HAC30,Another diatribe against the whole concept of Intiger (and...

HAC30,

Another diatribe against the whole concept of Intiger (and thence companies similar to Intiger). I think you’re overthinking/overtalking it? The very sentence “Intiger can reduce backoffice costs by 60% and perform 95% of backoffice tasks” is what I’m interested in. And ultimately, what the FP industry will be interested in. If this is true then FP industries will inevitably shift to AI solutions, surely?

Whilst I did use the word ‘obsolete’ related to paraplanners, I probably meant ‘relatively obsolete’. I would estimate a firm employing 4 paraplanners would be able to cut down to say, one Paraplanner.

I don’t mean to make any slurs on the capabilities or job descriptions of paraplanners. And I’d agree human paraplanners offer options that a robot cannot. You’re a paraplanner yourself, aren’t you HAC?

I remember PC’s sentences when it came to the time of change;

”I made structural changes at my workplace”
”It doesn’t mean job losses necessarily, more a restructuring for the better”
”Ultimately Intiger will cause job losses but that’s good for Intiger isn’t it” (podcast)

Remember PC mused that Intiger was the reason his Subiaco AMP FP practice won best FP practice in the country.

Due to the approach of Intiger putting 99% efforts into CBA, we still haven’t an idea how effective uptake could be with a roots up organic growth approach. I’m intrigued.

I’m perfectly happy to call a dead duck a dead duck, but there are more chapters to this story for sure. I can see why there is an overwhelming negative sentiment towards Intiger on this forum (and trust me, my losses are huge), but I want to see how Intiger fares with a different approach.

WB