| Name : SRIKANTH | City : BANGALORE |
| ARN NO : 33153 | Date : 25 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Good analysis and true also,.but do you think all this is not known to regulator,. We have been told what not to do,. let regulator hand hold the distributors and tell what to do,. and see the AUM s scaling. Empower distributors with proper regulations,. you would see AUMs at 50 lakh crores in next one or two years,. in the context of investor interest, system has ignored economical support MF and self employment impact it could have created, embedded along with, which opportunity is lost, from last 7 years. |
|
|
| Name : Shailesh Sampat | City : Nashik |
| ARN NO : 91276 | Date : 25 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| I think we should not relived solely on AMFI we each and every distributors should respond to SEBIs RIA consultation paper on email address given at bottom of the paper sebiria@sebi.gov.in before 4 th of Nov 2016.
Be quick because time is running fast whatever you think act fast. |
|
|
| Name : vishvas Sutrakar | City : MUMBAI |
| ARN NO : 104545 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Its a well written !
I am Wondering that in which way SEBI supporting Distributors,
After Three years, distributor suppose to send forms and fill it for clients, The whole universe moving towards online transaction then what would be the utility of Distributor... what it means, they are going to kill this vertical.
Its a very critical now, if AMFI or FIFA really wants to sustain they should have to do something to save Distributors..
|
|
|
| Name : Kshitija | City : Bangalore |
| ARN NO : XXXX | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Well thought out reply for the consultation paper. Very practical and articulate enough to convey the plight. I sincerely think this should be sent as a reply to SEBI by IFA associations. Sadly very few IFAs are responding to consultation paper though the impact if the present proposal gets effected is severe. Who will bell the cat is a question? |
|
|
| Name : Sunil B. Kapadia | City : Pune |
| ARN NO : ARN-13665 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Well written thoughts & perspectives. Lets hope our Industry & AMFI does now what is required & expected of them !! |
|
|
| Name : Shanthi Raj | City : HYDERABAD |
| ARN NO : ARN 25140 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| These are well thought and very important ideas and suggestions . As the deadline for giving the feedback on consultancy paper is 4th Nov. We need to unite and save this wonderful profession .It would be better if all the IFA associations ( Regional & national ) to draft feedback with the above given points in the prescribed SEBI FEEDBACK format and send before the 4th Nov.SEBI is not going to accept feedback from individual mutual fund distributor . We dont have time .we should to be proactive in this regard . |
|
|
| Name : Prashant | City : delhi |
| ARN NO : xxxxx | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Well written as usual. However, how can SEBI debar a distributor from offering insurance policy to his investor? SEBI does not have the power to challenge IRDA licenses. Hence, I disagree that Mutual Fund Distributor cannot sell insurance policies! There is NO LAW under which SEBI can debar this. In fact - IRDA HAS ALLOWED IMF (Insurance Marketing firm, which will distribute bOTH these products). So kind of a flawed argument. |
|
|
| Name : Subhabrata Ghosh | City : Kolkata |
| ARN NO : 95965 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| The fee recovery model suggested is too good and will help spread the growth of RIAs |
|
|
| Name : Milind Chitnis | City : Mumbai |
| ARN NO : ARN-1837 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Great suggestion. Fee recovery by R&T agent (with prior permission of investor) will encourage many IFAs (or should we now say MFDs?) to consider RIA option. |
|
|
| Name : jaideep | City : Mumbai |
| ARN NO : 81143 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Many of the suggestions are worth considering. However, there are 2 things one has to keep in mind. Nothing stops an investor, in a bearish market phase, from not paying any advisory fee, because anyway the market is down or going down. How does SEBI propose to protect advisors from this possibility ? We have had the bear market from 2008-13, which wrecked the livelihood of many distributors. I therefore do not agree to a cap on advisory fees, because there could be lean periods in between where investors opt to let their portfolio stagnate rather than pay fees and leave RIAs struggling to make ends meet. This obsession of limiting incomes of intermediaries and businesses, by regulators who themselves face no risk to their livelihood, is shocking and must be stopped. The cap would anyway be a result of competition and market forces, as investors have a choice between RIAs. |
|
|
| Name : Bhubaneswari mishra | City : Bhubaneswar |
| ARN NO : 98409 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Very good point. Same time we request to regulator. .when one scheme launched by amc it requires SEBI approval. .so why regulator dont ban the same scheme at that time if he feels. .it is not good for investors. .why he gives permission the scheme launched to market. ..if he control at that time. .no question of misselling. ..isnt it? If regulator serious in first step. .then no second rule required. ..please think respected regulator. .. |
|
|
| Name : SRINIVASA B L | City : MYSURU |
| ARN NO : 78360 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| well balanced,pragmatic solution to the IMPENDING crisis that REGULATOR is proposing to UNLEASH.Hope the KING is LISTENING & ACT.Thank you sir |
|
|
| Name : SURENDRA KUMAR TEAWRI | City : JHANSI |
| ARN NO : ARN-71648 | Date : 24 Oct 2016 |
| Comments : |
| Legitimate and very good suggestions. |
|
|