Originally Posted by sonlymewalter

That article is very interesting. The highest fees tend to be associated with banks and insurers who look after funds compared to other fund managed accounts. So Westpac and Commonwealth are two of the wort performing banks. I wonder how much profit they made from shoddy account management? Banks are one of the few institutions who can still perform shite and make loads of money doing nothing

The banks response is that it's a long term investment (you don't say) and a return of 6% is a good one overall. Really I bet if you stuffed the money in a long term safe savings accounts where it's not open to market fluctuations you'd gain just as much and without the threat of losing everything you've ever saved for in your dottage.

These greedy banks have duped again and super funds are one of the many rorts they've managed to get their greedy hands on without measuing their effectiveness. So oftern we trust the banks to look after our hard earned money, especially if we pay a fee for doing so. How about only paying a fee to manage a super fund if they make money?

Aus Super funds are a mess. People who have changed jobs (and subsequently Super funds) are all over the place. Don't be at all surprised if after pumping loads of money into your super fund for years you get Jack shit when you retire

Originally Posted by paulry

I agree, better to secure several other income streams. This book is a good read for that