CoCo's are NoNo's

One would have thought that the main lesson of the Credit Crunch and Financial/Economic Crisis is the danger that can be created by newfangled and little-understood financial 'innovations'. The need for banks to raise additional capital has led to the design of 'Contingent Convertible Bonds' (CoCo's for short). These bonds lure investors with relatively high nominal interest rates that make them appear attractive to those who are desperate to get some positive return on their investments. Even so-called sophisticated investors in large financial institutions get tempted. Partially because they do not play with their own money or they will long have moved on to other jobs or positions when the proverbial s*** hits the fan. They may also not be as sophisticated as their clients (pensioners, mutual fund savers and private clients) assume. It will be interesting to see how regulators treat these securities if they become more of a mainstream investment option. They will have to decide whether their role is to protect the banking establishment or the investors. We know on which side they should be and we are definitely siding with the investors on this issue. Dangerous bets such as CoCo bonds should not be in any investor's toolkit but should be strictly reserved for regular visitors to casinos and betting shops. Not for nothing the link above talks of a ticking time-bomb with respect to these securities.

10 things you should ask your financial adviser about
(MarketWatch)

Do not be taken in by fancy offices, glossy brochures or even by the centuries-old pedigree of an investment management company. If you are not sure how to protect your interests in the face of a slick and professional marketing machine you should consider taking impartial advice. And do not even think to rely on regulators - just never forget Cyprus and the fact that EU regulators were powerless (unwilling?) to help depositors in some of the country's banks.

Closing Banks restores Confidence? - Nuts!!

Alert Investors the world over will see through the explanations (CNBC) of the 'experts' that claim that keeping bank closed in Cyprus will 'restore confidence'. What confidence is left in politicians and regulators has been shredded to pieces in the farce surrounding the rescue of Cyprus and/or its banking system. Every investor should have a 'Plan B' to prepare for similar episodes in other financial centres - or get one ready if he has not already done so.

Is it a tax? is it theft? - Lessons from Cyprus debacle

The implications for any alert investor must be clear: analyse carefully where you hold your assets, which country and which financial institution can you still trust? Are you sufficiently diversified so that - apart from the nightmare scenario of a socialist world government - you are not likely to be fleeced by desperate governments that have hit the buffers - intellectually and finanically?

A significant cause of damage for investors

Says article (Financial Times, 18 March 2013) that deals with another mysterious and opaque way that providers of investment services can use to fatten their profit at the expense of their 'clients'. How many investors will know the difference between 'creation' and 'cancellation' prices for their investment funds? But technicalities such as these can make quite a difference and sharp practices should be banned. In the absence of legislation investors are well advised to consult experts that can help them safeguard their hard-earned cash.

How to find a safe haven for your money

Shocking news about the Cyprus money grab by the Eurocracy and assorted unelected bureaucrats demonstrates the need to have unbiased expert advice when looking for a safe haven for your hard-earned savings. All-too-often 'advisers' in established financial institutions have a vested interest in the status quo and try to lull clients in a false sense of security. Thus they avoid that funds that are under their management are moved to a safer and/or cheaper location or institution.

Superstate knows no Respect for Citizen Rights

News that the Obama 'administration' (mal-ministration would be a better word) is drawing up plans (Reuters) to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country should send shudders down the spines of all freedom-loving citizens (are there any left?) all over the world. Soon the difference between living in the 'land of the free' and living in a tinpot dictatorship will be only a question of degree.
As pretext the bureaucrats wheel out the same old excuses - fight against terrorism (self-inflicted as no one tells the US to interfere in other countries' affairs) or fight against various 'crimes' (most of them just the outcome of bad legislation, remember the Prohibition and its side-effects?).
Private Banking Advisory stays true to its name and will protect the privacy of any consulting client - wherever they happen to be.

Do you buy the cat in the bag?

A short reference (New York Times) to the purported reluctance of a prominent private client advisory firm to disclose the performance record for its recommended portfolios is a stark reminder that all-too-often investors enter into advisory relationships without doing proper research. The often repeated joke that investors spend hours researching before buying a $500 washing machine but hand over millions on the basis of glossy brochures or fancy offices comes to mind. PBA advises investors to insist on inspecting the performance record of any financial advisor before handing over any investment monies.

'100% Return' on Stocks in 10 Years?

This headline (Jim Bogle via CNBC)is designed to make the mouth of every red-blooded investor water. But what is easily overlooked iJs that behind this attention-grabbing number is the mundane fact that any holding doubling over a period of ten years would have provided an annualised return of 7 percent. While this is nothing to sneeze at - many investors would give their right arm to be able to achieve this performance - it also is not earth-shattering. Above all it reminds us that just a short period of under - or even negative - performance can make it nearly impossible to achieve this return over a period of ten years as any loss has to be made up before the clock starts ticking again in the investor's favour. So the avoidance of mistakes and maximum discipline in keeping the costs of portfolio management as low as possible should be foremost in investor's minds.

Meagre Performance for Private Banking Clients

Private Banking clients find it notoriously difficult to obtain meaningful performance comparisons. Private Banks or Wealth Management departments are reluctant do showcase their performance. To some extent they are justified by arguing that each client requires a different approach as the risk tolerance or tax situation varies in each case. On the other hand, this can easily be used as a smokescreen to disguise poor performance before or after the client engages the firm. The solution for this dilemma should really be that fund management firms offer model portfolios that clients can choose if they are happy with the parameters that are set out in the investment rules for these model portfolios. Clients would then have a choice between a quasi-discretionary approach or a standardised formula that can be subjected to stringent performance evaluation. A look at this survey conducted by a magazine in Austria offers a shocking insight into the poor performance that clients experienced during the past 10 years. Most of the managers just were able to scrape together an annualised performance of around 3-4 per cent. Interestingly it made little difference whether to portfolio was deemed to be 'conservative' or 'dynamic'.