Advice sector being split into two camps

Wouldn't mind my money back on the useless Mentor courses I've paid for in the past. Mark Sinclair should just stop talking himself out of business. From what I hear from the people I know only about 30% are considering taking the new requirements with the rest choosing to exit and I doubt that many that do will bother with Mentor education vs. a reputable Uni so I can't see Mentor surviving in the future either.

It’s too easy for the education/membership gangs to call opposers to their mafia tactics and hijacking of this industry “Rejectors”. Fantastic brainwashing job boys. You are missing everything that is wrong with this industry and I’m going to laugh my head off to watch it destroy itself over the years. Your red tape and compliance rubbish has increased the cost of doing business to a point of being unsustainable for everyone. Clients can’t afford it, advisers can’t afford the time or money unless they wish to be chained to the desk and destroy any glimmer of hope for a normal family life.
Education is not the issue. Never has been. Never will be. The markets and advice knowledge needed is gained not studied for. Your pathetic cash grab and course flogging will,kill this industry and all that remain will be expensive, young, talentless advice givers based on books and compliance.
Good luck surviving people. You will need it. Something over and above robo advice will come out and destroy this model. It will kill,off your $4000 soa nonsense and multi thousand dollar “fee for service” rort. What a con.

There is a third category and that's the ripped off group. What happens if you've done the study but the higher education provider made a decision that your qualifications don't meet FASEA's definition of being "relevant" because you got an exemption or didn't study the subject "Financial Plan Construction"

The changes to the industry are not just about advisers who accept change but it is about the regulatory failures of the past. If you wish to change the advice industry then what is being done at present is accelerating this in areas that the protagonists have little understanding of.
For example only last week we have a Life company advising the market that they have increased losses. The rise in premium levels across this segment will now be substantial and it has nothing to do with commission and everything to do with Group insurance losses from the Industry fund sector that will be horrendous going forward due to no upfront underwriting.
Thus insurance without advice equals insurance that is unviable to the client and the industry.
Advisers will now be asking for fees up front or else there will be no advice. The small end of the market will not be able to pay and get no advice. A large number of these people will simply just get to the end of their working life and have nothing, and become fully dependent upon Centrelink which is what the National superannuation system was designed by Keating to replace to a large degree.
So there will of course be queues at Adviser offices for advice and it will not be cheap.
ASIC's brilliant idea to milk the industry for fees will see these costs added to the bill for the clients and of course the public servants who thought this up did not realise that it would be all passed on!

Summary of course a bunch of older advisers will retire but not at the rate people might imagine.
They will amalgamate their practices with others and retain clients and values.

All in all the Royal Commission has exposed the rip off of clients by the banks and this is now painful and expensive to fix. The legislative response will be interesting.

It is not a matter of rejection, it is a matter of applicable education standards for financial advisers as opposed to financial planners - two distinctly different financial services providers. The education standards have been based only on financial planning - much of which is not relevant to financial advisers.

The inordinate amount of time and effort from the financial advising (including stockbroking) firms in responding to consultation has been mainly ignored.