Post by cyclops on Aug 16, 2012 16:27:24 GMT 10
An Open Letter to The Australian Financial Review, Fairfax,
& the Australian Securities & Investments Commission
In the weekend edition of The Australian Financial Review [published by Fairfax] there was a story on page 29 that featured FX trading.
Is this an article or an advertorial?
If the Australian Financial Review has received a financial benefit for providing that coverage, I believe they should have to disclose the fact with the article.
Of course, as you will know, financial advisers are now required to fully disclose referral or endorsement benefits, commissions, kick backs and commercial arrangements ... at the point of referral, NOT in fine print below.
So I ask, why shouldn't the Australian Financial Review also be required to disclose commercial arrangements that might be the basis of an article like the one I refer to?
After all, is this not a subliminal endorsement? I would argue it is.
With genuine concern I took the time to write a detailed email to the editor of The Australian Financial Review, Roger Johnstone.
For the record, I have NOT emailed Roger, ever. I did not know him at all.
I was surprised to say the least when, 24 hours later, I had not received any reply whatsoever.
I emailed again asking if he received my email. His reply ... "yes paul got it"
No punctuation. Nothing ... just the 4 words.
It seems clear he had no intention of replying at all. Go figure.
Could this be because he has been caught with his pants down?
Was the article about the FX spruikers quid pro quo for advertising dollars?
I believe these are questions that need to be asked, because it seems Mr Johnstone might have something to hide.
Does the Australian Financial Review have something to hide?
My request was simply that they balance the argument with my views, and the views of people like Dr Mohamed El-Erian, one of the world's most respected and sophisticated investors. See below.
But it seems they might not want to upset their advertisers, if that is what they are, even if they do represent a massive financial risk to the well being of Australians.
Are these advertising dollars more important than the well being of The Australian Financial Review's readership?
Should ASIC turn its attention to this matter, especially as it is now a trend for financial services providers [newsletters] to hide behind the facade of media?
The media is stacked with vested interests, and like the financial services sector, it seems anything goes.
The Australian public at least deserves to know what is advertorial, and what is not.
Australian investors and traders deserve better ... much better.
The Australian Financial Review might not have to answer me, but they do have to answer to their readership, and if ASIC is on the ball, they should start answering some bigger questions as well. After all, Fairfax and News Limited both own newsletters.
How can it be right that they sell financial services, but not be licensed and regulated by the Australians Securities & Investments Commission?
Why are they an exception to the rules of disclosure intended to keep the industry honest?
Regards
Paul Nojin
Here is the copy if my email to Roger Johnstone, editor of The Australian Financial Review ...
Hi Roger
It was disappointing to see the page 29 article on Saturday.
FX brokers and their spruikers are a major hazard to the financial well being of people.
Rest assured, the fact is, of equities, bonds and currencies, currencies are by far the most difficult to master.
Dr Mohamed El-Erian, one of the world's most sophisticated investors, is on record saying the exact same thing.
My colleague at Key Levels, Declan McEvoy, a former Bankers Trust and Macquarie Bank trader and one of Australia's most successful traders of the last 15 years also holds the strong view that FX is the most difficult market to master.
FX spruikers cannot be trusted in any way, shape or form. The mere fact they promote currency trading is proof of that. The fact they also promote day trading is the clincher.
Hopefully you will see fit to set this right, and publish my views on the matter, with the same degree of prominence that they enjoyed.
I have much more to say if you are interested.
It's well overdue that people were made aware of what is going on concerning these FX promoters, and the promoters of day trading and technical analysis. The risk to the accounts of everyday Australians is massive.
This disease has found it's way into the Australian market, and has now embedded it's spruikers into the mainstream business media. It's a massive concern. The next MF Global is surely just around the corner, and it's our fellow Australian's who will pay the price ... if we don't warn them in time.
Regards
Paul Nojin
& the Australian Securities & Investments Commission
In the weekend edition of The Australian Financial Review [published by Fairfax] there was a story on page 29 that featured FX trading.
Is this an article or an advertorial?
If the Australian Financial Review has received a financial benefit for providing that coverage, I believe they should have to disclose the fact with the article.
Of course, as you will know, financial advisers are now required to fully disclose referral or endorsement benefits, commissions, kick backs and commercial arrangements ... at the point of referral, NOT in fine print below.
So I ask, why shouldn't the Australian Financial Review also be required to disclose commercial arrangements that might be the basis of an article like the one I refer to?
After all, is this not a subliminal endorsement? I would argue it is.
With genuine concern I took the time to write a detailed email to the editor of The Australian Financial Review, Roger Johnstone.
For the record, I have NOT emailed Roger, ever. I did not know him at all.
I was surprised to say the least when, 24 hours later, I had not received any reply whatsoever.
I emailed again asking if he received my email. His reply ... "yes paul got it"
No punctuation. Nothing ... just the 4 words.
It seems clear he had no intention of replying at all. Go figure.
Could this be because he has been caught with his pants down?
Was the article about the FX spruikers quid pro quo for advertising dollars?
I believe these are questions that need to be asked, because it seems Mr Johnstone might have something to hide.
Does the Australian Financial Review have something to hide?
My request was simply that they balance the argument with my views, and the views of people like Dr Mohamed El-Erian, one of the world's most respected and sophisticated investors. See below.
But it seems they might not want to upset their advertisers, if that is what they are, even if they do represent a massive financial risk to the well being of Australians.
Are these advertising dollars more important than the well being of The Australian Financial Review's readership?
Should ASIC turn its attention to this matter, especially as it is now a trend for financial services providers [newsletters] to hide behind the facade of media?
The media is stacked with vested interests, and like the financial services sector, it seems anything goes.
The Australian public at least deserves to know what is advertorial, and what is not.
Australian investors and traders deserve better ... much better.
The Australian Financial Review might not have to answer me, but they do have to answer to their readership, and if ASIC is on the ball, they should start answering some bigger questions as well. After all, Fairfax and News Limited both own newsletters.
How can it be right that they sell financial services, but not be licensed and regulated by the Australians Securities & Investments Commission?
Why are they an exception to the rules of disclosure intended to keep the industry honest?
Regards
Paul Nojin
Here is the copy if my email to Roger Johnstone, editor of The Australian Financial Review ...
Hi Roger
It was disappointing to see the page 29 article on Saturday.
FX brokers and their spruikers are a major hazard to the financial well being of people.
Rest assured, the fact is, of equities, bonds and currencies, currencies are by far the most difficult to master.
Dr Mohamed El-Erian, one of the world's most sophisticated investors, is on record saying the exact same thing.
My colleague at Key Levels, Declan McEvoy, a former Bankers Trust and Macquarie Bank trader and one of Australia's most successful traders of the last 15 years also holds the strong view that FX is the most difficult market to master.
FX spruikers cannot be trusted in any way, shape or form. The mere fact they promote currency trading is proof of that. The fact they also promote day trading is the clincher.
Hopefully you will see fit to set this right, and publish my views on the matter, with the same degree of prominence that they enjoyed.
I have much more to say if you are interested.
It's well overdue that people were made aware of what is going on concerning these FX promoters, and the promoters of day trading and technical analysis. The risk to the accounts of everyday Australians is massive.
This disease has found it's way into the Australian market, and has now embedded it's spruikers into the mainstream business media. It's a massive concern. The next MF Global is surely just around the corner, and it's our fellow Australian's who will pay the price ... if we don't warn them in time.
Regards
Paul Nojin