FPA and AFA to hold member consultation on name choice
The Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) and Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) titles are likely to disappear as the two organisations confirm a name change will take place if the planned merger goes ahead.
For the FPA, in particular, chief executive Sarah Abood, said the potential new name had been a key question asked of her by members.
Phil Anderson, chief executive of the AFA, “There will be a new name and this represents the fact we are bringing together two organisations with different value and different histories and creating a new name and that will most effectively be done via a new name.”
Abood said: “The first question I get from many people is ‘what will it be called?’, it is really important to a lot of people. It is really symbolic of who we are. So we need to involve members on consultation of the new name and we will be doing that.”
If the merger was approved by members, the transition phase including a consultation on the name would take place between March-June 2023.
On board make-up, there would be eight directors from the FPA and four directors from the AFA on the new board which was decided based on the relative size of the two organisations. These would be for three-year terms and then they could stand for re-election.
Abood said: “The board is transitional so the number will reduce to a more-normal number after three years. It is to ensure the heritage of both associations is carried forward into the decision making of the merged association.”
The chosen professional designation for members would be the FPA’s Certified Financial Planner designation as there were “substantially more” advisers in Australia with that one and it had international recognition.
AFA qualifications would still be recognised and promoted, however, and they would remain part of the new entity. AFA members who were previously a CFP would potentially be able to re-instate their CFP qualification but it would depend on the individual situation.
Regarding voting to approve the merger, there were around 400-500 advisers who were members of both associations and the two CEOs said these advisers would be entitled to vote via both associations.
They also confirmed they would not pay higher membership fees and, for AFA members, the costs may be lower than before.
AUTHOR
Laura Dew
Recommended for you
A financial advice firm has been penalised $11 million in the Federal Court for providing ‘cookie cutter advice’ to its clients and breaching conflicted remuneration rules.
Insignia Financial has experienced total quarterly net outflows of $1.8 billion as a result of client rebalancing, while its multi-asset flows halved from the prior quarter.
Prime Financial is looking to shed its “sleeping giant” reputation with larger M&A transactions going forward, having agreed to acquire research firm Lincoln Indicators.
An affiliate of Pinnacle Investment Management has expanded its reach with a London office as the fund manager seeks to grow its overseas distribution into the UK and Europe.
As for a name....How about "The combined "A"ssociations that tried to represent the industry but ended up representing Super Funds and large insto's "W"hilst handing out CFP logo's, the odd Golf Day, to gain "A"dvisers, whilst pretending to "R"epresent Planners but didn't, really achieving nothing in the "E"nd because their purpose was and sadly still is, so clouded " .......is that too long? ..... I've tried to shorten it to Aware to fit in with that the majority of members and staff are connected to AwareSuper and will represent AwareSuper.
Product Provider Association?
Will the new society use the CFP designation, or the CFP qualification? They are different things. Some planners were given a CFP designation, without ever completing the CFP qualification. Some planners have completed the CFP qualification, but have chosen not to pay ongoing fees to FPA for the CFP designation.
I fail to see your point?