Financial advice for young and wealthy

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
please have this discussion elsewhere. preferably in the politics forum or something.

there are very good reasons to protect people from things using the government, in my opinion. but that's my opinion. you're entitled to as much libertarianism as you want, but really there's no reason to be debating whether or not there should exist a classification "qualified investor" in this thread.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, I think there is a stock market section to this forum???

[Bigwig]

Dude, I'm a financial planner, and you're going to get yourself in trouble by giving advice on this forum. You have to be licensed in each poster's state, and if you give anything specific without collecting all the necessary data you open yourself up to liability. Remember, you're acting as a fiduciary.

No offense to anyone, but I can't help you. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[citanul]

does he need to get licensed or anything like that if all he's going to do is teach, not make recommendations?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, I'm a financial planner, and you're going to get yourself in trouble by giving advice on this forum. You have to be licensed in each poster's state, and if you give anything specific without collecting all the necessary data you open yourself up to liability. Remember, you're acting as a fiduciary.

No offense to anyone, but I can't help you. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

bigwig, I'm not sure if he is liable to this because he carries no licenses. Those were my thoughts at first. Second of all, in order for him to begin to incur any fiduciary liability, he'd have to start receiving some compensation. I think this is a lot like an agent acting on behalf of a newsletter for CTAs. As long as the agent has no affiliation with where the transactions are being done, and he's not giving SPECIFIC and INDIVIDUAL financial advice, then he should not be governed.

But I do agree that there are concerns, and OP should be mindful.

Scuba

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
does he need to get licensed or anything like that if all he's going to do is teach, not make recommendations?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so. I can't do a seminar, for example, in a state where I'm not licensed. Although seminars might be considered solicitations.

If he gives very broad very non-specific advice, he should be fine. But I've been warned by my OSJ and home office many times about message board posting. I don't even mention my franchise name because of this. It's just too spooky out there today.

My suggestion is for everybody to simply hire their own local professional.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
does he need to get licensed or anything like that if all he's going to do is teach, not make recommendations?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but if he is licensed, he could become liable. This is where the problems can come in. Furthermore, teaching is very subjective, and can be construed as advice. For example, in classes I've seen, it was construed that because index funds are the cheapest cost, then that is the best route.

Unfortunately, this now becomes advice, and not teaching.

Scuba

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dude, I'm a financial planner, and you're going to get yourself in trouble by giving advice on this forum. You have to be licensed in each poster's state, and if you give anything specific without collecting all the necessary data you open yourself up to liability. Remember, you're acting as a fiduciary.

No offense to anyone, but I can't help you. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

bigwig, I'm not sure if he is liable to this because he carries no licenses. Those were my thoughts at first. Second of all, in order for him to begin to incur any fiduciary liability, he'd have to start receiving some compensation. I think this is a lot like an agent acting on behalf of a newsletter for CTAs. As long as the agent has no affiliation with where the transactions are being done, and he's not giving SPECIFIC and INDIVIDUAL financial advice, then he should not be governed.

But I do agree that there are concerns, and OP should be mindful.

Scuba

[/ QUOTE ]

He's not licensed?

Wait, what the hell does he do?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
does he need to get licensed or anything like that if all he's going to do is teach, not make recommendations?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think so. I can't do a seminar, for example, in a state where I'm not licensed. Although seminars might be considered solicitations.

If he gives very broad very non-specific advice, he should be fine. But I've been warned by my OSJ and home office many times about message board posting. I don't even mention my franchise name because of this. It's just too spooky out there today.

My suggestion is for everybody to simply hire their own local professional.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to look into this. As I've stated before, I'm leaving the financial advisoring industry. I will probably become a financial products wholesaler (meeting with Pimco for example). Anyway, I'm not sure if I need to retain my licenses or not. And if I don't, I wonder how liable I could be for teaching a class.

A_plus has made some comments that could be construed that he will become a RIA. If that's the case, then I agree, he should let this go.

Scuba

[A_PLUS]

I appreciate the advice. I have consulted the compliance officers at my company, and have an e-mail to the legal/ethics consultant of a professional organization that I belong to.

I am currently employed as an analyst, and do not need to have any liscenses (series 7, etc).

I plan for this to be very academic in nature (only explained in common language, with poker as a common drawing point).

I have no affiliation with any company that offers any sort of brokerage service, and/or provides public mutual funds. I will not be making any specific recomendations, only giving examples of how you would make an investment decisions (with completely fictitious investment choices).

I will not be recieving any money for this, and will not be soliciting clients.

I think I am in the clear legally, but I will be sending the first e-mail to my compliance officer before I send it to make sure everything is on the up and up.

[diconoclastx]

Great idea! Sign me up!