donroth:
I am glad that FP didn't continue to "push" you toward his/her fund. A number do, and thats wrong (obviously). It seems like it worked out for both of you...and as long as you are happy, thats all that counts!
Anyways, you kind of summed up my whole argument (whether you realize it or not :) )
Each person needs to take it upon themselves to do the "research" whether they ultimately go with a FP, the advice of a journalist, or other (or even all of the above).
What I am saying is that too many people assume there is NO conflict of interest when a magazine recommends an investment! And that it is completely unbias!
The reasons are simple: magazines are not going to speak negatively about an investment that takes out of full page ad...or that magazine will probably speak highly of that investment.
I say, everyone just needs to understand this bias & potential conflict of interest with the magazines, and do their OWN independent research! Thats the right way.
Whereas many people see "it" in a magazine and immediately assume it is the way to go because its "written" BIG MISTAKE!
Also, as far as the magazines point of view goes, they are in direct or indirect competition with the FPing community because they feel that if one follows the advice of a FP, "their" service is not needed, or diminished. True or not, thats their perspective. (its common sense).
I know "da would love me to say FPs are bias, but I just can't give 'da the satisfaction, Its too much fun :) ...
But, I will say that FPs being biased "can be" for those same reasons above...something I NEVER debated or disputed! (If its not disputed, why discuss...is my point!
Now, what's so hard to understand about that?...
[This message has been edited by Mark A (edited August 24, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Mark A (edited August 24, 2001).]