I USED to run a mortgage company and, along with other non-bank lenders, we made inroads into the banks' mortgage oligopoly.
The success of that company was attributed to lower interest rates - however, we weren't always the lowest rate in the mortgage market.
What our customers tuned into was the fact we were building branches. While the banks were shutting thousands of them in the 1990s, we opened them and people liked that. When it comes to money, not everyone wants to use a call centre. The same thing is happening again. There's a new wave of financial services migrating beyond the computer and to phones and tablets and banking is no longer just on websites - it's moving into social media such as Facebook. But as these services migrate to devices that fit in the pocket, people still need something more.
The key, in my opinion, lies in the difference between the financial services you can turn into a "product" and those you cannot. And it's becoming obvious to me that while most Australians are happy to get a CTP green slip or a credit card or a car loan over the phone or internet, most are looking for more when they get a mortgage, arrange life insurance or allocate their retirement investments.
People are happy to use financial products but they really want advice to cap it off.
The Nielsen Pacific organisation released the results of its global survey of investment attitudes a few weeks ago and it made for interesting reading. For instance, 70 per cent of Australians used the internet for banking and investment transactions in the previous three months, suggesting we're all shifting onto the internet. But the survey also found 54 per cent of Australians had visited a bank branch in the previous three months.
In my opinion, this shows a nation that is using the products presented to them for convenience. But they still need to talk about these things and especially the larger, more complex matters such as mortgages, life insurance and super.
It's a quaint picture of a technology-driven country with a traditional heart. But the problems this might create for us in the near future are far from quaint.
An example of this could include our superannuation system, which is compulsory but which puts the onus for retirement investment on the individual.
The first port of call for most people with super is not an adviser but a product. The super-fund member is mailed a brochure that describes the various products and the member ticks the boxes and sends it back.
The Nielsen survey shows just 16 per cent of Australians rely on a financial planner or adviser, while 57 per cent prefer to be in charge of their investment decisions. Now have a look at the fact that 70 per cent of investment-focused Australians currently maintain a shareholding of stocks. This is slightly higher than the global average of 67 per cent.
Look at the correlation: 57 per cent of Australians are in charge of their own investments, which leads to 70 per cent of investment-focused Aussies investing in the worst-performing assets.
I don't blame Australians for their scepticism about advice and therefore muddling by with their own strategies. I believe there have been many forces that have pushed Australians away from being advised on their investments and their retirements. Most banks don't offer advice unless the customer is a "high net worth" client stockbrokers don't give you the full service unless you have a certain amount to invest and the superannuation funds find it difficult to give advice because they have, in effect, become the product.
That leaves the independent advisers and planners, who many Australians avoid because there is either a trust problem or the costs are perceived to be too great.
It is my belief that financial security and retirement planning are crucial things about which Australians with no financial acumen should be seeking expert advice.
More should be done by the super industry, the Australian Stock Exchange, the government and regulators to encourage people to seek advice and have a tailored plan around the complex financial arrangements that make up their lives.
However, people have to show initiative in these matters and decide what's really important. Besides, most people who seek expert advice get something out of it: an insurance broker increasing your cover and reducing your premiums an adviser finding a lower-fee/higher-yield super fund a mortgage broker finding you a better loan or an accountant getting you a better tax result by changing your structure.
Mostly, I believe that when Australians know they can do complex bank transactions on an iPhone, it's probably time for the convenience argument to be balanced by old-fashioned expert advice.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
Why do many Australians still visit a bank branch even though online and mobile banking are popular?
The Nielsen survey cited in the article found 70% of Australians used the internet for banking and investment transactions in the previous three months, yet 54% had visited a bank branch in that same period. That shows people value face-to-face contact for more complex or personal money matters – they like the reassurance and tailored help you can get in a branch, not just the convenience of mobile banking or websites.
Can I manage my superannuation and retirement planning without a financial adviser?
You can, but the article warns it isn’t always wise. Superannuation is compulsory and puts the onus on the individual, yet many members treat super as a product (ticking boxes from a brochure) instead of seeking tailored advice. The Nielsen survey showed only 16% rely on a financial planner while 57% prefer to control their own investments, which can leave people exposed if they lack financial knowledge.
How common is online investing and internet banking among Australian investors?
According to the article’s reference to a Nielsen global survey, 70% of Australians used the internet for banking and investment transactions in the previous three months. That indicates online and mobile banking and investing are now mainstream for everyday investors.
Which financial services are suitable to buy as online products and which typically need expert advice?
The article suggests simple, commoditised services—like CTP green slips, credit cards or car loans—are fine to buy online or by phone. But larger, more complex matters such as mortgages, life insurance and retirement investment allocations usually benefit from professional advice because they require personalised planning and judgment that a standard product can’t provide.
What stops everyday Australians from getting financial advice?
Several practical and perception barriers are highlighted: many banks only offer advice to high-net-worth clients, stockbrokers often require minimum investment sizes, super funds have effectively become products rather than advice providers, and independent advisers face trust issues or perceived high costs. Those factors push people toward DIY solutions even when advice would help.
Are DIY investors more likely to pick poor-performing investments?
The article points to a worrying correlation: 57% of Australians prefer to manage their own investments and, among investment-focused Australians, 70% hold shares—leading the author to conclude many DIY investors end up in the worst-performing assets. In short, doing it yourself without the right knowledge can increase the risk of poor outcomes.
What real benefits can financial advisers, brokers and accountants deliver for everyday investors?
The article gives practical examples: an insurance broker can increase cover while reducing premiums; a financial adviser can find a lower-fee or higher-yield super fund; a mortgage broker can secure a better loan; and an accountant can improve your tax outcome by changing your structure. Those are the kinds of measurable benefits expert help can provide.
How should I balance the convenience of mobile banking with the need for expert financial advice?
Use technology for convenience—online banking and apps are great for everyday transactions and simple products—but balance that with expert advice for significant decisions. The article argues the convenience argument should be weighed against old-fashioned expert advice for complex financial matters, and investors should take the initiative to seek tailored guidance when it matters.