if they do not know the number of the two wheelers on road run by people who cannot afford cars leave aside a diesel car. SEBI has to regulate distributors least realising there are not too many left to regulate.
When PAN was made mandatory it killed the only chance a house hold maid or people of similar financial stature had to take advantage of stock market investments. Now that such people have UID that to replace PAN is not being pushed. The essence of Knowing Your Customer has been lost. Everyone wants to know the Distributor. Actually should also b'coz its a creed which will soon be extinct.
distributor are nothing but great fool.there are many advisors who are paying pass back on TAX saving schemes of MF. Why advisors are providing statements on monthly basis.
Sidhe aadami ka muh kutta chatata hai
I may not agree with the Moneylife's direct blame on SEBI. Yes, SEBI has tried to justify its stance for retail investors but it didnt work for distributors. But see today the scenario, all the fund houses' bottomlines are soaring like anything. They had been sitting on profits like anything. They are charging on an average 2% but distributing only 50-70bps upfront and rest pocketing themselves. So, it is fund houses strategy instead of SEBI's direct impact which make them profitable. Now coming to Fidelity, it is their high cost structure which has gone against their business model. Also, see their employees' attitude as if they are the best. Yes, some of their funds are performing well but as a distributor I can tell you that their sales people are so non-cooperative and unfriendly which have cost the whole company. They dont want to drive the business. I may be wrong but this is what I saw in them and the industry.
So, it wont be correct to blame SEBI in this case. It is not SEBI who is forcing FIL to exit. Believe us we have also been impacted by SEBI's hard rules but SEBI's rule should not be blamed for FIL's possible exit. It is their wrong strategy; so let them have their natural death.
The issues aremuch bigger
1. Why are people not investing in mutual funds?
2. What has Sebi done for investors?
3. Why are there commissions for insurance and not for mutual funds? what do RBI, Sebi and IRDA do in high Level coordination committee?
4. What has Sebi done to reign in banks and their mis-selling?
5. What is Sebi's way of getting feedback from the market?
6. What is Sebi's role in the development of capital market?
I have an answer for the questions of what SEBI did so far...--> omg, you do not know!! SEBI will keep the retail investors busy by asking KYC many times - so that SEBI can block the retail investors and allow FIIs to invest through Participator Notes, without even informing the real investor name behind it.
Intermediaries are the backbone of any service industry. If you try to kill this institution , the results are there to see. Mr Bhave and one self appointed MF expert have done great disservice to this industry ignoring the ground realities.
To be honest, I think these are moves by the powers that be, to systematically strangulate and kill the mutual fund industry. Otherwise, how do you explain the regulations which allow stock brokers to charge upto a maximum of 2.5% on transactions (which are to be paid over and above the price of scrip bought or sold), whereas the mutual fund distributor (non-institutional) has to convince the client that he needs to be compensated.
I am totally agree with the views in this article. Many more MF houses will have to take such type of decision in future. Only 5 to 10% investors are ready to pay the fees to MF distributors. Even after selling Rs.20 Lacs in a month we are getting upfront commission of Rs.10 to 15 K which is not sufficient even to meet the office expenses. We MF distributors could not afford to appoint sales person in the current situation. Person like me solely dependent on commissions from MF sales is facing lot of financial crises. In the circumstances we all MF distributors will have to form a association to fight for our rights. Why there is a different rule for MF distributors and LI distributors? LI agents are getting commissions upto 40% is it from the pocket of LI companies or from policy holders (investors?) pocket? Hope for good in future.
great & right article did mr bhave or any other boss has ever tried to cut there personell expenses which also comes from tax payers /investors kitty. as intermediary fertenity has no say in poilcy making so they are free to do what ever they wish to do ,did any one has listen that some agent has done wrong or fraud to his customer than why all fraud are coming from RM of bank only
Bank RMs are more educated , better trained and equipped than any of the so called agents / advisors .Most of them are qualified financial advisors. They better understand the various funds and associated risks .They are more careful of thier image than that of the banks. Some mis selling here and there have taken place .Considering the volume handled by the banks, these are very few in nunmber.
Vikas Gupta3 months ago in reply to K Sanjay Singh
I agree with Mr. K. Sanjay Singh that Bank RMs are more educated, better trained & equipped than any of IFAs in completing their targets given by their respective Banks irrespective of the fact whether their Customers need that product or not which they are selling. Thats why they are churning the same Funds of their investors more than even 3 times in a year just to complete their Targets. I also agree with that they arebetter Eqipped as they have the reach to their Bank accounts & FDs which they manipulate. I am of the Opinion that whosoever does all these malpractices, should be completely banned in selling any financial products in future.
What ever is said about SeBI is correct. At the same time it may be noted Fidility is not allowing individual ARN holders to em-panel with them. This is one of the reasons for their poor business
Presently there is one mutual fund (Quantum Mutual Fund) which is running as no loads fund since its inception. It has also given good returns to its investor. It would have been better for fidelity to reduce the commissions paid by it to big brokers/advisors (Fidelity is accepting only those advisors who can give alteast 1 cr new business every year ) and make online marketing of its product just as the quantum mutual fund. This would have increased its profitability for sure. Also as regards its exit is concerned though it is not a good sign for MF Industry but it will make a way for consolidation.
Very well written article.
In fact SEBI and Mr Bhave should Not be called 'Regulators' but 'Terminators'.
True, there is some mis-selling, but this is there in everything.
The regulator should have taken positive steps to educate and regulate Advisors, so that there was no mis-selling.
They have acted in a manner, which reminds me of an old story:
एक राजा का एक बहुत विश्वासपात्र बन्दर था.
जब राजा सो जाता था तब बन्दर उसकी रखवाली करता था.
एक रात उसने देखा कि राजा को एक मक्खी परेशान कर रही है.
अपनी वफादारी के भाव के कारण उससे देखा नहीं गया.
उसने तलवार निकाली और उस मक्खी पर चला दी जो कि उस समय राजा के मुख पर बैठी थी.
इस तरह एक वफादार बन्दर ने अपनी वफादारी का सबूत पेश किया.
इस कहानी में मुझे राजा investor लगता है और बन्दर SEBI और श्री भावे लगते हैं.
Foreign MFs like Zurich, Alliance, Sun F&C, Dundee and others have also come and gone, but the Indian market has prospered and will keep prospering.India is a long term game.
Some people have problem with anything and everything Government does, no matter what. One foreigner or foreigner company doing something, blackens the dace of the Government for these kind of people. They have engraved on their mind, that Foreigners entering India, deserve Profits on Silver Plate. These people think that foreign corporations have the right not to follow Laws of land or have them modified to suite them. Do they feel the same thing when they go to US to do business? If they can not succeed in their venture in US, is it a slap on US 's face too. Time to think than just criticize. Same is their role in the matter of Government subsidies. Diesel subsidy is a big problem with them while free market food prices, are problem that Government does not subsidize to reduce inflation. They expect Government to sell onions at Rs6- as poor do not afford buying at market driven price of Rs 60 as per them. If fidelity has announced their Infidelity that they can not loot money, by following the Laws of the land, too bad for them. SEBI does not to bend to make them grossly profitable.
Describing of an action on the part of a for - profit-corporate, as 'SLAP ON THE FACE' is Vomit
Asking them to be responsible author should not be termed as vomiting just because SEBI's action went against a large group, that was so absorbed in ripping off a commoner that they did need SEBI's intervention. I am an investor and for investor, is a disclosure to this affect is must to write on this platform.
tushar sinha3 months ago in reply to Joginder Singh
why vomit so much of opinion when there are facts confronting you? in any case who are you? you are clearly not an investor, or you would have wanted the existence of safe, large funds, rather than fly by night operators. so are you speaking for SEBI? What exactly is your point vis a vis this article? i am flummoxed?
Very well written article.These two fools deserve to get "Padmabhushan" and "Padmashree", which anyways mostly awarded to this type of peoples.
Thanks to you for showing courage by writting such a bold article.Its really a slap on the face of these two fools who work against the interest of every one the retail investors,the distributors and asset managment companies.
the article has done well to highlight the plight of distributors. But I wonder why it should be in the name of investors. there are many victims like me who have believed the agent and invested and lost money. Now I have stopped investing in mutual funds. But the article seems to glorify the agents justifying that all that have been done by these agents are right. perhaps a tear shed for investor would have been better . The article is for whom investor or the distributor or the mutual fund which you have written that it wants to shut shop. there needs to be somebody who will really speak for the investors. Obviously when there is no commission to be paid, as an investor I will welcome it. the agents should be paid, provided they do the service that are expected of them. Not for misleading gullible investors like me. It is good to shout at others, but the pinch will be felt only by those who have lost money. unfortunately there is no one to cry for this vast majority of the gullible investors. there are many to cry for the agents!
Congratulations Mr N KUMAR I think you should start distributing MF free of cost to all so investors will make only profit no loss at all.
I will selute you if you do that.!
thanks for your congrats. You do not seem to be an investor. Only if you have lost your hard earned money you will understand what it means. when churning was happening with the collusion of agents everybody enjoyed the game, except the investors. Nobody wants anything to be free. If u want to support an agent who squeezes a hapless investor, then god bless you! I am an affected person so I know better, what I have gone through. Dont ridicule somebody. My precise point is singing great about agents alone is not going to help.
"there needs to be somebody who will really speak for the investors"
You seem to be new here.
Moneylife Foundation is the biggest voice today for investors in India. It has done more in 2 years than all lavish and pseudo-literacy efforts funded by Sebi and NSE.
When I asked MLF people why Sebi is not involved with MLF, they smiled replied that Sebi does not want to recognise them!
Since you are new here, please spend time reading first before commenting.
I may not be a great intellectual who knows who is doing what and who doesn't do? I am not into that debate. Just by singing glories about the agents ...you want to get more investors..be it so. So all the fault is with the investor who haplessly invests. I have not mentioned anything against MLF. My precise point was when you sing glories about agents, pause for a while and think about what they are actually supposed to do and what they are doing. As an investor who has suffered I know about the pains, rather than anybody else. So please dont try to ridicule somebody's pains.
I totally agree with Mr. N. Kumar that All steps should be taken in the interest of investors. Anybody who is acting against the interests of investors be it delibrately or otherwise, he should not be allowed to do so. Be it SEBI, Banks Relationship Managers or IFAs, Anybody acting against the interests of Investors should be penalised heavily & barred in future.
The regulations are very good. The distributors sell mostly products which suits them and not for consumers. I have worked with one of the big distributors in India and know how the system works. No one cares about the consumer and only think about commissions what they get. They always sell new products which is not required most of the cases. There is nexus between distributors and asset management companies. SEBI tried to break it and this stopped the unholy practices. MF incurring losses because of fall in market and not alllowing them to market new schemes on same theme. Not because of commission. Please note noone will put money in falling market. If market is up, everything is up. We should not cry. In India, only indian MF works not the foreign one, Morgan Stanly is the classic example. Other funds such as HDFC, Reliance, ICICI Prudential also making money. It is about how you manage your fund. It is not good to blame everything to regulations.
Foreign MFs like Zurich, Alliance, Sun F&C, Dundee and others have also come and gone, but the Indian market has prospered and will keep prospering.India is a long term game.
Hello? Indian market has prospered? Looks like you are a new reader on these pages. I have seen several articles here - search for sucheta dalal's pieces - which say that India's investor population has decreased from 20 million to 8 million in the two decades after SEBI has been created. GREAT Achievement.
Today all investors want return of CCI - thats when SEBI wakes up do do something about IPO manipulation.
Most investors have moved out of MFs into bank FDs.
And ALL investors are fed up of repeated KYC harassment. SEBI is still just waking up to that
Finally - all investors are outraged at NSDL asking for photo and signature of nominee in case of demat accounts. in these days when parents are not safe from children making a nominee known actually endangers sr citizens.
But who will listen? instead, FINance ministry makes NSDL chairman the SEBI chairman and he ruins capital market . Just because he gets a few pathetic media hacks to praise him does not change facts and numbers.
read moneylife and get more enlightented.
Prasanta3 months ago in reply to Suresh Singh Bisht
Mr Bisht,
Your thought process is ill concieved. You cannot blame the entire distributor faternity jus few had made some wrong moves. Obvioulsy you are not a distributor. 90% of investors would ask for kickbacks/ passbacks for giving some business to a distributor. Don't you know any of that breed of investors in your personally ? You do . The biggest advantage SEBI had was to bulldoze hapless distributors and claim to be a saviour of investors. Nobody called bandhs or strikes. SEBI wants to shut down the MF industry not for trasnparency but to stop money flowing into Mf industry and flow into the equity market through brokers. Then lot of cash can move under the table between various buildings.
Tell me one thing Sebi has done to pull up distributors actually, apart from taking an axe kill everybody in sight. Can Sebi do anything as regards banks mis-selling? Ask anybody. Nobody is interested in selling mutual funds now.
I totally agree with Mr. Rakesh that First of all, Big Distributors & Banks must be penalised for Misselling heavily. SEBI is not taking any action against these Big Players at all.
The objective of regulations must be to curb malpractices , improve transperency & ensure that the end consumer has a means to challenge any kind of wrong doing. In India the regulators have lost focus on the core objectives & act as impediments both to the business & genuine consumers. .
RIL does not hold stake in any media company – True or It may be true that on paper, RIL does not hold any stake in any media company, as the minister stated in Rajya Sabha. However, the Reliance group now openly controls Eenadu TV
Did New India overcharge lakhs of policyholders? – II New India Assurance admitted that a software glitch resulted in overcharging mediclaim premium, but has dragged its feet on providing information. It now says that it gave a wrong
Daily cleansing for the mind Breathe away to happiness and glory! Bath for the mind consists in daily replacing our negative thoughts like hatred greedy, jealousy, anger and pride with positive thoughts like
Did New India Assurance overcharge lakhs of mediclaim Is New India Assurance sitting on crores of extra premium collected due to a software glitch? It does not even know how many policyholders paid excess premium and is stonewalling
President Pratibha Patil’s luxurious home continues to The 2,42,000 sq ft of land in Pune returned by President Patil is to be ‘suitably’ used for an alternative purpose. Communication from the ministry of defence is
DISCLAIMER: This article is written purely in the public interest. While every attempt has been made to ensure that the information provided on this page is accurate, Moneywise Media Pvt Ltd and its group companies (together called as ‘Moneylife’) will not be held responsible for any claim, loss, damage or inconvenience caused as a result of any information within these pages or any information accessed through its site(s).