Data & Research December 16, 2007

Financial Advisers Concerned About Market Conditions

When asked what issues would have the most significant impact on businesses in 2008, advisers are most concerned about market performance/volatility (58%), retiring Boomers (54%), and the real estate bubble and credit crunch (tied at 49%).
Reported by

Further, when asked what they will focus on most heavily in 2007, the majority of advisers (75%) say they will spend most of their time in 2008 discussing retirement with their clients, according to a survey of financial advisers released today by OppenheimerFunds, Inc.

Advisers’ concerns in general for 2008 are: the real estate bubble (76%), credit crunch (73%), and the 2008 Presidential election (70%).

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Advisers surveyed were asked about how thy plan to approach business in 2008. Forty-nine percent of advisers view female investors as the most valuable target for 2008, followed closely by Generation X (43%).

Recession Worries

The majority of financial advisers do not think a recession is likely in 2008; only 1% of advisers believe that a recession is very likely and 26% of advisers indicate that 10% of less of their clients has expressed fears or concerns regarding the possibility of a recession.

“Advisers are optimistic about global markets,’ said economist Brian Levitt, in an Oppenheimer press release. “One of our key themes for 2008 is “global for the long-term’ and we share the view that there are great investment opportunities around the world. It’s good to see that advisers are thinking broadly across a mix of asset classes.’

Asset Classes

In fact, advisers are so optimistic about 2008, 82% of survey respondents say that it is feasible for one particular asset class to achieve double digit returns in 2008 – most probably, according to advisers, are global stocks (cited by 41%) and growth stocks (27%).

IMHO December 15, 2007

IMHO: “Legends″ of the Fall?

I went to see “I Am Legend″ over the weekend.
Reported by
It’s the third cinematic version of the post-apocalyptic story that Richard Matheson wrote in 1954. This weekend’s reviews will (rightfully) be mostly about Will Smith—but Vincent Price was the first to take on the role in 1964 (in “The Last Man on Earth’), as did Charlton Heston in 1971’s “The Omega Man.’ Each film, of course, is different—and I’m not just talking about the generous application of CGI. So different, in fact, that while I had read the book and seen the prior two film interpretations (Matheson influenced the 1964 version, but had nothing to do with “Omega Man’), I was distracted by things not happening the way they were “supposed’ to happen in the story.
The “story’ of this nation’s retirement has been similarly well-chronicled. For the very most part, the stories of late have been of the apocalyptic variety—and with some justification, IMHO. Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published the latest version, titled “Low Defined Contribution Plan Savings May Pose Challenges to Retirement Security, Especially for Many Low-Income Workers.’
Gee, ya think?
I don’t mean to disparage the work of the GAO in this regard. They’re not the first—and they certainly won’t be the last—to attempt to project the consequences of our nation’s current preparations for retirement. Most, including the GAO projections, paint a dire picture indeed. In fact—and this was the headline for most of the coverage of the report—GAO projected that, for workers born in 1990, nearly 37% would reach retirement with no savings at all!
Now, I have a daughter who was born in 1990 (she actually went to see “I Am Legend’ with me), and while she surely is an exceptional child, I have a hard time imagining that 37% of the kids her age will come to retirement with no savings at all. Not that I see it as an impossibility. Let’s face it, we live in an era where about half of working Americans don’t even have the opportunity afforded by a workplace retirement savings program, and where, on average, a quarter of those who do, don’t take advantage of it.
Still, one could at least argue that today’s workers are still “counting’ on Social Security, that some have (and too many presume they will have) the underpinnings of a defined benefit pension, that many espouse the notion of working past the confines of a traditional retirement age as a choice, rather than a necessity. If they’ve been slow to respond to the call, perhaps they’ve been “encouraged,’ perhaps even deluded, by our unwillingness to be straight with them about the need and their growing responsibility.
The Boomers remain a relatively optimistic lot when it comes to retirement, despite a litany of surveys and projections (including those like the GAO report) that suggest many are merely whistling past the proverbial financial graveyard. Time will tell if the urgings of those Cassandra’s are an accurate prediction too long ignored; a fundamental misapplication of averages, standard deviations, and longevity tables—or some of both.
The next generation—for this is the Boomers’ brood, after all—may fare no better, it is true. But they’ll surely do it with less justification—and despite access to a growing array of tools and resources—than their parents.

«