Let’s start afresh - it is about future price which is about current perception of profit, page-52

1. Financial planners over the age of 50 are generally glorified insurance salesperson (the type that sell to and charge dead people). They reminisce about the good old days and due to time in industry were always at the top of any "awards" just for "turning up"= Yes that is my experience of the entire industry. They also got interest free loans as golden handcuffs

2. They LIVE for the BOLR. It's everything to them. I remember before I left them they were talking about an EBITDA model and AMP buying into their book. Laughable.= I heard that they tried it with the AMP Advice chanell but I have not heard anything that great about it. Plus I cannot imagine the brand having a lot of value now.

3. The banking arm was ok although I hardly used them as I had deep relationships in private banking arms of the big 4 (and most of my stuff was commercial as opposed to Resi). =Bank is great  but small. Although profitable the size doesnt add much value to the bottom line

4. They would churn clients routinely on insurances. That's a fact. Something that wouldnt be possible going forward given all that's occured5. Financial planners are ugly sisters of the financial world knowledge/trust wise (from my experience). Sorry to any financial planners out there if I offended. I might have just come across a bad bunch (and I used to think my corporate banking teams had there fair share of "Muppets") = AMP have had a few planners banned for this. I have heard of entire business models based on re-writing insurance. Like you said there are basically too many old blokes over 50 y/o who just drifted into FP after the reforms in the late 80s. They are really just policy peddlers who had to call themselves planners but the business model is the same old same old.