MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

First It Was Obama. Now Cameron Speaks Out On Fund Fees

TedTed
edited April 2016 in Fund Discussions
FYI: I must say I didn’t see it coming. But yesterday brought a highly significant development in the campaign for greater transparency in asset management. Speaking at Prime Minister’s Question Time, David Cameron expressed concern that lack of understanding of the true costs of investing is “sapping people’s enthusiasm” for saving for retirement.

He was responding to a question by the Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, who recently discovered that the total charges on his own investment portfolio were “more than 5% a year” as a proportion of his assets, or “about triple what I had originally calculated”.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.evidenceinvestor.co.uk/first-it-was-obama-now-cameron-speaks-out-on-fund-fees/

Comments

  • davidrmorandavidrmoran
    edited April 2016
    ha, a Brit liberal is a conservative who discovers he's a victim of greed.

    In the editorial work I have done for a wide range of SICAVs, both the fees and the performance have seemed, over and over, strikingly bad.

    Transparency is altogether desirable, but I would bet there's a serious RTFM problem here too.
Sign In or Register to comment.