New funding, new target for ‘compare the pair’
The industry funds ‘compare the pair’ advertising campaign which once aimed squarely at opposing commissions paid to financial advisers is now being aimed at superannuation fund stapling, particularly with respect to underperforming retail master trusts.
Industry Super Australia (ISA) has declared it is aiming a new ‘compare the pair’ advertising campaign directly at under-25s who may find themselves stapled to superannuation funds which are regarded as underperforming and who need to find a better performing fund.
And the message from Industry Super Australia is that most profit to member funds are better performers.
The campaign is being funded collectively by 11 industry superannuation funds which are members of ISA.
According to ISA, “recent changes in the law are likely to see young workers stapled to their first fund for a longer time.
“’Compare the Pair’ will now also aim to help this age group find a high performing super fund.,” ISA claimed, citing SuperRatings figures revealing that over 20 years the typical worker could be $95,391 better off in the average Industry Super Fund than the average retail super fund, younger workers have the most to gain by being in a fund that is run only to benefit them.
Commenting on the new campaign, ISA marketing director, Alana Burnside said recent super reforms meant that Australians could be stuck with the same fund unless they actively switched out.
“’Compare the Pair’ prompts workers to think about their super and check if it is delivering them good investment returns and those who made the switch 20 years ago are almost $100,000 better off,” she said.
Comparing a “Balanced Fund” with 95% growth assets, of which they self value 25%, vs a fund with 70% growth assets all of which are valued by the market? Yes, compare the pear with the apple!
It doesn’t matter, ASIC has given the union funds the ability to make any claim they want without the fear of any consequences. Time and time again the union funds make blatantly misleading claims, or even down right lies, and ASIC does nothing. Prove me wrong.
Correct, a corrupt ASIC are happy to exterminate IFA’s who dare have a comma out of place on an all but defunct FSG, but union funds can manipulate both asset allocation and labelling as well as outright fraud & deceit in its returns. Compare the pair indeed.
Where is the ACCC or ASIC in this? If I, as an adviser, promote an investment purely on performance then I’d be done for. Yet 11 Super funds can pay millions to do this on national television and somehow this is not just ok, but also meets the sole purpose test for super. For the record I use industry funds, but completely disagree with this so-called marketing.
Can anyone confirm what Industry Super Funds in total receive from HIDDEN COMMISSIONS charged to every member to pay for Intra Fund Sales advice ?
Compare the pair, Industry Super the biggest Commission’s ever charged. And most of these HIDDEN COMMISSIONS are for No Service.
All I’d say is that if you’re going to tout your brand based on performance, then why not open your books to see what you’ve got and how you’ve valued it?
Seems only fair right?