This morning two regular twitterers from the financial adviser community discussed the merits - or otherwise - of basing an advisory business on the St James's Place model.
Threesixty managing director Phil Young posed the following question on Twitter this morning:
"With platform tax wrappers, a centralised investment process, won't we all just be SJP without the cheese in future? Discuss."
@IFABlogger, better known as Richard Bishop from Premier Practice Limited didn't think this was such a bad thing:
"You mean we should try and be like #1? Knocking SJP is like saying BMW make OK cars!"
"I mean that the traditional reasons for knocking them seem to be less talked about."
"All new model advisers follow the SJP model. IFAs slagged them off really based on the high initial charge. SJP invented the model."
"It seems to be the high charges not the 'independence' issue which is all anyone complains about now, and even that less so."
So is @Philyoung360 right to say new advisory businesses models are aping SJP?
Leave your thoughts below!
Industry Voice: Scottish Widows pension expert Robert Cochran and economist Andrew Scott discuss the future of employment and income, in episode three of Scottish Widows' podcast series.
What made financial headlines over the weekend?
Follows McVey's resignation
Schroders and Aviva Investors
LightTower Partners, Seneca Partners and Unicorn AM