Comments on: A Disturbing Fidelity Ad

By: Linda

Linda — Tue, 12 May 2009 00:25:29 +0000

I’m glad many of your readers are better informed about these common investments than you are. Isn’t every guarantee only as good as the issuing entity? Upon who else would it rely? Unfortunately a lot of the economic mess we are in is due to the naïveté and idiocy of people who don’t understand things as simple as this.

By: Wm P. Deans Sr

Wm P. Deans Sr — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 05:59:42 +0000

What is even more troublesome is Fidelity is showing all the signs of a ?? solid company that is slowly but very likely about to start spinning off and spliting up. Don’t take my word look at the signs.

Fidelity refuses to disclose if any the sucessor for the company even thought the chairman is getting way up in age. . Fidelity has had a brain drain at the core of the business for well over two or three years. Fidelity took a much bigger hit in mutual fund losses that most mutual funds and now they are promishing almost anything to get your business. I do not think they can guarantee much right now.

By: Jay

Jay — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:20:26 +0000

Great find Mark, and I completely agree. Unfortunately (as someone else pointed out) these types of ads for annuity products are alarmingly common. The practice of using “misleading wording” is supposed to be dealt with swiftly, but apparently it isn’t. I left Prudential Financial for virtually the same reason; I wasn’t willing to misrepresent a product simply to make a sale. It’s not just annuities that are being misrepresented though. I’ve discovered that a huge amount of people (Baby Boomers and older) have old Whole Life life insurance policies which have little or no value. They were sold much like annuities are sold today, and these people were promised a “stream of income” after “x” years. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that it simply can’t happen. The problem is, these poor people had no idea that they couldn’t rely on that phantom income until I called…20 some-odd years later! Sad times.

By: sue

sue — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:16:57 +0000

adding to beenthere’s comment: after scaring people and using the word ‘guarantee’ (with all the fine print caveats), the biggest and scammiest parts are the VERY large commissions paid to those who SELL these annuities.

My advice (which i took 2 years ago when a wells fargo ‘broker’ sold my 87 year old parents a huge annuity with…guess who? AIG! yikes) is, if your elderly parents are sold this junk, BREAK THE TRADE. it’s is legal and FREE because ethically they are not allowed to sell annuities to the elderly. Precisely because of what Mr. Mark has pegged…..that ‘lil ol’ word GUARENTEED…(not)

It does take time to get your elders money back, but if you go up the financial food-chain to the ’superist’ of supervisors … they will honor your request if done politely and truthfully. GOOD LUCK!

By: Bill Hayes

Bill Hayes — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:25:24 +0000

Today Fidelity Investments pulled the product above off of their web site and no longer will offer the product to clients throughout the country. Looks like your blog has some real power.

Now Fidelity needs to address the question of “guidance” to clients. What does that mean actually? It means that the reps there have to make “suitable” recommendations to their customers. The problem is these suitability regulations don’t entail as much disclosure of possible conflicts of interest AND they don’t obligate putting client interest first.

Watch out this is the tip of the iceberg at the firm!

By: Re-Establish the Tyranny of “RISK” « Chaos Out of Order

Re-Establish the Tyranny of “RISK” « Chaos Out of Order — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:38:55 +0000

[...] it looks like our major financial institutions have not yet learned their lessons. As Marc Cuban points out, Fidelity Investments is still marketing Annuities with the claim that returns are [...]

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:51:51 +0000

A mutual fund company placing a misleading ad? Yeah, there’s a surprise! Authenticity won’t matter. Investors will continue to pour trillions into the stuff. Actually, I’m just waiting until the markets get bearish enough that the fund companies will do like the hedge companies and suddenly put in all kinds of kickers to halt redemptions.

By the way, addressing two other poster comments: S&P is hardly reliable for assessing financial strength as we’ve learned over the last few months. As for having some kind of regulator like Canada does for ads, the Canadian one is useless. Actually, mutual fund dealers here get away with far more murder than their American counterparts. The “historical returns” charts of any and all of their funds verges on downright fraud.

By: investorwalk

investorwalk — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:51:57 +0000

A guarantee is as good as the person (or company) who gives it. Fidelity is putting their name behind it. That’s all a guarantee is.

By: vestopia

vestopia — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 05:07:31 +0000

This is disturbing? You know how many times I called and asked to talk to Chuck to no avail?

He is never there!!

By: bill ross

bill ross — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 04:51:32 +0000

Mark,
You have hit on something I have recognized for a long time: some companies can get away with anything…until they can’t.
It should be illegal to say guaranteed in an ad…even if you use an asterisk, regardless of what that asterisk says.

It is impossible. Yes, that means CANNOT HAPPEN! Nothing, NOTHING is 100% safe in any market. On top of that they say it can go up?! HA HA HA!

This is the just like the subprime mess. How many morons have come up to me and bitched that they were always told home prices never decline. There have already been annuities in the UK that have been unable to meet their obligations.