Well Poosmate. A bit evil of you calling him a barstool professional. Why not keep your nasty comments to yourself. Maybe this guy has something to offer here, give him at least a chance.
I noticed you commented 30 minutes after the post of all this information and website details on Australia. Well if you can check all that lot out in 30 mins you should put up for election against Obama next year. Your just another know all, that knows FA.
Yes Poosmate, are you competing for the title ''Dumb and Dumber''. The guy has said it's not a bank. Do you think we are all as thick as you, and you need to tell us what this guy has already said.
What he is telling you is how to side step the piss poor bank rates and put your money where the banks do. And all your crap about banks like BCCI, Barings, Northern Rock. There's risk with everything, even crossing the road. Maybe its better to stop at home and put your money in a shoe box and go broke in the end.
If it goes in £s it comes out £s. Same for THB, USD and every other currency.
So lets say you put in £100,000 for one year at 6.5% pa. You will get back £106,500 that's guaranteed (Providing Gadafi does not invade Australia and wipe it out). There's no set up fee, no costs, no hidden extra's.
Minimum investment £1,000 or equivalent. No maximum.
Serious people who wish to comment should spend an hour looking at http://www.lmaustralia.com and should have an understanding of the Australian economy. Its just not fair to knock everything without doing a bit of homework. This did not mean you Chopsticks.
Thanks for the advise Rodstewart and Bradford.
I was under the impression this guy had a secure and safe investment offering good returns as an alternative to the bank. I spent long enough reading the marketing for the Australian investment company to realise that it was not safe or secure and certainly not guaranteed therefore not as described by Paul .
if I wish to gamble with my money there are many ways to do it.
I would be happy if Paul was offering as he described and would be one of the first to invest.
My money has so far been protected from the financial wizards who are usually feathering their own nest. Fortunately I did not invest in pensions that lost fortunes or were persuaded that an insurance backed mortgage would produce a nest egg or any of the other sure fire winners previously sold. There are many who are suffering the fallout from 'financial advisers'.
As I said 4% Bangkok bank is what I have been offered. I am happy to be dumber but have my investment guaranteed than to risk all for 1.5%.
So lets say you put in £100,000 for one year at 6.5% pa. You will get back £106,500 that's guaranteed
Paul maybe you can point me to the part where it stated the investment is guaranteed.
As I previously stated I am able invest a significant sum ( at 6.5% for 12 months that you quoted) but am unconvinced unless I have a cast iron bank style guarantee.
As I am not very bright why does it seem that only you are offering the safety and guarantee.
rates may vary to be higher or lower than expected depending on the performance of the fund assets and other conditions during the term of
investment. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.
LM Investment Management Ltd
I am with Poosmate on this one. I had a financial adviser once and had I taken his advise would have lost money. I do not know Paul simkiss and it would not be fair to comment on him. However you are the customer and a financial adviser will make money out of you. If you can afford to lose a bit no problem. If not buyer beware. His guarantee is very unusual is it in contract?
Woke up this morning breathing that's a good start to the day.
RODSTEWART wrote:The guy has said it's not a bank. Do you think we are all as thick as you, and you need to tell us what this guy has already said.
Poosmate has told us what the guy has NOT said, and yes, I certainly want to hear about these associated risks. There was specific questions from posters concerning the associated risks, personally I can accept a level of risk if the returns are higher than I'd normally get in a 'high street' savings deposit account but something I'd never do is risk the principal sum. A poster specifically the question I would have when he said... "So how are your investments safe ? Can you elaborate - by safe I would expect at least my initial investment to be guaranteed to be returned."
I've had a good read through the linked investment companies' website and the savings product they offer seems to say the following about the associated risks, unless I'm reading the wrong product item etc??...
Investment In The LM Savings Plan forms part of the LM Australian Income Fund - Currency Protected ARSN 133 497 917 (The Fund)
The fund is not a bank deposit and there is a possibility that an investor could suffer a loss and may lose some or all of their principal investment.
* In order to protect all investments, as per the product disclosure statement, LM may delay withdrawals from the fund by up to 365 days or suspend withdrawals. Investors will also only have limited rights to withdraw if the fund does not satisfy the liquidity test in the Corporations Act
** Fund performance is not guaranteed and returns may be lower than expected.
Does this apply to the product or am I mixing it up?
Yes, the worst disaster of my life was investing in real estate limited partnerships back in the 80's. I invested $40k with a promised return of 12 to 20% after a three year period. Since it was real estate I believed the hype. I finally got $10k of my principal investment back about ten years later after lawsuits against the general partners and financial advisers (who had gone out of business and disappeared in the meantime) and dissolution of the partnerships.
Luckily, I still had many earning years left so I was able to recover.
Not to say, Paul or his investments are like this, but do read the fine print and understand the risks of what you are investing in. Even good financial advisers tend to believe in their product and have a very optimistic outlook so may not present the risks accurately imo.
My brain is like an Internet browser; 12 tabs are open and 5 of them are not responding, there's a GIF playing in an endless loop,... and where is that annoying music coming from?
hhfarang wrote:Even good financial advisers tend to believe in their product and have a very optimistic outlook so may not present the risks accurately imo.
Is this a polite way of saying that they hide the truth
Paul has yet to answer any question of security or guarantee.
Unanswered questions in a previous thread still remain:viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18224&start=30#p221443
Even the company he represents has a warning attached to its FIXED deposit rates:
Rates above are an indication only, are subject to change and may vary during the investment term. Effective rates above are net of fees and are calculated on the basis that all distributions are reinvested for a 12 month period.
Past performance is no indication of future returns.>
....that's guaranteed (Providing Gadafi does not invade Australia and wipe it out)
Yes, I tend to agree with what people are saying above, not that there is anything wrong with the product as such but with the use of the word "guaranteed" that seems to be used in a conversational sense and not meaning any actual contractional financial guarantee.
Unless the investment company in Thailand is offering one above what the fund in Australia is?
Good afternoon Mr Poosmate. Have I done something wrong to you in a past life. You do not know me, or have ever met me. I find it insulting and childish of you to refer to me as ''another barstool professional''. Anyway it's clear from your comments about financial advisors being guilty of feathering their own nest, selling bad pensions and mortgage endowments, that they are not top of your Christmas card list. Although I have to agree with you that there still is, and have been many in the past who would sell their Granny for a quid. And I think the large banks have acted as badly as anyone.
I realise that certain comments posted by others may have annoyed you, and this has prompted you to scrutinize everything about LM Australia and make public on this forum every negative you can find. You are certainly entitled to do so. However LM have a superb safe and secure 12 year track record. I doubt that will get mentioned. But under Australian legislation LM must publish the regulaters dire warnings. I am sure that is already on your keyboard.
I do understand that you are looking for a safe place to invest your money. However you use the term ''CAST IRON BANK GUARANTEED''. Well just be careful what you and others perceive that phrase means. The only bank guarantee you get is up to the level of the deposit protection limit operated by the bank you invest with. In Thailand at the moment that figure could soon be only THB 1,000,000 which is not a great amount. See below. I have also listed for the benefit of everyone, other countries.
Thailand. The complete deposit protecion system was in introduced in Thailand by the establishment of the Deposit Protection Agency (DPA) on 11 August 2008, in accordance with the Deposit Protection Agency Act B.E. 2551. The objectives of the Agency as specified by law are providing protection to deposits in financial institutions system; administration of institutions subject to control under the Financial Institutions Businesses Act and liquidation of financial institutions whose licenses have been revoked. Deposit in Thailand is fully guaranteed until September 2011, It will be decreace to THB 1,000,000 in 2012. However I have heard rumours that the previous rate of THB 10,000,000 may have been extended.
Explicit deposit insurance is a measure implemented in many countries to protect bank depositors, in full or in part, from losses caused by a bank's inability to pay its debts when due. Deposit insurance systems are one component of a financial system safety net that promotes financial stability.
Why it exists. Banks are allowed (and usually encouraged) to lend or invest most of the money deposited with them instead of safe-keeping the full amounts. If many of a bank's borrowers fail to repay their loans when due, the bank's creditors, including its depositors, risk loss. Because banks rely on customer deposits that can be withdrawn on little or no notice, banks are prone to a Bank run, where depositors seek to withdraw funds quickly ahead of a possible bank insolvency. Because banking institution failures have the potential to trigger a broad spectrum of harmful events, including economic recessions, policy makers maintain deposit insurance schemes to protect depositors and to give them comfort that their funds are not at risk.
Deposit insurance was formed to protect small unit banks in the United States when branching regulations existed. Banks were restricted by location thus did not reap the benefits coming from economies of scale, namely pooling and netting. To protect local banks in poorer states, the Federal government created deposit insurance.
Many national deposit insurers are members of the International Association of Deposit Insurers (IADI), an international organization established to contribute to the stability of financial systems by promoting international cooperation and to encourage wide international contact among deposit insurers and other interested parties, in particular, IADI.
Detractors of deposit insurance claim the schemes introduce a moral hazard issue, encouraging both depositors and banks to take on excessive risks. Without deposit insurance, banks would compete for deposits because depositors would prefer safe banks over risky banks to guard their money. With deposit insurance, banks can take excessive risks because depositors do not fear for their deposits safety and thus do not move their money to safer banks. The risks are shared by all banks, be they safe or risky.
How it works. Deposit insurance institutions are for the most part government run or established, and may or may not be a part of a country’s central bank, while some are private entities with government backing or completely private entities.
There are a number of countries with more than one deposit insurance system in operation including Austria, Canada (Ontario & Quebec), Germany, Italy, and the United States.
On the other hand, one deposit insurance system can cover more than one country: the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Puerto Rico are insured by the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon will also be covered by a single system.
Overview by country. According to IADI, as of June 2008, there are currently 119 countries with a deposit insurance system in operation, pending, planned or under serious study (i.e. 99 in operation, 8 pending, 12 planned or under serious study).
The United States was the first country to establish an official deposit insurance scheme, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, during a Great Depression banking crisis in 1933.
A separate fund, the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF) administered by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), was created in 1970 to insure deposits at credit unions.
In Massachusetts, the Depositors Insurance Fund (DIF) insures deposits in excess of the FDIC limits at state-chartered savings banks.
Canada created the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) in 1967. It is similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the United States. Since 1967, 43 financial institutions have failed in Canada and all were members of CDIC. There have been no failures since 1996. Insurance is restricted to registered member institutions, and covers only the first C$100,000 in very specific categories of accounts. Credit unions and Quebec’s caisse populaire system are not insured Federally, because they are created under Provincial charters and backed by Provincial insurance plans, which generally follow the Federal model. Funds in a foreign currency, not Canadian dollars, are not insured, such as a US dollar accounts even when held in a registered CDIC financial institutions. Guaranteed Investment Contracts with a longer term than 5 years are also not insured. Funds in foreign banks operating in Canada may or may nor be covered depending on whether they are members of CDIC. Some funds in the Registered Retirement Savings Plan or Registered Retirement Income Fund at their bank may not covered if they are invested in mutual funds or held in specific instruments like debentures issued by government or corporations. The general principle is to cover reasonable deposits and savings, but not deposits deliberately positioned to take risks for gain, such as mutual funds or stocks.
The roots of all of this well organized reform can be traced back to the 19th century, such as the Upper Canada’s financial problems of 1866, the North American panic of 1872 and the 1923 failure of Toronto’s Home Bank, symbolized today by Casa Loma. Historically, in Canada, regional risk has always been spread nationally within each large bank, unlike the uneven geography of US unit banking. layered with savings & loans of regional or national size, who in turn disperse their risk through investors. Generally speaking, the Canadian banking system is well regulated, in part by the little known Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (Canada), who can in an extreme case close a financial institution. That and Canada's tight mortgage rules mean the risk of bank failures similar to the US are much less likely.
Mexico. Mexico’s Banking Act of 1897 established the legal possibility of failure of a credit institution, but set up some mechanisms in the banking law itself to prevent bank failures--but the law itself did not create a formal insurance scheme. In 1981, the General Law of Credit Institutions and Auxiliary Organizations provided for the creation of a fund to protect credit obligations assumed by banks.
European UnionDirective 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on deposit-guarantee schemes requires all member states to have a deposit guarantee scheme for at least 90% of the deposited amount, up to at least 20,000 euro per person. On October 7, 2008, the Ecofin meeting of EU's ministers of finance agreed to increase the minimum amount to 50,000. Timelines and details on procedures for the implementation, which is likely to be a national matter for the member states, was not immediately available.
The increased amount followed on Ireland's move, in September 2008, to increase its deposit insurance to an unlimited amount. Many other EU countries, starting with the United Kingdom, reacted by increasing its limit to avoid that people transfer savings to Irish banks.
As from October 2008, many EU countries were in the process of increasing the amounts covered by their despoit insurance schemes. Since these amounts are typically encoded in legislation, there was a certain delay before the new amounts were formally valid. Countries have varied in their approach; some have permanently increased the amount, while other have implemented temporary measures.
Belgium EUR 100,000 - 100% Fonds de Protection / Beschermings Fonds / Protection Fund. Previously 20.000 EUR before 2009.
Bulgaria EUR 100,000 100% December 31, 2010 Bulgarian Deposit Insurance Fund DIF Saving limit was EUR 51,129 in the period: April 15, 1998 - December 31, 2010
Czech Republic EUR 100,000 100% Deposit Insurance Fund Previously (since 2002), the insured amount was 90 % of deposits up to EUR 25,000; in 2008 it was increased to 100% of deposits up to EUR 50,000. Effective 2011, the limit was increased to EUR 100,000. Credit unions covered since 2006.[9]
Denmark Ordinary deposit guarantee scheme applies after September 30, 2010, covers up to DKK750,000 100% Garantifonden for indskydere og investorer, The Guarantee Fund for Depositors and Investors. For the two year period from October 5, 2008 to September 30, 2010 an unlimited governmental guarantee for deposits has been added.
Finland EUR 100,000 100% 1998 Deposit Guarantee Fund Increased from EUR 25,000 to EUR 50,000 on October 8, 2008 and to EUR 100,000 on January 1, 2011.[13]
France EUR 100,000 100% Fonds de Garantie des Dépôts (FDG) Unlimited state guarantee?
Following the Irish legislative change to unlimited state guarantee, and the German announcement of unlimited support, the French President declared on 13 October 2008 that "The government will not let any French bank fail. This political commitment has so far held (rescue of the Franco-Belgian bank DEXIA)
Germany EUR 100,000 100% Jan 01, 2011 Bundesverband deutscher Banken BdB (for private banks)
Bundesverband Öffentlicher Banken Deutschlands VÖB (for public sector banks)
Bundesverband der Deutschen Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken BVR (for co-operative banks)
Deutsche Sparkassen- und Giroverband DSGV (Savings banks)
The 4 banking associations run voluntary additional guarantee schemes, which go beyond the European minimum of EUR 100,000.
For instance for BdB member banks, "The protection ceiling for each creditor is 30% of the liable capital of the Bank.
An unlimited state guarantee was announced in October 2008 (and extended in July 2009). The legal details are nevertheless unclear.
Greece EUR 100,000 100% October 2008 Was 20,000 EUR, increased in October 2008
Hungary, National Deposit Insurance Fund (NDIF)
Ireland Unlimited September 2008 Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Amount raised to unlimited in September 2008
Italy EUR 103,291.38 100% December 4, 1996 Fondo Interbancario di Tutela dei Depositi (FITD)
Netherlands EUR 100,000 100% October 7, 2008 Before October 7, 2008 coverage was 100% of first EUR 20,000, 90% of next EUR 20,000 (hence a compensation of up to EUR 38,000). The raised amount is valid until December 31, 2010.
Poland EUR 100,000 (corresponding amount in PLN) 100% 30 December 2010 Bankowy Fundusz Gwarancyjny (BFG) Amount raised from EUR 50,000 on 30 December 2010
Portugal EUR 100,000 100% November 2008 Amount raised from EUR 25,000 to EUR 100,000 in November 2008.
Slovakia Unlimited 100 % 1 November 2008 Deposit Protection Fund Credit unions are not covered.
Slovenia EUR 100.000 100% July 28, 2010 Slovene: Banka Slovenije, the central bank of the Republic of Slovenia.
The Bank of Slovenia joined the Eurosystem in 2007, when the euro replaced the tolar.
Spain EUR 100,000 100% 1998 Fondos de Garantía de Depósitos (FGD)
Sweden SEK 500,000 100% October 6, 2008 National Debt Office - Deposit Insurance From 1996 to October 2008, amount was SEK 250,000.
United Kingdom GBP 85,000 100% Jan 01, 2011 Financial Services Compensation Scheme Amount raised from 35,000 to GBP 50,000 effective October 7, 2008. Before October 1, 2007 coverage was 100% of the first GBP 2,000 and 90% between 2,000 and GBP 35,000.
According to Art. 7 (1a) of Directive 94/19/EC all EU Member States were expected to increase the amount to EUR 100,000 as of 31 December 2010. This is the case in all EU countries. For countries with non-EURO currency the limits are near to EUR 100,000 e.g. in UK it is GBP 85,000 which is near to that limit, depending on EUR-GBP rate.
Rest of Europe. Belarus Deposit insurance in Belarus is handled by Agency of Deposit Compensation (Агенцтва гарантаванага пакрыцця банкаўскіх укладаў) and covers 100% of deposits, but only those belonging to the individuals, not organizations.
IcelandDeposit insurance in Iceland is handled by Depositors' and Investors' Guarantee Fund (Tryggingarsjóður) and covers a minimum of 20,887 euros. However, the fund was drastically insufficient to cover the bank failures of the 2008–2010 Icelandic financial crisis, particularly Icesave. This case shows the limits of deposit insurance in protecting against systemic failure (as opposed to the collapse of a single bank or other institution).
Norway. Deposit insurance in Norway is handled by the Norwegian Banks' Guarantee Fund (Bankenes sikringsfond) and covers deposits up to 2 million NOK.
Russia. Russia enacted deposit insurance law in December 2003 and established the national deposit insurance agency (DIA) in 2004. Until 2004, Russian banking system was divided: obligations of state-owned Sberbank were guaranteed by law, while other banks were not insured in any way, creating an unfair advantage for Sberbank. The law addresses only individuals' deposits. Maximum compensation is limited to 700,000 roubles (equivalent to 23,000 US dollars or 17,000 Euro at February 2009 exchange rate). As at January 2008, DIA funds exceeded 68 billion roubles (2.8 billion US dollars). There were 15 "insured events" (bankruptcy cases involving DIA intervention) in 2007 with resulting payout reaching 350 million roubles.
The agency is set up as a state-owned corporation, managed jointly by Central Bank and the government of Russia. DIA membership is mandatory requirement for any bank operating with private investors' money. Central Bank of Russia used admission of banks into DIA system to weed out unsound banks and money launderers. The murder of Andrey Kozlov, the Central Bank executive in charge of DIA admission, was directly linked to his non-compromising attitude to money launderers.
Switzerland. Switzerland has a privately operated deposit insurance system called Deposit Protection of Swiss Banks and Securities Dealers. It guarantees up to CHF 100 000 per bank customer per bank. Membership is compulsory for all banks and securities dealers that are regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). It had covered depositors in 1993 in the case of the failure of Spar- und Leihkasse Thun SLT, Thun. The next cases happened in 2007 with the liquidation of AB FIN SA (a securities dealer) in Lugano and with Kauphting (Luxembourg) SA, Geneva branch which was closed on October 9, 2008. Clients of this bank received the payments (at the time up to CHF 30 000 per customer) within three weeks.
Turkey. Deposit insurance in Turkey is handled by Savings Deposit Fund Insurance (Tasarruf Mevduatı Sigorta Fonu) and covers a maximum of 50,000 TL.
British Isles Offshore. Although many offshore subsidiaries of mostly British-based banks and building societies in the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey offer a parental guarantee for all sums deposited with them, the Crown Dependencies fall outside the jurisdiction of both the United Kingdom's Financial Services Authority guarantee to underwrite the first £50,000 per depositor per bank and the European Economic Area 'passport scheme' that pays a minimum of £16,000 per depositor per bank in the case of a default. In 1991, the Isle of Man introduced a bank depositors' insurance scheme to cover 75 percent of the first £15,000 per depositor per bank, but it was the October 2008 crisis-stricken Icelandic government's seizure of Kaupthing Bank hf in Iceland after the United Kingdom suspended the trading licence of Kaupthing's British subsidiary that compelled a radical revision of deposit insurance in the Isle of Man. Unable to secure reserves held by Kaupthing hf in Iceland or Kaupthing's British subsidiary to facilitate customer withdrawals, Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) Ltd. saw its Isle of Man banking licence suspended after operating less than a year, compelling the firm to request to be wound up. The Isle of Man government called an emergency session of the Tynwald parliament which voted unanimously to bring the Isle of Man depositors' compensation scheme into line with the newly-enlarged scheme in the United Kingdom, guaranteeing with immediate effect 100 percent of the first £50,000 per depositor per bank, and studying amendments for the subsequent inclusion within the scheme of corporate and charitable accounts. The Isle of Man government also pressed the Icelandic government to honour Kaupthing hf's irrevocable and binding guarantee of all depositors' funds held by Kaupthing, Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) Ltd. In Jersey and Guernsey, deposit insurance schemes for non-residents have yet to be enacted.
Australia and New Zealand. The last bank failure in which Australian depositors lost money (and then only a minimal amount) was that of a trading bank, the Primary Producers Bank of Australia, in 1931 (Fitz-Gibbon and Gizycki 2001). Since the early 1930s, banking sector problems have been resolved without losses to depositors.
The Australian Prime Minister announced on October 12, 2008 that, in response to the Economic crisis of 2008, 100% of all deposits would be protected over the subsequent three year period. This was subsequently reduced to a maximum of $1 million per customer per institution. This measure comes on top of existing mandates of APRA and ASIC to monitor Australian banks and deposit taking authorities to ensure that their risks do not compromise the safety of depositors funds.
New Zealand has announced on October 12, 2008, that an opt-in scheme for retail deposits will be introduced. The scheme offers 100% cover to Banks and other institutions, with the first NZ$5billion free, and excess amounts charged at 10 basis point pa.
Asia. India was the second country in the world to introduce Deposit Insurance in 1962. The Deposit Insurance Corporation commenced functioning on January 1, 1962 under the aegis of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). 1971 witnessed the establishment of another institution, the Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. (CGCI). In 1978, the DIC and the CGCI were merged to form the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC).
Hong Kong Deposit Protection Board is an independent and statutory institution formed to manage and supervise the operation of Deposit Protection Scheme. The maximum protection amount of deposit was HKD$100,000 in 2006 (when the Hong Kong Deposit Protection Board was set up), it is now with a limit up to HKD$500,000 (or equivalent in RMB or other foreign currency).
Malaysia introduced its Deposit Insurance in 2005. Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation (MDIC) or locally known as Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia (PIDM), is a statutory body formed under the Akta Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia 2005. Until December 2010, all deposit in Malaysia is fully guaranteed under the Government Deposit Guarantee Scheme.
paulsimkiss wrote:In answer to Chopsticks. Re currency movements.
If it goes in £s it comes out £s. Same for THB, USD and every other currency.
So lets say you put in £100,000 for one year at 6.5% pa. You will get back £106,500 that's guaranteed (Providing Gadafi does not invade Australia and wipe it out). There's no set up fee, no costs, no hidden extra's.
So a person invests Bht5million and after one year will receive Bht 5,325,000. Can you answer:-
To what name does the investor send his Bht 5million?
In what currency is it transferred to Australia?
What company transfers the investment?
What company takes out the forward FX contract - Thai Baht to (Australian Dollars?)? .
Does the investor then have a direct investment with the end investment Fund, so that they are contractually liable to the investor?
I am presuming that the investment ends up with the Australia fund who invest in property and from property income generate the investors income?
What commission does the Australian Fund pay your company? As you know this information is mandatory in the UK so it is being honest to your investor.
Finally your advertisement in AWOL for example, refers to these multi currency investments being SAFE and SECURE and GUARANTEED can you please back up that statement with hard evidence?
Courage is grace under pressure and when circumstances change you change your mind.
T.I.G.R. wrote:Hey Admins.......what happened to you can't promote your business on the forum??? Looks like one of us is setting up office right here........
Well, I looked at the top of the page and see a banner for Paul's company......I don't see the relavance but I guess you're saying if you advertise with HHAD or whoever that gives you the right to sell your wares on this forum. That's a risky proposal in terms of someone offering financial advice right ......I think it would make you liable for those products at some level, but I could be wrong.
Financial mangagement is a risky business and I'm sure all of us would appreciate hearing from Paul as to what his professional credentials are, and if he would be so kind as to provide herein a synopsis of his professional accomplishments and activities.
I'm not picking on you Paul, but there are lots of people out there that find delight in taking advantage of those who seek help with their financial affairs. It would be prudent for all of us to have your CV, as they say in Europe, so we could determine the extent to which we might invest in your various offerings. I see you use the term IFA; could you also explain the process you go through to obtain this credential and where it is recognized?
Thank you, and I'm looking forward to viewing more of your wares as I, too, have some funds that need to be put somewhere.
paulsimkiss wrote:I realise that certain comments posted by others may have annoyed you,
Why do you think this has any bearing on my scrutinising your business before deciding to invest into something that you claim to be guaranteed. Maybe you are used to selling to people who take everything you say as gospel? Independent Financial advisers in my experience are mainly interested in getting as much as they can from clients but sometimes this is not in the clients interest.
I was like many others drawn into this thread by your false promises.
I am not interested in any product you are trying to sell that comes with any risk.
You were the one spouting I can get.........I was only trying to prove your claims.( had they been true this would be a very short thread).
I for this and many reasons would not trust you or any other unregulated Financial advise company with my money or any other scheme with risk of capitol loss.
The Thai Banks are presently guaranteeing 50 Million Baht per institution until next August.
The main reason of my dislike of IFA in general has been heightened by this and the previous thread on offshore pensions by your inability to back up your claims.
This is why regulation was put in place in the UK for transparency regarding fees and commission.
This is also why companies like the Australian fund manager have to state risk. Both these were put in place because of massive fraud and misselling throughout the finance industry.
So do not take it too personally.
I agree your integrity would be improved with some previous examples of success in other countries
you appear to have been involved in financial selling.
