Marissa Broome: 00:00 To say that I’m upset by the decision the government made last week is very much an understatement. You did touch on how much work it’s been. It’s been almost two years of solid commitment from us at board level and from the management of the FPA. But not just us, one of the really positive outcomes out of this is we’ve had all the proactive professional advisor associations working together on this and there’s been an awful lot of work that’s taken place from them as well.
Fraser Jack: 00:29 Hello and welcome to the Goals Based Advice Podcast, where I have conversations with pioneers with the new world of financial advising. I’m your host, Fraser Jack, and I want to thank you so much for tuning in today. I’d also like to thank our supporting partner, Advice Intelligence, for powering this podcast. If you’re enjoying this podcast, then please help me spread the world and the challenges still out there to help your colleagues who don’t know how to listen to podcasts, by showing them exactly how you do it and chatting to them about what you get out of it.
In this episode, I chat with Chair of the Financial Planning Association, Marissa Broome, about the rise and fall of their code monitoring body. We also chat about some of the other work she’s doing with the association, and how she juggles her industry commitments with keeping her own financial planning business moving forward. There’s a lot of info in this short episode so strap yourself in as we hit play on my chat with Marissa.
Welcome to the show, Marissa.
Marissa Broome: 01:27 Thanks Fraser. Lovely to be here.
Fraser Jack: 01:29 Now, do you want to give the listeners a quick overview of yourself right now?
Marissa Broome: 01:36 Certainly. I am a certified financial planner, very proud to be one. I’ve been a financial planner for 22 years. I’ve been self-licensed that entire time. I run a small boutique practice in Sydney, in Balmain, so a little bit out of the CPD. CBD, sorry. I’m I guess targeting a very specific, very high net wealth client base. I only have a very small number of clients but that’s just the way I’ve always operated.
I also happen to be the Chair of the FPA at the moment, so it’s not a second job. It’s very much a time consuming job, but it’s something I’m incredibly proud and humbled to hold.
Fraser Jack: 02:12 Yeah, does it actually take up a lot of your time? It almost is a second job?
Marissa Broome: 02:16 It’s meant to be one to two days a week. I’m afraid this year it’s been more like three or four days a week, sometimes five. I didn’t have many weekends off at the beginning of the year.
Fraser Jack: 02:26 Yeah, you chose the perfect storm scenario to come into, didn’t you? I don’t like to use the word storm, but obviously the perfect scenario where there’s so many things hitting you from different angles in that position.
Marissa Broome: 02:37 Sure. Look, I was very aware of the pressure that I was going to be under in the job. I was very lucky, I was mentored by Neil Kendall for eight months before I took over the role so I knew what I was facing. I was very involved in the FPA. I have been since before the FPA was the FPA with the two associations that formed it in the first place. I knew what to expect, I knew what the workload was, and I just adjusted my own business to cope with it.
I’ve got great people around me, and I was lucky that team has stood by and carried the business while I haven’t been in it quite so much.
Fraser Jack: 03:08 Yeah. Now, you mentioned you’ve been running your practice for a long time. How did you get involved?
Marissa Broome: 03:16 When I left university, I worked in a graduate program in a large bank. My first rotation was in asset management and I never left that. I also as part of that, worked in one of the first personal investment centers that Westpac set up. I’ve seen the funds management side of things, I’ve seen how financial planning really made a difference in people’s life. We’re talking about over 30 years ago, and that makes me sound old. Obviously I was five when I started.
But I really did know that long term, my career was going to be about helping people on an individual level rather than being in an asset management scenario. I moved from that, after I had my second child, I set up my first firm. Rather than trying to deal with setting up a new business and dealing with the corporate world at the same time.
Fraser Jack: 04:04 Did you set your business up whilst part time? Like, being a mom and then set your business up?
Marissa Broome: 04:10 I had a six month old baby, a two and a half year old baby, and I did work part time, and it’s one of the wonderful things about being a financial planner is how flexible it was. They would go to bed at 6:00 or 7:00 at night, and I might do two or three hours of work then, but I got to see them awake. Whereas opposed to the corporate world, when I went back to work with my first child, I had a week when she was seven months old when I hadn’t seen her awake and I actually resigned at the end of that week. Because the nanny was having a great time with her, but I wasn’t.
So, I love the flexibility that financial planning has given me. Once they finished school, so I was very involved with them at school, once they finished school was when I put my hand up to join the board. It wasn’t that I hadn’t been asked to join the board before that and run for election, but I waited to give back to my profession until I had time in my life to juggle both.
Fraser Jack: 04:53 Yeah, exactly right. It certainly is a bit of a juggle, isn’t it? When kids at school and looking after everything and trying to do something like the work you’re doing now with the profession.
Marissa Broome: 04:53 Yeah. 16 weeks of school holidays and no childcare was hard work.
Fraser Jack: 05:07 Yeah, fair enough. There seems to be a lot of cost involved with providing advice these days, and that being able to be a parent at home and work and start a business, is that something that may have been even a thing of the past now?
Marissa Broome: 05:23 I actually worry that it is a thing of the past, and I’m not just talking about for women. It’s just as relevant for men. There’s as many men, primary care givers as women, and just in our family’s case, it turned out that I was the primary care giver. That does really worry me. I mean, my personal compliance costs in my business are raising to about $50,000 this year, because we had an ASIC levy, I’ve had a PI increase, even though I’ve never even had a letter of complaint in my practice. My PI over the last two years has gone up about 40%.
I’m paying for my people to do their exam. The other associated studies we’re coming to an arrangement with about what sort of units they need to cover. The compliance costs are astronomical. If it costs me 3 or $400,000 just to turn the light on on the 1st of January, you do actually wonder how someone can set up a business in that way. I’m self-licensed, so my costs are higher, but I do know that in larger licensee scenario, they’re passing all those costs back to the advisors anyway, so it’s a similar scenario for them.
I am really concerned about where the new bright talent is going to come into our profession, because it’s hard work to get in at the moment.
Fraser Jack: 06:25 Yeah, it is. It’ll be interesting to see how these things play out over time and whether we can get back to making it available for people to then stay at home and parent if they choose to, and stay in the profession.
Marissa Broome: 06:40 I think the government doesn’t understand the full costs and it’s one of the things that I lead out with, with a lot of the discussions I’ve had, with our minister, with treasury, with other stakeholders, is I talk to them about the real costs of running a business and the real costs of providing advice. They really have no idea but they also at the other side don’t have any idea of the real benefit of advice, and so we’re starting to try and get some more quantitative figures around actually what benefit to the economy does quality advice give, so that people aren’t reliant on aged pensions, aren’t reliant on other funding mechanisms. People can actually afford to retire appropriately.
Fraser Jack: 07:13 Yeah, exactly right. Just on the cost scenario, because I have this theory that a small business like yourself, the cost is either borne by you as the shareholder or by your clients.
Marissa Broome: 07:13 Exactly.
Fraser Jack: 07:23 And nobody in between. So, yeah, being able to bring that cost down and as you said before, getting those benefits, those compensations and benefits out there to the government, them understanding that this stuff really works and to get behind it. Now, one of the things I wanted to talk to you today was really around how the rise and fall of the code-monitoring conversation, the body obviously, it’s been so much work has gone on behind the scenes, especially from yourself and the association, so much time and effort have been put into this code-monitoring conversation, just to have it now, everything change at the last minute. Do you want to talk us through some of the stuff?
Marissa Broome: 08:07 To say that I’m upset by the decision the government made last week is very much an understatement. You did touch on how much work it’s been. It’s been almost two years of solid commitment from us at board level, and from the management of the FPA, but not just us. One of the really positive outcomes out of this is we’ve had all the proactive professional advisor associations working together on this and there’s been an awful lot of work that’s taken place from them as well.
But certainly the FPA has borne the brunt of the work because it was an entity that we decided to do, and my genuine belief, a solution by advisors for advisors was going to be the best outcome for us as a genuine profession. Every other profession has a similar body to this, in that they regulate and they discipline their own members, and we’ve actually had that taken away from us. It’s incredibly disappointing. I believe it’s a political decision, I don’t believe they really understand the consequences of the decision that was made.
Fraser Jack: 09:04 Yeah. It seems to me that were most of the way through the work on getting it set up and understanding, and how it’s going to work, and then obviously the Royal Commission findings were handed down, and then there was this area in there that was mentioned about this government body that should take over the scenario. From that point on, I guess were the associations then pushing the government to make a decision on that, whether one way or the other?
Marissa Broome: 09:29 That was something that we raised with treasury the day that the Royal Commission report came out, the final report came out. We rang them that day to discuss it with them. They had absolutely no idea what that meant, and certainly we obviously went into caretaker mode and we went into an election, but we were speaking to both parties about the implications of that in the lead up to the election. Certainly speaking to what we thought were the potential crossbenchers, and in our very first meeting with Senator Hume, we brought it up then.
At that stage, we had every indication and it’s why we kept building, and why we actually recruited staff. We had every indication that we were going to be given a period of time that this was going to operate, until such time as the single disciplinary body was actually addressed, because they didn’t believe they really understood how to address it at that time. That was May. Then literally 12 hours before to launch a new business, they made a decision against going ahead with code-monitoring. It was right down to the wire.
Fraser Jack: 10:24 Yeah. Because I was going to say, to me it felt like maybe then ... It’s kind of good that they made a decision rather than having no decision.
Marissa Broome: 10:34 Yes, except that we now are in this limbo where we’ve, licensees now have to monitor people’s adherence to a code of ethics. The code of ethics in itself still has some issues, so I try and see a positive out of this, is we’ve got a bit of time to try and get some sense and some good outcomes in the new explanatory memorandum which again, we’ve been promised since February. Trying to get actually some clarity in that code of ethics, so people can still operate, because there’s a lot of problems in it.
We’re trying to look at the positives that have come out of this, in that we’re going to have hopefully a better outcome for a code of ethics that we can actually all still operate under.
Fraser Jack: 11:11 Yeah, so I guess now it’s trying to help licensees to work out how to police this code.
Marissa Broome: 11:18 Yes. It very much is that. We have a very good working relationships with the licensees at all levels. I know a lot of people criticize us all the time about being in the pockets of the large end of town. Well, there’s not many large licensees left anyway, but we work at all levels. My small business is a professional practice. We get a lot of support from the FPA through that, and we’re helping people at all levels to try and meet that. It’s one of the focuses of our sessions of Congress coming up, is we’re going to help licensees in our licensee workshop and in our professional practice workshop, understand the implications of this for them.
Fraser Jack: 11:52 Yeah, one of the big unknowns obviously outside of how the code is going to be interpreted is the cost of a body, and obviously we’ve heard the associations come out and say that this was going to be something that was set up. It wasn’t going to be a for-profit business, it was just going to be set up and run at that scenario. And now that there’s obviously going to be a government body, I can only assume that the cost involved will be slightly higher. There might be more levels of overlay and political, I don’t know what the right word is there.
Marissa Broome: 12:29 I assume that you’re probably right. I mean, I paid last year, $750 to ASIC in various lodgment forms, and this year I paid seven and a half thousand dollars to them. If that’s any indication of what costs to deal with regulation, I mean it’s not about the cost that I pay to the TPB and other areas. I’m concerned about that, and there was 25,000 advisors out there and they’ll look at the risk at a very different pricing point.
Fraser Jack: 12:52 Yeah, fair enough. This is all going to mold out over the next 12 months. Do you think that licensees will have to add some additional cost to their services over the next 12 months?
Marissa Broome: 13:03 Possibly. It’s all too new for me to actually understand the full implications of that, and Dante and I haven’t actually been in the same country at the same time. We are meeting on the weekend to start talking through some of those issues, because we’ve been doing it all by phone. This happened during actually holidays for me but it was no holiday. I spent pretty much the whole of my week in Japan on the phone to the FPA in Sydney.
Fraser Jack: 13:30 Yeah, certainly was what seemed to be a very quick and crazy announcement that came out of the blue.
Marissa Broome: 13:37 Yeah, very much so.
Fraser Jack: 13:38 Very good. Now, one of the other things I wanted to work through on this is the ... Actually, I’m going to cut this bit, but trying to get my words out. I lost that. All right. Let me start again. One of the things I’m also interested in how this affects you, like as a small business, and how you’ll now go about your monitoring as a self-licensed person.
Marissa Broome: 14:14 In my business, it doesn’t change a lot, because any advice that comes out of my practice, there’s two of us that authorize and we check each other’s work and we have an internal system that really wasn’t going to change a lot of what we do. Not just because I’m a CFP and not just because we’re an FPA professional practice, but we’ve always held ourselves to high account.
We don’t do everything perfectly. Obviously we’re human, but we hope to think that our interview systems will stop us being in breach of any of the rules to come out through the code of ethics. We believe the FPA code of professional practice is higher anyway, and we’ve always held ourselves to that account.
Fraser Jack: 14:53 Yeah, now you mentioned ... Just with the code itself, you mentioned before that obviously there’s a lot of resolution that needs to come out and some direction around how things are going to be interpreted. For someone like yourself that is doing a lot of work within the profession, working for an association, or working with an association I should say, to do these things, how do you distinguish then with some of the rules around things like avoiding conflict as opposed to just disclosing it? The FPA obviously has sponsors that sponsor it, how do you as a small business then be able to say, “Yes, I do some work for the FPA. Yes, we have sponsors.” How do you then run your practice, avoiding those sponsors, or?
Marissa Broome: 15:44 Well, I disclose everything. In the back of my SOAs, in my FSG, when I deal with clients. I mean, I’m also married to someone that for our entire marriage was a fund manager and I had to disclose the fact that there was a relationship by marriage with a fund manager, that I didn’t actually use for my clients, but I still had it disclosed in my SOA, so I’m very clear.
One of the first things you read on my FSG is that I am the chair of the FPA, that I often am taken out to events, I’m often taken to conferences in exotic places to speak. Doesn’t mean that they’re paying for me to do any of that, but I do disclose it all because I would hate anyone to think that I’m conflicted as a result of it. I don’t go to events for the sake of going to events. I go to events because I can add value in my capacity as the chair to be an advocate for the 14,000 members that we have, and that’s my priority. It might seem naïve and people often interpret it the wrong way, but that’s the whole reason why I’m involved.
Fraser Jack: 16:41 Yeah, I feel like every single planner in the country would have the same sort of thing going on. Every single planner in the country probably has a superannuation fund and that superannuation fund could be Australian based equities, which could or may or may not involve a bank or a provider or a fund manager in some particular way.
Marissa Broome: 16:59 That’s right.
Fraser Jack: 17:01 It’s really interesting to think how within the code itself, there could be a total avoidance of any conflict.
Marissa Broome: 17:10 That’s exactly right. Our meetings with FASEA have continually said that that was not their intention. It was not about X, it was about Y. Unfortunately, the explanatory memorandum and the code itself doesn’t say that, which is why we’re waiting for this new EM to come out, because hopefully there’ll be more clarity in it.
As I said, that’s been promised for many months. At the moment, the FASEA board only has two financial planners on it. The third financial planner representative on it has resigned and we haven’t had an opportunity to replace that person, so our voice is not as strong on that board, and I’m very much hoping that we’ll get some guidance happening well before our Congress happens in November. Because it’s really running down to the wire on how people will adapt their businesses to do things appropriately.
Fraser Jack: 17:53 Yep. Obviously this has been taking up, this code-monitoring has been taking up a fair bit of your time at the association. What are the other things that you’re working on at the moment?
Marissa Broome: 18:03 Oh, we’ve certainly done an awful lot. I’m so proud of the team there. Dante’s staff, the team there’s only 40 people and they’ve delivered so much this year. I can’t thank them enough for their commitment. They came out with Return to Learn, our ability to help people go back and look at what study they need to do, how to study, and also we’ve got a range of discounts from a number of quality providers which people can, because it’s expensive to go back to study, they can get a better deal by using some of those offerings that have happened.
We came out with Match My Planner, which I was told was Tinder financial planning. Even though I don’t know anything about Tinder, I’m not sure that’s the case. But certainly the ability to take this consumer marketing that we’ve been very successful in and actually linking that to our members and getting them to find more clients, we think that’s incredibly important.
A big focus at the moment is Congress. Michelle Tate-Lovery, my fellow director that has focused on Congress for the last couple of years is doing a stellar job. I had some time with her earlier this week and every year I can’t believe that it can get better than it was the previous year, but this one’s looking better, so I’m amazingly proud of her and very excited to see what happens.
We’ve got a lot more that’ll come out in that education space. There’s more tools to help people get through this, the current interruption. It really is noise out there, but we really want to be there walking with our members and getting them as many support tools as possible. We get some crazy ideas thrown at us about how we should make different changes. One of the changes we are going to make next year is we’re going to get our CFPs involved in the marketing that we do for CFPs.
But some of the ideas are a little bit too crazy to be really sensible, but it doesn’t mean that we don’t listen. We listen to every idea that comes our way.
Fraser Jack: 18:03 I love crazy ideas.
Marissa Broome: 19:47 We are working on a wonderful project, Fraser, that you know a lot about, which is the Ultimate SOA. I’m pretty excited to see what the outcome of that is. I know you and Ben have been working very closely together on that and we think that’s a really valuable tool, that will actually turn on its head, what an SOA is all about.
Fraser Jack: 20:04 Yeah, hopefully that is all, comes out really well. Again, that’s going to be coming out around the Congress time, which is the end of November, in Melbourne.
Marissa Broome: 20:15 Yes, and then the other thing I’d like to get feedback on at Congress is we’re going to come out with our new policy platforms. Nick, our government relations manager, is working really hard on that. He’s part of Ben’s team, our policy team, and we’re really [inaudible 00:20:29] about what are the next big things that we need to call for? What are the big changes we need? Do we need to completely rewrite chapter seven? Do we need to actually be licensed for advice and not product? All these big ideas is the stuff that I would like to come out with about being really firm, being really bold about what the change is for getting quality advice. It really does link in to what the new SOA looks like, too.
Fraser Jack: 20:51 Yep. Yeah, fantastic. Now, exactly right. The SOA could be completely different in years to come, although still getting the right messages across and the right aims. Now, I just wanted to quickly ask you too, because we haven’t really heard much around the extensions that were given for the exam and for the education period. How’s that going through the legislative, what has to go through parliament?
Marissa Broome: 21:16 It does have to go through parliament. We don’t expect to see that legislation this year. We expect that it will happen next year. That hasn’t stopped our advocacy. The government has still reconfirmed its commitment to have those extensions put in place. I’m concerned about that, now that we’ve had code-monitoring decision change everything. One of the reasons why the extensions were recommended was that we had a catch-all in the code-monitoring process that was going to be in place.
We are going out and talking to the crossbenchers and we’ve got more meeting with them in November, so we’re hoping to see some good news that will happen there. I am normally very optimistic on everything. I’m probably a glass half full at the moment, so doesn’t mean it’s not going to happen but I am concerned that there will be some people that will think that we’re getting off too lightly by not having code-monitoring, and they don’t want us to get away with anything else.
Fraser Jack: 22:12 Okay. Do you think there might still be a chance that it doesn’t quite go through as planned?
Marissa Broome: 22:16 I’m hoping not, am I probably shouldn’t be quite outspoken about it, but I am concerned.
Fraser Jack: 22:23 Yeah, okay. The message that has been resonating-
Marissa Broome: 22:26 I haven’t given up fighting.
Fraser Jack: 22:28 Yeah, yeah. Is the message that’s been going out is that to unite and come up with one message and then still continue to take those messages out to your local members, you still advocate for that?
Marissa Broome: 22:38 Yes, we have an advocacy kit, we still want that to happen. If you’d like to go and speak to your local member, we have a number of members for example, that are in the treasurer’s electorate, and they’ve made meetings with him, and that’s to give firsthand feedback on what the code-monitoring decision means, and we’re hoping that more people will go out, especially if those are in an area where there are crossbench influence, whether that be in the lower house or in the senate. We’d really be interested in using our advocacy kit to go on, really tell people exactly what the story is and what the lay of the land is, both in how hard it is to do business at the moment and also what the implication is about building consumer trust.
Fraser Jack: 23:19 Yeah, fair enough. Now, with all these changes, have you had to make any major changes to your business, your personal business at all, or is it still tracking along as normal?
Marissa Broome: 23:27 Not really. I’d made a decision not to take on new clients. I went through a long period of time where I didn’t take on new clients. I’ve only just started growing the business again. Was loving it, was loving being refreshed by having a different outlook. I don’t take on new clients at the moment because what’s tending to happen with my clients is they’re bringing to me their young adult children and their aging parents, so I’m inevitably getting a larger client base simply because I’ve extended the family reach.
That’s where the focus needs to be in my practice at the moment. My commitment has to be to the FPA while I’m in the role, while I’m in this term, and I’ll have some new directors possibly to bed down next year as well, so there’s still more work to be done until my term is over, and then I can go back and focus on my business again.
I’m exactly in that demographic where I could possibly retire. My husband is just about to retire. It’s quite possible, in fact him retiring is probably a reason to stay at work but I’ve got no intention to retire for a good 10 years or so. There’s plenty of time to go back and focus on my business.
Fraser Jack: 24:29 Yeah. Will your business be changing over the next 10 years? Can you see that?
Marissa Broome: 24:35 Possibly. One thing I’m probably not as good at is embracing technology. I used the FPA whitepapers and did adopt a few bits and pieces that came out of it, but I’m probably still very principle dependent in my business and I’m probably not as technology orientated. I think there’s a lot of efficiencies that I could build into the business when I’ve got time to go back and focus on it. I need to get through the exam, I need to do one extra unit of study, I’ve got to do the ethics course. I’ve got to continue my role in the FPA and then we’ll come back and look at the business, and it’s doing quite well as it stands at the moment, so we’ll how it morphs over time.
Fraser Jack: 25:07 Yeah, that sounds like a very similar dilemma to most planners out there at the moment, with exams to do, study to do, and then their business can almost get pushed down the order a little bit.
Marissa Broome: 25:19 It does. I mean, you’ve got to put your clients first but maybe running the business itself, maybe having the business not as efficient as possible is not a bad compromise to do, if you can actually put your clients first and your own continuation in the profession first. Everything’s got to have a priority.
Fraser Jack: 25:36 Yeah, fantastic. Now, let’s jump into our last few questions. What tips do you give to consumers? If you’re at a barbecue and you’re chatting to someone who you may have just met, they know, and they’re asking you for tips on what they should be doing when looking for a planner, what tips do you give them?
Marissa Broome: 25:53 I go back to a very old, what was the ASE at the time, brochure that was don’t kiss your mommy goodbye, which was the questions you need to ask when you go and seek advice. We’ve taken a lot of those tips and we’ve got them even on our Money And Life website, consumer facing website. Make sure they’ve got the appropriate qualifications and they’re meeting the new qualifications. Find out how they charge, find out what their associations is. It doesn’t matter if they’re associated with a large licensee or they’re self-licensed. If you’re comfortable with dealing with them and they fully disclose the relationships and the conflicts they have, then that’s still appropriate advice for you.
I talk to them about all the things. This is not a transactional business, this is a relationship business, so it has to be someone that you’re very comfortable working with for a long period of time, because it may take 12 months, two years to even sort you out. I mean, the very last new client I took on, it took us two years before we invested a dollar, and being an investment advisor is only a small part of what I do, but it was all the other strategy work I needed to do on the way through to get that client in the position where they were structured properly before we actually then went ahead and made some big decisions about investing.
Fraser Jack: 27:02 Yeah, fantastic.
Marissa Broome: 27:04 So they’re a couple of things.
Fraser Jack: 27:07 Yeah. I had a conversation a few times, around the idea of transactional and relationship and how as advisors, as planners, the transactional stuff almost seems like a different business model than the relationship stuff. I feel sometimes that’s the regulator or the government feels that transactional advice is where it’s at.
Marissa Broome: 27:27 I think that [inaudible 00:27:28] a place for transactional advice. I mean, some of my very early clients, it was a transaction. But they came back to me two years later or three years later, as their circumstances changed. In fact, one of them that was in a part of my client base that I did sell about 11 years ago has recently come back to me, tracked me down and found me again, and it’s come back to being a relationship. Even though there was no need for me to see him in his belief, in terms of ongoing advice, he’s now in a position where he definitely needs ongoing advice. We’ve reestablished that relationship and we’re helping him out. I’m not doing it, one of the people in my practice is, but we’ve certainly continued that relationship in the business.
Fraser Jack: 28:11 Fantastic. What tips do you give to planners that are having to go through all this change at the moment and finding it a little bit overwhelming?
Marissa Broome: 28:19 Look, it’s worth it. Even the ASIC report that came out just a few months ago talked about the demand for advice is going to be increasing. Some of the recent data that we saw from CoreData has said and reaffirmed the same thing. We’ve got an aging population, I mean all my friends are getting close to retirement. We’re all looking for advice. I’m not prepared to look after my friends from that perspective, so I’ve got a whole lot of people I can refer out, keep doing it because there is an enormous market out there.
But more than anything else, I’m really worried about the fact that I’ve got kids in their 20s and they can’t afford advice but they’re going to need maybe initial transaction advice and then move on. There’s an enormous opportunity for them. They understand, they’re used to paying for services, they understand that there’s a need to get put on the right track early, because if you’re on the right track early, they’ll continue to actually be on the right track and they’ll meet all their goals.
I think there’s scope at both ends for people who are getting close to retirement, but very clearly for the young market coming through who will actually want professional services to support them.
Fraser Jack: 29:15 Fantastic. Tell me, if you could do it again, if you could go back in time and have a do over, what tips would you give to yourself? What would you go back in time and make some changes?
Marissa Broome: 29:23 I don’t think I’d change anything. I’ve been so lucky and it’s one of the reasons I stood for the FPA board. I absolutely love being a financial planner, I love my profession. I am so proud. I tell people, people ask me what I do and I say I’m a certified financial planner. I don’t think anything would change. If I could have more hours in the day and I could work a bit harder, maybe that would have been the only thing I would have change. There weren’t enough hours to do all the things I wanted to do.
I’m a big believer that you can do anything you want in life. You can have it all, you maybe can’t have it all at once, but if there were 30 hours in a day, maybe I could have had it all at once.
Fraser Jack: 29:58 Fantastic. Thank you Marissa for coming on the show. Really appreciate you coming and sharing what some of the stuff that’s been going on behind the scenes, and some of the hard work that’s been going on behind the scenes, only to have it moved outside of our reach, but thank you so much for coming on the show and sharing some stuff about your personal stuff as well. I really appreciate it.
Marissa Broome: 30:14 Not a problem, Fraser. It’s been delightful, thanks.
Fraser Jack: 30:16 If you haven’t already, I’d love you to subscribe to the podcast on your podcast platform of choice. To continue the conversation, head over to our social media channels. We’ll catch you next time.
Disclaimer: This document is a transcription obtained through a third party. There is no claim to accuracy on the content provided in this document, and divergence from the audio file are to be expected. As a transcription, this is not a legal document in itself, and should not be considered binding to advice intelligence, but merely a convenience for reference.