Enemy withinBY ALEX DUNNIN | WEDNESDAY, 5 JUN 2013 11:48AMAustralianSuper caused a mild stir early this year with its proclamation that it wants to ramp up the proportion of its assets it self manages to about one-third. But the perplexing ... Upgrade your subscription to access this article
Join the growing community of superannuation
professionals with unlimited access to our latest news, research and analysis of the industry.
Become a premium subscriber today. |
Latest News
AMP launches superannuation feature to boost retirement income
AMP has launched AMP Super Lifetime; a superannuation feature it claims could lift members' retirement incomes by over $100,000 in the first decade post-work.
Iress completes sale of super business
Iress has today completed the sale of its superannuation business to Apex Group.
UK treasury provides guidance on local pension consolidation
The Pension Investment Review aims to consolidate smaller public pension and multi-employer defined contribution pension schemes into 'megafunds' to emulate Australian and Canadian investing models.
Quality over quantity: CareSuper on mergers
The dust has barely settled on the merger that created CareSuper as it is today and chief executive Jason Murray is gearing up for another in mere months - but he's not looking to make a habit of it.
Further Reading
Cover Story

Climbing to the top
DANIEL SHRIMSKI
MANAGING DIRECTOR
VANGUARD INVESTMENTS AUSTRALIA LTD
MANAGING DIRECTOR
VANGUARD INVESTMENTS AUSTRALIA LTD
Vanguard Australia managing director Daniel Shrimski is determined to propel the investment giant's superannuation product into the top 10 funds by assets under management by 2030. It's an audacious goal, even for a fund backed by the world's second largest asset manager. Andrew McKean writes.
IMHO limiting the selection universe available to the end user in any way shape or form generates a potential for conflict of interest and should be prohibited. Time and time again I have seen fund groupings selling off a limited 'menu' of self-managed funds fall to 'commercial pressures' which cause them to peddle their own wares over best of breed. I have even seen a Managed Account platform exclude its own best performing Bond fund from its own menu in order to be able to charge a higher fee. The second Superfunds start worrying about how much revenue they produce rather than the returns they deliver there is a problem. I am all in favour of cost containment and in-sourcing where appropriate but only if a client centric focus is maintained. Reminder to all Superfund staff - the money you manage does not belong to you - you are not the client.
Alex I work with a large retail platform. Self management in our case is about capturing additional revenue. That's not to say that the group products aren't quality investments, it's just that it is recognised that if you can clip the ticket in various parts of the value chain then you should. look at the direction of administrative fees on platforms. The margins there are getting squeezed. If you don't have diversification of revenue then you will be in trouble. Maybe the motivation for industry funds to self manage is different. However my educated guess is it is not. The difference between a retail platform (not employer super products) is that they typically offer 50 - 300 managed funds (and shares) as choice. Industry funds don't typically offer that same level of choice. Have a look at the pricing structure of Asgard Infinity and AMP North though - they are offering a discounted admin fee if investors invest into group product. They can afford a hair cut on the admin fee as the margin in the investment fee is still there. Interesting times.