skip to main |
skip to sidebar
SPECIALITY:
Financial retirement solutions focussed on lifetime retirement capital and income preservation through comprehensive personal, business, estate and succession planning within the life insurance distribution sector of the financial services industry. Agency manpower growth specialists in Advanced Life Insurance Applications, Estate Planning and Retirement Solutions
FOCUS:
In order to serve the extraordinary real time access needs of boomers now retiring, we are enhancing the growth, productivity, compliance and retention of high performance financial services professional practitioners through a contemporary community web 2.0 based demand/distribution paradigm.
A REAL TIME MARKETING/DISTRIBUTION PARADIGM:
We have adapted the distribution paradigm to accelerate real time boomer access to contemporaries collaboratively on an interactive community web 2.0 based platform. Boomers who are actively engaged in their own retirement planning can compare notes and then have access to the best and brightest professional financial practitioners in Canada - professionally designated and qualified through their experience to assist the boomers in arriving at a specific solution to each of their unique retirement lifetime capital and income preservation needs on an open and direct real time basis.
Providing real time digital access to professionally designated and experienced comprehensive financial retirement planning advisors for the 1,000,000 Canadian boomers now retiring and 13,000,000 to follow over the next 18 years is our imperative.
90,000,000 North American boomers are preparing to retire - many in financial distress. The national and personal economic impact of a failure to solve this boomer financial need is second only to the financial distress 47,000,000 Americans face without healthcare.
We are professionally committed to, focussed on and capable of solving this financial breakdown of "The American Dream".
A year ago, having been semi retired for 2 years the imbalance between the 90,000,000 retiring boomers in Canada and the US and the supply (less than 12,000 in Canada) of professionally designated financial planning retirement advisors in both lifetime capital and income preservation and asset growth captured my attention.
Given the seismic financial impact of the 2008 financial meltdown on retirement planning for the boomers and others I decided to develop a solution based upon a real time digitally innovative advisor access alternative to solve the demanding retirement needs of the boomers in a sector whose growth opportunities can benefit from the breadth and depth of my knowledge and experience.
The disciplined foundation for my consulting practice derives from my formal education and corporate responsibilities in structural engineering within the structural steel industry and my corporate and entrepreneurial initiatives in the financial services including my insurance industry manpower development leadership roles.
My financial services industry experience includes innovative distribution marketing leadership, training, education, knowledge, skill, experience and successful execution in new business sales development and agency manpower productivity exponential growth.
Raising the bar through professional practice is my operating discipline.
My objective is to apply my formal education, training, professional discipline and experience through the transferability of my skills in client engagement, solutions analysis, sales growth, collaborative team building and manpower productivity development within a professional practice environment.
North American boomers are preparing to retire - many in financial distress.
They are out of time.
The national and personal economic impact of a failure to solve this boomer financial need is second only to the financial distress 47,000,000 Americans face without healthcare.
We are professionally committed to, focussed on and capable of solving this financial breakdown of "The American Dream". It is our imperative.
Failure is not an option.
For details visit: http://www.beyondrisk.blogspot.com/
Systemic regulation is coming to financial institutions, with the goal of limiting the risks posed to the overall economy by systemically important institutions — those deemed "too big to fail" in the recent financial crisis.
"Our sense is that the first thing we're going to see on this regulatory reform agenda is going to come out of the U.S. Congress," said Timothy Ryan, president and CEO of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the American equivalent of the Investment Industry Association of Canada (IIAC).
Speaking at the IIAC's Annual Conference in Toronto on Thursday, Ryan said Congress is likely to table final legislation to establish "some type of systemic regulator" within the first half of 2010. Just as the crisis started in America, so too will the response.
"The U.S. is the best organized governmental process to move forward in a timely fashion and get something done," he told the audience. "The European Community is aggressive in their promotion of ideas, but very difficult to get a consensus and implement changes."
A systemic regulator would take a holistic approach to oversight in the financial services industry. While typical regulators focus on a single element, such as mutual fund dealers, the systemic regulator would keep an eye on all the working parts of the industry, with a goal of containing any new crisis.
The creation of such a beast will be very popular on the political front, as the public has demanded closer scrutiny on virtually everything: retail lending practices, leverage in the banking sector, capital ratios and even executive compensation.
While it's easy to point to the credit crisis that brought the global financial system to the brink of collapse and demand closer scrutiny, there is a risk that limits set on various ratios could be arbitrary.
"What's acceptable leverage? People in the industry are not even sure," he said. "You will find people in the industry, legislators and regulators talking about leverage ratios they think make sense. If 40 is too high, then maybe half of that is probably better. If there's a cap, we still don't know what is that appropriate range or number."
One of the key challenges that a systemic regulator will need to address is what activities are permissible for systemically important financial institutions.
"Paul Volcker, the former head of the U.S. Fed, will testify that if you're an insurance depository institution in the United States, there are certain things that you just should not be doing; they're too risky," Ryan said. "He is totally opposed to proprietary trading within these big banks, which is an important component of how these big banks make money."
There are many firms in the broker-dealer channel that have commodity business, and hold hard assets, such as pipelines, ships and storage facilities.
"Is that an appropriate role for a systemically important institution? These are all issues that require a very complex model," Ryan said.
Taken to their logical extreme, calls for tighter regulation of SIIs would see them ramp up capital, reduce leverage, lock up their liquidity and bar them from the more lucrative lines of business that they currently participate in.
"We're going to end up with large financial institutions which are really utilities, oh, and by the way, we don't want them to pay dividends," said Ryan. "And then we still view them as the engines of grow for the economy. Something's got to give."
One of the loudest populist calls, especially in Europe, is for government regulation of executive compensation, but Ryan points out that such limits will drive the "best and brightest" away from the industry.
"Our view is that the people who should be making decisions on compensation should be compensation committees and boards that are accountable to shareholders and to regulators."
Systemic regulation is coming to financial institutions, with the goal of limiting the risks posed to the overall economy by systemically important institutions — those deemed "too big to fail" in the recent financial crisis.
"Our sense is that the first thing we're going to see on this regulatory reform agenda is going to come out of the U.S. Congress," said Timothy Ryan, president and CEO of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the American equivalent of the Investment Industry Association of Canada (IIAC).
Speaking at the IIAC's Annual Conference in Toronto on Thursday, Ryan said Congress is likely to table final legislation to establish "some type of systemic regulator" within the first half of 2010. Just as the crisis started in America, so too will the response.
"The U.S. is the best organized governmental process to move forward in a timely fashion and get something done," he told the audience. "The European Community is aggressive in their promotion of ideas, but very difficult to get a consensus and implement changes."
A systemic regulator would take a holistic approach to oversight in the financial services industry. While typical regulators focus on a single element, such as mutual fund dealers, the systemic regulator would keep an eye on all the working parts of the industry, with a goal of containing any new crisis.
The creation of such a beast will be very popular on the political front, as the public has demanded closer scrutiny on virtually everything: retail lending practices, leverage in the banking sector, capital ratios and even executive compensation.
While it's easy to point to the credit crisis that brought the global financial system to the brink of collapse and demand closer scrutiny, there is a risk that limits set on various ratios could be arbitrary.
"What's acceptable leverage? People in the industry are not even sure," he said. "You will find people in the industry, legislators and regulators talking about leverage ratios they think make sense. If 40 is too high, then maybe half of that is probably better. If there's a cap, we still don't know what is that appropriate range or number."br>
One of the key challenges that a systemic regulator will need to address is what activities are permissible for systemically important financial institutions.
"Paul Volcker, the former head of the U.S. Fed, will testify that if you're an insurance depository institution in the United States, there are certain things that you just should not be doing; they're too risky," Ryan said. "He is totally opposed to proprietary trading within these big banks, which is an important component of how these big banks make money."
There are many firms in the broker-dealer channel that have commodity business, and hold hard assets, such as pipelines, ships and storage facilities.
"Is that an appropriate role for a systemically important institution? These are all issues that require a very complex model," Ryan said.
Taken to their logical extreme, calls for tighter regulation of SIIs would see them ramp up capital, reduce leverage, lock up their liquidity and bar them from the more lucrative lines of business that they currently participate in.
"We're going to end up with large financial institutions which are really utilities, oh, and by the way, we don't want them to pay dividends," said Ryan. "And then we still view them as the engines of grow for the economy. Something's got to give."
One of the loudest populist calls, especially in Europe, is for government regulation of executive compensation, but Ryan points out that such limits will drive the "best and brightest" away from the industry.
"Our view is that the people who should be making decisions on compensation should be compensation committees and boards that are accountable to shareholders and to regulators."
Advisor.caSteven Lamb09/25/2009
Companies across a wide range of industries are about to make networking a commonplace feature of the objects and devices we use every day. Internet connectivity for electronic devices—smart phones, PCs, book readers—is becoming a standard feature. But the next generation of solutions and devices promises to connect almost anything to global networks. Imagine cars that communicate with websites, energy systems that link to sensor networks, refrigerators that talk to microwaves, toys that interact across media devices and even digital pills that transmit data as they navigate the human body. In other words, here comes everything.
Accenture recently conducted 30 in-depth interviews with thought leaders across a broad spectrum of industries that will be major players in this new "network of everything": automotive, entertainment, energy, health care, appliance and toys and games companies. We have termed these organizations "next movers." They follow in the footsteps of the “first movers”—the telephony companies, handset makers and Internet services firms that laid the groundwork for a networking superhighway that already supports billions of devices.
Nearly all of the executives interviewed expressed a strong commitment to networking and anticipate that most of their major products will be networked within the next three to five years. However, respondents also highlighted a number of challenges that must be overcome: a lack of skills, evolving business models and collaborative relationships, and the need for development platforms that make possible the interconnectivity of billions or even trillions of objects.
Networking and business transformation
One of the things that distinguishes the next movers is their awareness that adding networking to a device is more than a "nice to have" feature. Rather, it is a transformational act that goes to the heart of the device’s value proposition. With ordinary consumer products, opportunities for interaction with the buyer occur only if something is wrong with the product, or if the person buys another or similar product in the future.
But a networked device establishes an ongoing relationship between the device maker and the device owner—something known as "persistence." The ability to have persistent relationships fundamentally alters how devices are marketed, priced, supported and used. Persistence creates an ongoing relationship with the consumer, the value of which is capable of surpassing the profitability of the devices and products themselves.
Persistence in nascent form is already a feature of the communications and high-tech marketplace. Microsoft, for example, relies on persistence to maintain its huge installed base of operating systems by downloading patches over the network on a regular basis. Mobile operators have successfully exploited persistence by up-selling data services to handset users—offerings which now account for about 20 percent of the typical carrier's revenues.
The next movers are following a similar path of discovery. One next mover told us: “Hardware is now a commodity. The differentiation is in the data.” We heard a similar sentiment expressed by product developers across a number of traditional industries. For example, an automaker said, “We won’t see much change in mechanical systems and in the chassis and other traditional technologies, but we will see more and more innovation in networked devices that assist the driver.”
The need for collaboration
One obstacle faced by many next movers is that networking is not a core competency, and thus few organizations have the skills in-house to lead the networking revolution. To cope with this capability shortfall, companies are taking collaborative approaches: by working with consultants, outsourcing providers, software companies, Internet companies, chip makers or PC manufacturers, next movers can obtain both technical capabilities and marketing advantage.
For example, one appliance maker that is preparing for the networking of kitchen devices is partnering with a PC manufacturer to develop a Wi-Fi-equipped appliance that links to the home computer and to the Internet.
Or take the recently announced example of a group of television manufacturers planning to introduce a new type of product: TVs that will give consumers the ability to view video websites along with more traditional programming. The sets will be based on Intel circuitry and Yahoo’s widget channel framework: an engine that will allow viewers to interact with and enjoy a rich set of TV widgets—small Internet applications designed, in this case, to complement and enhance the traditional TV experience.
One executive whose company has been involved with this project told us: “This type of partnership is going to drive [the growth of] home networking because it is not just us or Yahoo or Intel, but numerous manufacturers that are building on the same widget platform. It's out there. Anyone can license it. And any manufacturer’s device will work with it.”
The need for interconnectivity
One thing that's compelling about a network of everything is that it presents consumers with the possibility of controlling all their devices simply and easily. Imagine a time when, as your car reaches a certain proximity to your home as you return from a trip, it could alert central controls in your house to turn on the air conditioner, unlock the doors and put your favorite music on the home audio system.
Behind such a vision, however, is a difficult technological feat: a common platform that can facilitate networking across different devices and services. Many of the networked products now coming to market are end-to-end solutions in which a single company manages the entire value chain—like Apple did when it developed the original iPod as a proprietary, end-to-end ecosystem.
Most next movers believe, however, that a proprietary platform is problematic because most companies have neither the resources nor the clout to dominate a market. Executives expect to see the emergence of value chains that allow individual companies to specialize in what they do best and to participate in an ecosystem that allows both developers and consumers to orchestrate functionality across many devices and services.
What kind of company is best positioned to provide that common platform? Network providers and mobile operators are likely candidates, though such companies should pay heed to several concerns expressed by the next movers with whom we spoke.
Many executives view the operators as insufficiently responsive. In the words of a medical device maker: “It might take six months to a year just to get through the negotiations with a large mobile operator to the point where they say ‘yes.’ But then a year or two could go by without anything happening."
To turn things around, operators should first make it clear that they want the business. They must open their networks to next movers, develop more flexible pricing models and develop a set of offerings that accommodate the diversity of devices on the horizon.
The need for new business models
A final challenge concerns the new business and pricing models necessary to profit from the network of everything. Part of what makes the addition of networking capabilities to a device transformational is how persistence facilitates—and often demands—new kinds of models for branding, pricing and distribution.
One-to-many platforms and models are one compelling way to monetize the network of everything. For example, Accenture Mobility Operated Services is a technology platform that permits device makers to reach a global market with a single deployment—a one-stop service that eliminates the need to negotiate certification, technology and business issues with individual telecommunications carriers.
The platform, based on open-source software, features an extensive set of interfaces to enable transactions across multiple organizations. It provides a common point of contact for identity management, billing, analytics, diagnostics and other services that exploit the persistence that comes with networked devices. With direct links to customer and billing systems, this kind of platform facilitates the new business models that next movers are interested in pursuing.
Figuring it out
Next movers are still exploring the ins and outs of the collaboration models, platforms and pricing strategies facilitated by networking. Because embracing the "network of everything" will be essential to achieving high performance in the future, the marketplace is certain to see multiple waves of innovation in the coming years.
Many approaches will coexist, and the market is unlikely to be dominated by a single model or clear winner. As one next mover put it, "You need to come in with a deck of cards instead of just one card. You have to figure out what the customer wants because that is ultimately who you are trying to satisfy."AccentureAndy Zimmerman is the global managing director of the Accenture New Business Group.July 2009
During a time when the U.S. political system is being ripped apart over a bitter healthcare reform battle, there's reluctance among Canadians to address this issue openly. The president of the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association says Canadian healthcare system is headed for a crisis, unless serious reforms are made.
Speaking before the Economic Club of Toronto, Frank Swedlove warned the current Canadian healthcare system is not sustainable.
Swedlove said too many people believe there are just two healthcare options available — a private system like the one in America, or a fully-funded public system. He argued there's a way to preserve the integrity of Canada's universal public coverage, while offloading some expenses to private care providers.
"We're in the midst of an aging population and there are newer and more expensive treatments. If the trend continues, in ten years many provinces will spend 70 cents out of every budget dollar on healthcare, with little remaining for education, infrastructure, and innovation," Swedlove said.
This figure suggests it's virtually impossible to have a world-class healthcare system under the current model.
Successful private partnerships in certain medical services can reduce the funding burden of the government, Swedlove said. There are homegrown examples of private-treatment offerings — sometimes covered by insurance — that don't undermine the public healthcare system in Canada.
"A 2006 Conference board of Canada study, comparing 24 leading OECD countries, ranked Canada 11th in terms of overall health. There are more recent studies that rank us even lower," Swedlove noted. "There are plenty of countries for us to learn from. Home-grown success stories can also be studied and built on. For instance, there is the Shouldice Clinic here in Toronto — a leader in privately delivered hernia surgery — and similarly the Calgary-based Gimbel Eye Centre — the first out-of-hospital institution in Canada to offer small-incision cataract surgery."
In fact, Canada actually has an above-average participation of privately covered healthcare versus the global average.
"The average public healthcare spending by partner nations is 73%. Canada's public spending ranks lower at 70%. The rest comes from private sources, a mixture of private health care providers and directly from your pocket," Swedlove said.
Skyrocketing drug costs account for part of the growing healthcare costs. According to a white paper released by the CLHIA in June, Canada ranks second in total per capita spending on drugs, both prescribed and non-prescribed, out of the 20 leading OECD countries. Total drug spending in Canada reached $26.9 billion in 2007, representing an annual growth rate of 7.2% over 2006. Spending on prescribed drugs grew faster than spending on non-prescribed drugs and reached 84% of total drug costs in 2007.
The cost of drugs is staggering for those who don't have private drug coverage. Even, generic drugs in Canada are much more expensive than they are in other developed nations.
"Healthcare may be a universal benefit of living in Canada, but it isn’t the same reality when it comes to affordable drugs. Consumers continue to face prescription drug costs that can be staggering. Supplementary insurance provides some drug assistance but not all Canadians have such insurance," Swedlove said. "Our paper calls for catastrophic drug coverage for all Canadians, equitable drug pricing across public and private programs, and a competitive generic drug regime."
Incentives for LTC
Currently, Canadian insurers cover about 220,000 Canadians for long-term health care (LTC). And the number of Canadians needing LTC is growing dramatically, according to CLHIA, and the public system will be unable to support LTC claims as the number of elderly Canadians drastically increases over the coming decades.
The CLHIA white paper says many Canadians hold a "mistaken belief" that all of their long-term care needs are met by the government. The CLHIA says the responsibility to pay for such care remains largely with them. With the number of seniors expected to balloon to 9.8 million by 2036, [according to Statistics Canada], there will be a significant cost burden to Canadians fighting for an LTC spot.
According to Swedlove the CLHIA would like to see the government introduce tax incentives through an RSP-equivalent vehicle such as a Medical Spending Account to allow Canadians to fund LTC.
"Governments need to ensure that people living with a chronic illness receive health care services that are integrated across the primary care system and coordinated by family doctors or clinics," he added. "Tax and financial incentives for Canadians would also help them take greater responsibility for the care of aging or ill family members at home through the purchase of private insurance."
(09/22/09)
Filed by Mark Noble, Advisor.ca
REGULATORY BULLETIN
Advocis Releases Commissioned Report “Encouraging Small and Medium Sized Firms to Participate in Pension Plans”
Pension coverage, retirement income adequacy and the need for pension reforms have become urgent public policy issues. Advocis established in 2007 a Pension Task Force whose mandate is to promote a sound pension system, to help ensure plan sustainability from both an employer and employee perspective, and to stimulate higher levels of plan sponsorship.
Advocis strongly believes that a broad focus encompassing all types of retirement savings is required. The problems of defined benefit plans are only a small part of a larger picture. Public policy needs to not only focus on improving the pension regime for the small percentage of Canadian employees who have an existing pension plan but also on facilitating pension plan participation for those Canadian employees who do not currently participate in a pension plan and who need to save for their retirement.
In order to promote thoughtful and informed discussion of the public policy issues around increasing pension plan participation and promoting a sound pension system, earlier this year Advocis commissioned a study by Professors Morley Gunderson and Thomas Wilson. The study examined existing barriers to establishing and maintaining pension plans and incentives to encourage small- and medium-sized employers to participate in pension plans.
The report, which is called “Encouraging Small and Medium Sized Firms to Participate in Pension Plans”, confirms that the number of Canadian employees who are participating in any form of employer sponsored pension plan has been declining, that two-thirds of Canadian employees do not have an employer-sponsored pension plan and approximately two-thirds of Canadians will not have adequate income at retirement.
The report confirms that the most appropriate type of employer sponsored pension plan is a defined contribution pension plan, especially for small and medium sized business enterprises.
Advocis believes that the report provides important information and analysis and makes a valuable contribution to the public policy debate. The report will be used as a basis for future representations to governments as they reform pension plans in Canada.
Bulletin # 029-9/09September, 2009Advocis
We concur with the following client asset investment principle:
"We use investment results and not asset growth as our benchmark for the achievement of wealth.
As a financial services professional practice our client centric focus is balanced long term investment growth vs short term product promotion, marketing and sales.
We believe that the difference between these two views is both fundamental and material.
A sales and marketing led organization spends more time and money gathering assets than investing the money they have already gathered.
An investment led organization focuses the majority of its professional practice efforts on building client wealth."
EdgePoint Investment Group, Inc.
