Brightscope to launch Yelp-like reviews, putting advisors under the consumer microscope

Is it just me? Or, do the Wells Fargo and Ameriprise television commercials skirt the testimonial issues for RIA’s? The Wells Fargo commercial clearly talks about financial planning and spells it out in their ad. The person depicted in the commercial is giving a testimonial on how Wells Fargo helped them all of their life. In my compliance mind, the fact that it is a fictitional bank customer makes little difference. The bottom line is that Wells Fargo is also a RIA firm who is using a testimonial in their ad.

Ameriprise has recently begun running commercials with Tommy Lee Jones. Again, I know he is an actor, but he is touting the benefits of Ameriprise who is also an RIA firm. This Ameriprise commercial clearly talks about financial planning and uses Mr. Jones as its testimonial.

Us peons down here in the real RIA world cannot skirt the rules like these big behemoth companies with deep pockets. If Brightscope wants to give us peons a little leg up, then so be it.

I thought the rules were if you hold yourself out as doing financial planning, then you are subject to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. If so, then in my opinion, both Wells Fargo and Ameriprise are breaking the rules for testimonials.

This will be an interesting experiment. We seem to know from research:

- Negative and hostile-aggressive commentators dominate all social and digital media

- Our minds over-weigh negative information

- Negative reviews can build a business as much as positive

We are looking forward to this. Unfortunately, as with so much Mr. Alfred does, advisors will likely be harmed and perhaps seriously. Imagine the lawsuits! Plaintiff attorneys will be scouring these complaints to find new clients.

Advisors will have no recourse to any accusations, of course. But even responding to a false accusation is a loss for any advisors. It is a lose lose for advisors. So we can expect the most hostile-aggressive and unreasonable clients who blame everyone else for their mistakes to dominate this service.

Also, like Yelp has been found guilty of, the unethical will game the system. Yelp, promised good reviews to clients that signed up and bad ones to client’s that don’t. It’s an opportunity for a protection racquet.

Glad none of our clients will be effected, yet.

From a technical marketing case study POV, we look forward to seeing how this “train wreck” will play out.

When do you think regulators will change their rules on “testimonials”?

Current client feedback is essential in today’s decision making process, proven in client referrals usually being the number one source for new business (by far).

Let the power of the internet help advisors and clients!

Mike Byrnes, President
Byrnes Consulting, LLC
http://byrnesconsulting.com/
http://twitter.com/ByrnesConsultin

You must allow all reviews, negative and positive. Those companies looking to stay in business must be monitoring for all reviews and respond publicly. Social media has forever opened the medium for businesses to be open with consumers, with a two way authentic communication.

You could create reviews on articles without an RIA knowing. How will the SEC treat this? I’m interested to know the history, or the root of today’s testimonial rules. Anybody know?

Neither companies, nor advisors can respond to anything a client posts. It’s called confidentiality. There will be no discussion about any client, period. There cannot and will not be any specific two way communication using Social Media. Competitors can post negative comments about other advisors. Same as disgruntled clients. Who will regulate that?

This could be as bad as company employees posting bogus reviews on Amazon.com. Happens all of the time, except we’re not talking about TVs.

This is reckless and unethical. Referrals come from positive recommendations, not negative. Even when a referral calls my office, I cannot discuss any details about the 'referring’ client. The 'power of the Internet’ will help investors, but not this way.

This is one more attempt to generate page views. i can’t imagine how they are going to make money. Tick, tock…tick, tock….

Then what about libel? Can an advisor risk their business by not suing for libel? Is BScope then culpable as well?

The idea of taking consumer web tactics and applying to a heavily regulated business is remarkably unintelligent and typical for BScope.

If a positive review is posted does it need to be investigated by the SEC?

The BScope brothers are quite clever and misleading — a strategy that usually works, for awhile.

- So they tout themselves are the best friend of the advisor and they do this aggressively with
the media — who buys it hook, line and fishing pole.

- But everything they do attacks advisor’s businesses and integrity

- In fact, what they do is always poorly conceived, mismanaged and threatenting to advisors

- Then they demand money from advisors to fix BScope’s own mistakes and bad data that threaten an advisor’s image and business.

They package all this in the warm fuzzy package of “transparency” and “helping”. Even the NYT bought this silly story.

Clever, deeply dishonest, but clever.

Harvard BUsiness Review of Yelp — does this model apply to advisors? Probably not. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6833.html

Is this service going to be like the other Brightscope services, where if you pay them $100 or more, you get to choose what is said about you? I am extremely skeptical to say the least.

Personally, I had a bad experience with an advisor who was more interested in pushing me into risky investments rather than helping me manage my finances. I would welcome a venue where clients could provide honest feedback on their advisor. Yelp is great if you want to eat, but this is people’s life savings we’re talking about here, not a dinner date. That makes it ever more important to know what you’re getting into with an advisor before signing on the dotted line.

What would be the most accurate way to do this? Just the straightforward matter of accuracy is very complex in social media — and life.

Unfortunately, there is no way to ensure 'honest’ feedback. Even worse, a client’s perspective may be completely inaccurate. Can you imagine an arbitration meeting where the client/investor says, 'If you don’t refund my money, I’ll post what happened on Brightscope.” Do you really think the disgruntled client is going to post honest feedback?

I’ve read a few complaint letters in my time, and they aren’t exactly accurate. Anyone in our business would know that. This whole idea won’t work in the long run, but may hurt some people in the short term.

Over in the retirement markets, that’s what we/ve experienced with BScope. Bad data, misleading claims, irresponsible business practices all around.

This is wrong:

- 2 young and inexperienced brothers

- With a U5 event already on their records from one of their 1st jobs in the industry

- That required a significant cash payment from each of them

- For deceiving a retirement client

- Who also have a bad reputation in the retirement industry for bad data, bad business practices and misrepresentation — all validated by in-depth discussions and fact-checking.

- Who would likely never be hired again in the financial services industry, because of the U5 event

- Have set themselves up as the arbiters of the personal, professional and career reputation

- For every financial advisors in the country

It is astounding that the media is not investigating this in-depth. Since the BScope bros hold the careers of every advisor in the country hostage on their site, shouldn’t there be some immediate in-depth forensic investigation of who these people are and their business practices – at a minimum? Beyond accepting PR and what they about themselves.

Where is the data to back up their claims? Have they even thought about safety measures to protect advisors – and investors? Why aren’t serious professional questions being asked?
Time for some simple fact-checking.

The issue at hand is to make sure that the questions

The issue at hand is to make sure the rating/review questions are service based and not market performance based which we all know will fluctuate and continually sway an investor.

Financialjoe determined there had to be something the great advisors were doing to stand out from the others. What was revealed through the survey is that it had nothing to do with market performance; which comes and goes – but everything to do with service and relationship; which should always be there.

Furthermore- we do not charge advisors to create their profile, upload their pictures, link their personal website, blog, facebook, twitter, or linked in accounts. Advisors control their information and may change it at any time; they own it.

We do offer additional services and are looking for advisors during our beta launch to participate, and in return receive a free one year “Joe-Pro” subscription for free. See our blog for further details. http://financialjoe.tumblr.com/

Kind Regards to all,

Shawn Tierney, Founder/CEO
financialJoe
www.financialjoe.com

We do not share a sanguine view of social media usage for professional business matters — especially in highly regulated industries — especially where an advisor’s career and reputation can be permanently ruined with false claims and accusations.

Remember, the internet is forever. You cannot ever take back a false claim, nor remove it from Google — for the rest of your life. Likely no commercial entity can afford to fund fact-finding and moderation on these matters. This is why it is now provided, pretty efficiently, as a government utility.

Equating restaurant and consumer goods reviews with professionals and licensed professional services is a deeply flawed perception and claim — but likely profitable, short term.

Anyone who was/is registered with a S65 are being picked up in their database even though they may never have worked as a financial advisor. No screening at all and rank and file brokers names being crawled all over Google. How does FTC feel about privacy issues…because you have a securities license, you’re fair game? Any other site removes your info if requested. This company profits from government data… hopefully not for long.

Whether BScope or some other company does this, it is the nature of digital communications to dominate now and mistakes to occur. Bad data hurts everyone. This is a good matter for the new Consumer Protection Agency. Some attys could build a good career on handling this and advising the government, companies, etc.

<a href="http://www.jasminfreecam.com/10726/wholesale-louis-vuitton-jewelry-accessories-making-lesson/" rel="nofollow">wholesale louis vuitton jewelry accessories making lesson</a>