Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.

Get Our Activist Investing Case Study!

Get the entire 10-part series on our in-depth study on activist investing in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or print it out to read anywhere! Sign up below!

LinkedIn has become an effective site for communicating between advisors, prospects and centers of influence. My recent experience illustrated how advisors should respond to inquiries from a LinkedIn contact.

I recently posted this inquiry on LinkedIn:

A reader with $5M in assets made this inquiry. He has a financial planner, a C.P.A and a trusts and estates lawyer. He wants to invest all his assets in a Dimensional core fund. He doesn't want any other services. He asks: "What's a reasonable fee to pay solely for access to Dimensional funds?" What would you tell him and what firm, if any, would you recommend to him?

I was stunned at the amount of interest this post generated. When I last checked, it had more than 5,470 views. My typical post has fewer than 100.

I subsequently clarified my requirements to indicate the advisor and the planner would work jointly to determine asset allocation, rebalancing, fund selection and tax-efficient investing and withdrawals.

Let’s review some of the more negative responses. There are valuable lessons to be learned from them.

The negative responses

I received comments from a small number of advisors (fewer than 30). A few of them were negative, questioning the process implemented by the prospect and noting how difficult it would be for the advisor to be effective in the scenario noted.

These comments were not unreasonable, given the limited information provided in my initial post. Advisors have every right to do business with whomever they wish, on whatever terms suit them.

Yet, I still think there are lessons to be learned here.

By Dan Solin, read the full article here.

Tags: