Posts Tagged Rafi Mohammed

Who’s Charging What for Trust Services? Part 3

Our new trust industry survey for the third quarter of 2010 reveals who’s charging what for directed trusts and for investment management. We found providers charge about the same price for similar services. Our report offers guidance on what to look for to gain the best value for your client.

To offer us clues which trust company provides the best value proposition, we went to Rafi Mohammed, author of The Art of Pricing and The 1% Windfall, for insight as to what differentiates these similarly priced vendors.

When reviewing our research, one would think that advisors pick pricing as the only factor in deciding which trust firm offers the best deal for their clients.

Who’s Charging What for Directed Trust Services

Trust Company

State

Trust account minimum

Minimum annual fee

First $1 million

Next $1 million

“

DE

$500,000

$3,500

0.50%

0.40%

“

TX

$1,500

$1,500

1.10%

0.75%

“

DE

None

$6,000

0.60%

0.60%

“

DE

None

$4,000

$5k fee to $1.5M

$7k fee to $5M

Fed

None

$6,000

$1,200 +1.33%

0.75%

KY

$1 million

$10,000

1.00%

1.00%

NH

None

$3,000

0.90%

0.55%

IL & DE

$5 million

$20,000

0.40%

0.40%

NV

None

Varies

0.60%

0.50%

GA

None

$3,000

0.60%

0.35%

“

NM

None

$4,000

0.75%

0.75%

“

NV

None

$1,000

0.50%

0.50%

“

NV

None

$3,000

0.50%

0.45%

“

VT

Varies

N/A

0.50%

0.30%

“

SD

None

$4,000

0.50%

0.50%

“

DE

$1 million

$8,000

0.60%

0.40%

“

NM

$240,000

$2,400

1.00%

0.75%

NOTE: Edward Jones is a subsidiary of The Jones Financial Companies, a federally chartered savings and loan association. Accuracy is not guaranteed. Please consult the institution directly to confirm costs. Most institutions require a $1 million minimum trust account and there are can be additional fees for investment services. The Trust Advisor Blog realizes that this is not a comprehensive list of all firms. To make sure your institution is included (or excluded) in the January 2011 of this survey, please let us know. We will be expanding coverage; please also include any other services offered such as investment management, special purpose trusts, HSAs, etc. Advisors and estate planners may reproduce this survey upon request. To contact us, click here.

Source: Websites and telephone interviews. ©2010 TheTrustAdvisor.com

But, based on our conversations with pricing expert Mohammed, we can find plenty of factors that should go into the decision of which trust company to hire:

  • Critical mass. The amount of assets already under administration may be an important way to determine whether a provider is a right fit for a client. But recently, we have found that independent trust companies have taken a big share of the market from the trust banks that traditionally rule this space. Therefore the marketplace is telling us that the amount of assets under administration is not a key factor.
  • Technology. Although most providers rely on their clearing firms or custody vendors to determine what fancy technology may be available, trust firms that have enhanced trust accounting systems and slick reporting — especially when it comes to servicing advisors — may have a big edge.
  • Overlay systems. Although overlay systems have been sleepers in the advisory community, when mixed into the trust environment they become powerful high-tech incentives to consider when choosing a provider. Our research told us that both Reliance Trust, which relies heavily on GlobalBridge overlay systems, and Alaska Trust, which relies heavily on Concord, may be emerging as winners in this space because of their arrangement with overlay management systems.
  • High touch services. Trust firms that offer a great deal of mothering to an advisor obviously have an advantage. If the firm offers a lawyer with trust experience, there is obviously an edge and a unique benefit to the relationship. Advisors have told us that service is an important part of the selection process. Trust firms that do not offer any support at all and rely on call centers to support advisors and clients will likely not compete well on this front.
  • Price. Finally, the raw cost proposition has traditionally been a key determiner — especially after the financial meltdown — to steer advisor and client to one provider or the next.

More than a commodity play

“Trust administration in itself is really a commodity and is often priced that way,” says Mike Flinn, a Phoenix-based trust consultant with Delaware-chartered Advisory Trust, a long-time directed trust company and a unit of Wilmington Trust since 2008.

Back then, Flinn told an audience at a Pershing Insight Conference that “70% of all brokerage account business involves trusts” and that “after a death, someone has to decide where the assets go. Therefore, the wealthy who leave property behind need trusts.”

“You don’t see a U Haul hitched to the back of a hearse,” he observed.

Directed trust, in which trust companies and investment advisors split the responsibility of administering the trust from the management of the underlying assets — and split the fees — has become a huge way for advisors and trust companies like Advisory Trust to work together.

According to Advisory Trust’s web site, directed trust has become a $1.3 billion business for the company. With about 1,200 accounts, that translates into an average account of a little over $1 million.

“Our direct trust services consistently have the broadest appeal,” says Bryn Mawr Trust president Matt Waschull. Bryn Mawr is a leading directed trust provider, based in Delaware and offering a competitive directed trust service for 60 basis points.

This quarter, we add Edward Jones Trust Company to our list to represent the wirehouse category. Since Edward Jones has about 11,000 reps on the ground, it is clear that the purpose of this trust company is to service its own network.

Advisors should note that relationships with brokerage-affiliated trust firms such as Edward Jones or Raymond James Trust tend to be difficult to move. Naturally, these firms’ allegiances are to their brokerage-tied reps and to making sure accounts stay where they are.

Investment Management Provided by Trust Companies

Trust Company

State

First $1 million

Next $1 million

“

TX

1.10%

0.75%

“

DE

1.00%

1.00%

“

DE

$5k minimum to $1.5M

$7k minimum to $5M

“

Fed

$600 +1.33%

0.75%

KY

1.00%

1.00%

NH

0.90%

0.55%

NV

$2,500 +0.50%

$2,500 +0.50%

NV

$100 +1.02%

$100 +0.80%

VT

1.00%

0.60%

SD

1.25%

1.00%

NOTE: Edward Jones is a subsidiary of The Jones Financial Companies, a federally chartered savings and loan association. Accuracy is not guaranteed. Please consult the institution directly to confirm costs. The Trust Advisor Blog realizes that this is not a comprehensive list of all firms. To make sure your institution is included (or excluded) in the January 2011 of this survey, please let us know. We will be expanding coverage; please also include any other services offered such as investment management, special purpose trusts, HSAs, etc. Advisors and estate planners may reproduce this survey upon request. To contact us, click here.

Source: Websites and telephone interviews. ©2010 TheTrustAdvisor.com

Value is more than basis points

Our survey tells us that advisors are historically reluctant to rely exclusively on price as a factor when recommending a trust company.

According to data collected by Tiburon Strategic Advisors back in 2001, the overwhelming majority of advisors (92%) said they could find a provider willing to charge under 35 basis points for serving as a corporate trustee. But the trust companies they actually went with tended to charge 40 to 50 basis points.

Almost a decade later, that 35 basis-point level would now be viewed as corporate suicide. While it’s possible to find a lower-cost relationship, the level of service would be so poor that a client may be sold down the river if and when the discount vendor finds it impossible to make a profit.

As to where those extra basis points come from, pricing guru Rafi Mohammed says trust firms — or advisors, for that matter — that differentiate themselves can charge a little extra.

“You do not need to charge what your rivals charge because your products are not exactly the same as theirs,” he says.

“You know your product is best in some way,” he adds. “But when I ask you why I should buy it, most people stumble. You have got to effectively communicate with your clients to understand what value a provider offers.”

For the fourth quarter survey, The Trust Advisor will be collaborating with Cerulli Associates. To make sure your firm’s fees are anonymously reflected in the final data, please fill out the brief “Trust Fee Survey” questionnaire HERE.

Scott Martin, contributing editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes contributed to the research and reporting.

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/news/fees3q10

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Expert Says Delaware and South Dakota Trust Providers Should Boost Fees

Pricing guru Rafi Mohammed recommends providers in trust-friendly states charge higher fees for services not available elsewhere.

Trust companies in a position to provide a broader range of products don’t need to cut prices to compete and are even justified in charging higher fees, says Rafi Mohammed Ph.D, a leading pricing expert and author of books like The 1% Windfall and The Art of Pricing.

“If I come to you and say my trust product can avoid taxes for generations to come while others don’t, your eyes would be popping,” he told me. “If consumers are really hooked on the dynasty trust, then vendors should not be afraid to ask for a top-dollar premium on that added value.”

To earn that premium, out-of-state trust companies have to give prospective customers a good reason to move their business out of the local market. In some jurisdictions, the selling point might be the perpetual or “dynasty” trust, which potentially lets beneficiaries avoid generation-skipping taxes for centuries. Or it may be the self-settled asset protection trust, which is designed to shield wealth from litigators.

“This is not a mass-market product,” Mohammed told me. “Articulate how you are different and how it benefits the consumer,” he added. “Especially in high-net-worth markets like this, it’s not always about the best price.”

Some value propositions are easy to demonstrate to a prospective client. Just moving a plain vanilla trust from New York to Nevada, for example, improves its real investment performance by about 113 basis points a year simply by eliminating drag from state taxes.

That’s a huge added value, and trust companies in tax-free states can get a few of those basis points for themselves if they can communicate what those basis points add up to over the decades.

Competing on value, not price

As long as a trust company avoids charging a lot more than rivals that offer comparable value, it should definitely forget about charging less in order to win business, Mohammed says. After all, these are multi-million-dollar trusts, not Volkswagens.

“Your marketing should never be about a race to the bottom,” he told me. “Once you establish that your offering is competitive with what direct competitors are charging, there’s no reason to lower your prices. People are always too quick to lower prices.”

If your offering isn’t competitive in a particular market, don’t compete there. Directed trust companies like Santa Fe Trust or Georgia-based Reliance Trust often operate in states that don’t support some forms of trusts, so they have to refer these accounts to other vendors—and don’t spend much time chasing them.

“Perpetual trust can be an issue,” Santa Fe CEO Kathy Roberts told me recently.  “We can provide those services through partnerships in other states, but the advisors we work with are more interested in arrangements that are easier to administer right here.”

The numbers speak for themselves

After Delaware changed its statutes to allow perpetual trusts, trust companies operating in the state doubled their assets in five years as money flowed in from all over the country. Clearly, the trust-friendly environment was good for business.

Harvard law professor Robert Sitkoff has been looking at this issue for years alongside Max Schanzenbach at Northwestern. Not all of the 20 perpetual trust states were created equal, he tells me.

In fact, according to their research, between 1995 and 2003, one out of every ten trust dollars—$100 billion—moved to jurisdictions that, like Delaware, South Dakota and Nevada, support trusts in perpetuity but do not tax out-of-state accounts.

States like Wisconsin, which allow perpetual trusts but tax the assets, didn’t get many of those accounts.

“Once there’s a reason to go out of state to take advantage of more favorable statutes, picking the one with the best tax treatment is an obvious decision for an estate planner to make,” Sitkoff explains. “The added cost is minimal and the benefits are huge,” he added.

Other competitive propositions seem harder to sell. Sitkoff and Schanzenbach have yet to find any proof that asset protection, spendthrift trusts, added confidentiality or other added services have translated into concrete asset flows.

“We’re just not picking any of that up,” Sitkoff says.

Pricing and profitability

Some of the most trust-friendly states provide trust companies with a two-pronged benefit: premium service and better margins.

While Philadelphia-based Sterling Trustees is setting up its trust operation in South Dakota because it likes the regulatory climate, Antony Joffe, the company’s president, tells me cost efficiencies are a nice bonus.

“We can operate more cheaply than the Glenmedes and Wilmingtons of the world,” he says.

Rafi Mohammed says that trust companies that operate in low-cost states like New Mexico or South Dakota offer the same level of service as rivals in high-cost states like Pennsylvania or Delaware, so they should charge the same fees.

“There’s no need to lower your price to pass on your efficiencies to the client,” he advises. “When consumers evaluate your product, they never say ‘The most I’m going to pay is double costs,’” he added. “Your profits should never be part of the conversation,” he added.

Scott Martin, contributing editor, The Trust Advisor Blog. Steven Maimes  contributed to the research and the editing

Permalink: http://thetrustadvisor.com/practice-management/value

, , , , , ,

No Comments