1 david lamb st. jamess place 8 december 2010. 2 how we see the rdr opportunity benefiting st....
TRANSCRIPT
1
David LambSt. James’s Place
8 December 2010
2
How we see the RDR opportunity benefiting
St. James’s Place
3
Agenda• Introduction to St. James’s Place – a truly
integrated wealth management business • How we see RDR playing out in our space
and in the wider market• St. James’s Place post RDR• Questions?
4
St. James’s Place: overview
• Leading UK Wealth Management Company– Established 1991– UK listed with market cap of c.£1.3bn– Over 200,000 clients and £24.8bn in FUM
• Differentiated business model– Own dedicated distribution - the Partnership– Distinct investment management approach– Manufacturer and distributor
• Well positioned to benefit from long-term market growth– Favourable demographic trends– Increasing tax burden (on individuals)
5
Our Client Proposition• We provide financial advice to mass affluent
/high net worth investors
• How do we differ from others?– Emphasis on long-term relationship-based
approach– Provision of face-to-face advice– Not just a fund platform– Both manufacturer AND distributor of investment
products– Outsource investment management
6
Our products and services
Comprehensive range• of Pension, Investment and Savings ‘wrappers’
Our focus• is on our own products and funds• but we also distribute non-core products of others
Whilst avoiding• capital intensive products• guarantees and options• overly complex, fashionable or high risk
structures
7
St. James’s Place is (or will be)Whole of market in:
• Protection (Term and Whole Life)• Annuities• Mortgage lending• Employee Benefits
Whilst selecting our investment managers from the whole market (not restricted to the UK)
8
The SJP model - Two USPs
• Dedicated distribution– The Partnership
• Investment Management– Products manufactured in-house– Investment management outsourced
9
Dedicated Distribution – the Partnership
• High quality self-employed team of c.1500 advisors– Average experience 17 years– High productivity– 90%+ per annum retention rate
• Previous backgrounds– IFA– Bank– ML, Goldman Sachs
10
The Growth ModelTarget
15 – 20% pa
New BusinessNew BusinessNew BusinessNew Business
CAPACITYCAPACITYNo of PartnersNo of Partners
CAPACITYCAPACITYNo of PartnersNo of Partners
PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITYNew BusinessNew Business
Per PartnerPer Partner
PRODUCTIVITYPRODUCTIVITYNew BusinessNew Business
Per PartnerPer Partner
11
Growing Number of Partners
1506
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Nu
mb
er
of
Part
ners
+5%+8%
+7%
+9%
30 June
+3%
7
12
Growth
25.5%
Jul 03 - Jun 08
18.8%
Jul 04 - Jun 09
22.7%
Jul 05 - Jun 10
17.4
Jul 02 - Jun 07
17.4%15%
20%
Compound APE Growth – rolling five years
13
Funds under management
0369
1215182124
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
-6%+11%
Fu
nd
s
£’b
n
+34%
+20%
+25%
+29%
+18%
18%p.a. compound growth over the last5 years and 17%p.a. over 10 years
-10%
+31%
(30 June)
+5%
14
Benefits of our own distribution
• New business and expenses are more predictable
• Spread of production• Less exposed to market pressures• Greater control over quality of new
business• Ability to build and maintain distribution
led culture• Better retention of business• Ability to build stronger client advocacy
15
Investment Management
16
Our approach to investment management
Appoint theFund Managers
Sets PerformanceObjectives
Aim for Top 25%
Risk Management& Strategy
Decisions:Change Firm?
Change Manager?No Change?
Input / advice fromStamford Associates
'Manages the Managers'
Investment Committee
17
Stamford AssociatesIndependent Investment
Consultancy
• Analyse & IdentifyTalented Managers
• Gather Intelligence
Research FundManager Market
•Behavioural Psychology
Monitor Managersand Portfolios
Recommend:
• Potential changes
• New Managers
Advise InvestmentCommittee
• Number Crunching
Access to Whole Market
Qualitative & Quantitative
Focus on Future Outperformance
• Monitor Activity
• Workplace Analysis
18
The Investment Committee
Sir Mark Weinberg Michael SorkinSarah Bates Vivian Bazalgette
Peter Dunscombe David Lamb Andrew CroftChris RalphAndrew Humphries
19
Evolving our fund range• 2008 launches and managers
– Alternative Asset Fund - BlackRock– High Octane Fund - Oldfield/Thornburg– Cash Unit Trust - State Street
• 2009 launches and managers– Corporate Bond Fund - Invesco Perpetual– Gilt Unit Trust - Wellington– Income Unit Trust - Axa Framlington– New managers - Burgundy/Liberty Square/JO Hambro
• 2010 launches and managers– Global Emerging Markets - First State– International Corporate Bond - Babson Capital– UK Absolute Return - BlackRock– UK & International Income - Artemis– Global Managed Fund - Artisan– Global Unit Trust Fund - Artisan– UK Equity Income UT - RWC
20
Our fund managers
21
Relative investment performanceFunds under management – rolling 5
years
19%11% 9%
4%9% 6%
13%6%
16%
9%
9%7%
6%5% 11%
10%
12%
9%
15%
12%16%
10%8%
16%
16%17%
13%
57%67% 69%
80% 78%67%
61% 65% 62%
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
1st Quartile
2nd Quartile
3rd Quartile
4th Quartile
22
Benefits of investment management approach
• No in-house managers so no conflict of interest
• Benefit from Investment Committee experience & expertise
• Ability to appoint the best fund managers with wholesale purchasing power
• Continuous monitoring plus quarterly reviews• Easy to change manager – reduced churn• Free switching for clients• Significantly improved retention of funds
23
How do we see RDR playing out in our space and in the wider market?
24
Retail Distribution Review
• Professional standards
• Status disclosure
• Adviser remuneration
25
RDR – What do the FSA want to achieve?
• Raise the standards of all advisers• Clear disclosure of adviser status• Removal of product and provider bias
(influencing the adviser)• Information on cost of advice to explain
advice isn’t free and to show how the cost of advice relates to the cost of the product
• Any ongoing adviser charges to be supported with ongoing service
26
Status Disclosure
• Broader market test for Independence
• If not Independent, then Restricted
27
What is Independent?• Whole of market
• All retail investments, including Investment Trusts, passive funds (ETFs)
• National Savings
• Structured Products
• etc
28
Adviser Charging
• Remove provider bias – prevent product providers from paying commission
• Remove product bias – required tied offices to remove product bias
29
Adviser Charging• Adviser remuneration agreed between IFA
and client• Can take many different forms • Must be clear• Cannot be influenced by product providers• Can by paid by cheque• Or ‘bundled’ with product charges, but no
factoring
30
Life after RDR - Distribution• Fewer advisers, but better qualified• Continued demand for advice (for those
who can pay)• Client/Adviser relationship key• Fewer Independent Advisers, some
become Restricted Advisers
… access to distribution will be important
31
Small firms with less than five sales staff dominates the UK IFA market
11%0%
1%
2%
11%
75%
Source: Datamonitor, Matrix-data
32
Turnover of IFA Firms (2009)Turnover Firms %
£1m to £50k 247 2%
£50k - £100k 3,342 32%
£100k - £500k
4,714 45%
£500k - £1m 584 6%
£1m - £5m 310 3%
>£5m 77 1%
Unknown 1,097 11%
10,371 100%Source: Data Monitor
33
Life after RDR – Asset Managers
• Greater competition for distribution
• Brand important
• Price will matter– But margins intact? Price Pressure?– Rebates may disappear?
• Further consolidation?
34
Life after RDR – Insurers
• Greater competition for distribution • Can no longer buy business• Brand important• Factory Gate Pricing
– margins intact (?) but much more visible?
• More consolidation in the industry• Product commoditisation
35
Life after RDR - Platforms• Major route to market• Inevitable consolidation among Platform
providers• Transparency and unbundling will impact
margins – today fund charges can vary by 80% between platforms (Citywire 26 April 2010)
• Restrictions likely on some of the current payments (unbundling)
36
Life after RDR - Clients
• Better quality advisers (?) – but fewer advisers
• Less transparency on total costs• Cost of advice may increase• Cost of product may reduce• Impact of tax on advice costs (VAT,
Pensions Relief)
37
What about SJP?Pre RDR Post RDR
No Provider BiasNo Product BiasTied AdviceGuaranteed AdviceTrusted and ProfessionalHighly CapitalisedControl of DistributionCompetitive ChargesInvestment ApproachAdviser Remuneration
No Provider BiasNo Product BiasRestricted AdviceGuaranteed AdviceTrusted and ProfessionalHighly CapitalisedControl of DistributionCompetitive ChargesInvestment ApproachAdviser Charging
38
“… but opportunities to capitalise on market disruption – especially vertically integrated companies and companies with the right types of tied model.”
Towers Watson. April 2010