<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Financial advisory fees must be transparent and justifiable</title>
		<description>Discuss Financial advisory fees must be transparent and justifiable</description>
		<link>http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/3774/financial-advisory-fees-must-be-transparent-and-justifiable.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 06:58:41 -0500</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/feed/com_k2/3774.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Financial Services Instructor</title>
			<link>http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/3774/financial-advisory-fees-must-be-transparent-and-justifiable.html#comment-492</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Alan, The comparison to the Australian model is flawed. The Australian financial services industry is built on a completely different foundation than the Canadian financial services industry. The banks are much more involved in the provision of products such as insurance. As for the switch to fee-for-service , I am fine with it, but I think it has limited applications. What about a family with net income less than $100,000? I have not yet seen a model which would support moderate income earners. Regards, Jason.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jason Watt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 03:29:41 -0500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/3774/financial-advisory-fees-must-be-transparent-and-justifiable.html#comment-492</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
