NEW YORK, Dec. 19, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- First and foremost we'd like to thank Reuters for taking the time to recognize our organization and its place in the daily discussion within wealth management. It is an honor to have come to the point where our work is relevant and of significant interest to advisors and the institutions that employ them. AdvisorHUB has tremendous respect for each and every firm within the landscape of traditional financial services, both large and small. With that said, we have even more respect for the individual advisor and the very difficult work that they do on a daily basis. AdvisorHUB has, and always will, exist for you - the advisor. Our ongoing conversations with advisors across the country, from nearly every firm, are the backbone of who we are and what we do. That will not change.
With all of that said, we disagree with both the tone and the specifics in the Reuters article. Let's cover the specifics very quickly. We DO NOT sell advisor information to any wealth management organization. We were approached by multiple firms in March and April of 2014 to share data. Let me say that again: the firms approached us about data and analytics. We had initial meetings with multiple firms and ended the conversations after the first meeting in each case. We were uncomfortable with the direction that those conversations were headed and believed that they were outside of the scope of our advisor centric philosophy and corporate principles. Those conversations ended in July, 2014. They have never been revisited. Until this Reuters piece. (Below we have attached an initial correspondence from one wirehouse asking us to meet and discuss 'possibilities/data.' This information was shared with Reuters.)
"Andrew –
I hope you are well and enjoying the summer.
By way of introduction, I am **** *********, strategic communications with ******* *****.
I was wondering if/when you're next in NY we could grab a cup of coffee or lunch to discuss *******, the wealth management business, financial media, AdvisorHUB data and anything else of interest.
In the meantime, please feel free to contact me if I can be of any assistance. My contact info is below.
Regards, ****"
I am personally disappointed that Reuters chose to print information about my family and personal life. It comes off as cheap and debased, characteristics I would not normally attribute to Reuters. It came to light in our discussions with Reuters that two different firms had hired private investigators to look into AdvisorHUB, its employees and, principally, myself. As you can imagine, this is disappointing and disturbing on many levels. Issues in my personal and working life are well known and a matter of public record, from FINRA filings to divorce, and should have no bearing on an article written about AdvisorHUB and its popularity with financial advisors.
We are also disappointed that Reuters interviewed numerous people that provided positive comments, yet were never mentioned in the article. We feel it was odd that positive and productive comments were ignored, but understand it now given the bias of the published article. We are cognizant of the fact that some large wealth management firms pay Reuters and affiliated companies tens of millions of dollars every year for work station content. While we can't match that, it would have been enlightening to read comments from industry leaders about AdvisorHUB.
We expect to continue to take shots and deal with them as they come. One thing is increasingly clear: our work is disruptive in nature and there are specific firms that DO NOT want their advisors talking to AdvisorHUB, or anyone else for that matter.
Attempts to silence our organization is nothing more than an attempt to silence the advisors employed by the firm. It really isn't surprising, is it? Those that have moved from one firm to another have dealt with the same sort of tactics that are present in the Reuters article: misrepresentations, innuendo, character assassination, etc.
Instead of focusing on the real problems that are causing alarming attrition and historically low advisor satisfaction, certain organizations believe it makes more sense to attack a niche financial media startup and its eight employees. If this modus operandi sounds familiar to you, feel free to fill in the blanks. Another email that we received a couple weeks ago (that I personally responded to) makes it clear what the Reuters article really is:
"I want to get across the firm wishes to discredit you, more clarity as you have given is huge, the comp rolls out today and will not impact managed money as suggested. I think the firm has approached the journal and other publications to try to discredit you but as of yet have failed or publications are disinterested. Firm is painting you as recruiters trying to solicit info for a quick buck."
Finally, we'd like to thank Reuters again for recognizing our work and spending the time that they did on the article. The attention will serve to increase our audience and allow the advisor voice to be heard by more financial services professionals. Our firm will move forward unbowed and confident in our philosophy and execution. We will allow advisors to decide who they trust in this story - leadership at a particular firm with a clear agenda, or a startup seeking to allow advisors to have an honest conversation about their firm and their careers.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Andrew Parish
AdvisorHUB, Inc.
+1 614-824-3173
ajparish@advisorhubinc.com
To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/advisorhub-responds-to-reuters-article-300012631.html
SOURCE AdvisorHUB
