# Article distinguishing "advisor vs. adviser"



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

https://ca.yahoo.com/finance/news/financial-advisor-vs-adviser-can-trust-174918853.html
*
Financial advisor vs. adviser: which can you trust?* ... :confused2: massively.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Oh Yahoo

This was on CBC Marketplace last year and Moneysense years ago and I feel like we already have a thread on it here somewhere?

And yes most Canadian financial "advisors" are really salespeople. That's what led me to CMF in the first place


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> Financial advisor vs. adviser: which can you trust?


I often wondered how to correctly spell that word. Even looked it up once and on-line dictionary said they were interchangeable. But now it seems that adviser has some legal meaning while advisor does not. If I was going to pay someone for advice, I think I would want an adviser.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

There are many job titles that seem to indicate some kind of professional organization would be involved and therefore some standards would apply, yet if you do some actual research, you find such is not in fact the case. This is simply one example. Others examples people might think are regulated are a Bookkeeper, Paralegal, or how about a University Professor! Anyone can be a University Professor if you can BS your way into the job somehow. There is no actual educational requirement or governing body. It is always up to the individual to determine who they are doing business with and what their background experience/education/credentials really is.

Who you can trust is yourself, everyone else is 'trust but verify'. Most people don't understand what that phrase means. Nor does some kind of 'Certification' necessarily mean anything. We had a pipe burst in our kitchen a while back and our Insurance company immediately sent their adjuster to deal with it. He brought along a guy who was a 'Restoration Specialist' and the Insurance company's 'preferred' service supplier. They would dry everything out, do all necessary repairs, etc. This 'certified expert' told us they were 'Clean Trust Certified.'

I looked up 'Clean Trust Certified' here is what it is: "The Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) is an independent certification and standard-setting organization for the inspection, cleaning and restoration industries. The IICRC ensures that when consumers hire a cleantrust Certified Firm or technician, they have hired experts who will provide reasonable assurance that work will be completed in accordance with the industry’s standard of care."

Sounds good huh. The only thing is, it says, "independent certification" which to me means companies in that business, contribute money to fund an organization that then turns around and certifies those companies who contribute. Umm, see the picture? That's like me 'certifying' myself for something. Meaningless. I have come across this type of 'certification' in other businesses as well.

But they were our Insurance Company adjuster's 'preferred' supplier, so that must mean something right? Well in this particular case, I would trust this 'Certified Restoration Company' as far as I could throw the guy who visited us. You know when you just know a guy is full of it, this guy was. A scam artist if ever there was one. I could go into detail but suffice it to say that I concluded all this guy wanted to do was quote as high a price as possible for restoration of our kitchen and get paid by the Insurance company. As a single example of his response to us as a homeowner, I offer the following example. My wife asked him face to face, 3 times, 'will the carpentry work needed be done by a licensed carpenter?' He avoided answering all 3 times. What does that tell you? We ended up using our known and trusted renovation company. The insurance company cannot mandate who you have do the work, only how much they are willing to pay. As it happened, with some smart thinking our contractor was easily able to do the work for LESS than the 'Restoration Experts' had quoted the insurance company.

While this is a financial forum and so topics are about all things financial, it doesn't hurt to remind people that things like titles that are meaningless, come in all shapes and sizes.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

agent99 said:


> I often wondered how to correctly spell that word. Even looked it up once and on-line dictionary said they were interchangeable. But now it seems that adviser has some legal meaning while advisor does not. If I was going to pay someone for advice, I think I would want an adviser.


Agent99, there is no legal difference between an advisor and an adviser. As noted in the article, the only difference is which spelling is used in Canada as being the legal SPELLING of the word. Someone titled 'adviser' is no more likely to be a better choice to advise you so don't take that as evidence of anything. Trust but verify.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Well actually Agent99 is correct. The article was quoting someone from wealthbar when arguing that it was just spelling. But it's not. We can all call ourselves 'advisors', but not advis*e*rs. To their credit, they do have a couple of advis*e*rs on staff, a CFP/CIM and a CFA.
You need to look at their 'professional' designation if you want some idea of their formal training.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Well actually Agent99 is correct. The article was quoting someone from wealthbar when arguing that it was just spelling. But it's not. We can all call ourselves 'advisors', but not advis*e*rs. To their credit, they do have a couple of advis*e*rs on staff, a CFP/CIM and a CFA.
> You need to look at their 'professional' designation if you want some idea of their formal training.


OMO, what law prevents one from calling oneself an adviser as opposed to adviser? BC has a Workers' Advisers Office. Manitoba has a Worker Advisor Office. Do they perform different functions?

This bit of tripe causes me to recall my early days in law school. Property law class. We were all keen students. The prof at one point announced that is was important to understand the meaning of "unlawful" as opposed to "illegal". We all sat there, paying rapt attention, assiduously taking notes as, at first, he explained that "unlawful" means "contrary to the law". Good. Got that. We all started to write again as he explained that "illegal" means "a large, sick bird". Lesson learned.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

Heh, shouldn't it be the other way round? Advisor being the professional, titled person, and adviser being the door-to-door salesmen.

Solicitor, Executor, Juror, Advisor...

butcher, baker, candlestick maker, adviser.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Same issue occurs even when the same title is used. Engineering associations fight this. In Ontario, only licence holders can use the following titles:
 Engineer
 Professional Engineer
 P.Eng

Occupation titles like Software Engineer, Systems Engineer, Train Engineer, Aircraft Maintenance Engineer, Sound Engineer, Flight Engineer, Stationary Engineer, etc etc, drive them nuts because those occupations are seldom done by licensed engineers. Their concern is public and worker safety, and rightly so. 

The titles Advisor and Adviser are no doubt often misused. Maybe intentionally, maybe not. As in engineering, perhaps those with valid credentials should be called Professional Advisers to better protect the public? In the US, I seem to recall that engineers legislation has done that to distinguish trained engineers from the plethora of other occupations that include the word engineer.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

As explained in the linked article, everything done today to earn money is a "profession". I used to cut lawns and shovel snow as a kid to make a bit of coin. I was a professional. I was a lawn _cuttor. _

http://www.somegreymatter.com/professional.htm


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

my understanding - from a couple years back - is that the top professional title in financial advice that's recognized by the IIROC is "portfolio manager." There are exams to pass to get that title. A candidate may need experience in the field as well.

unfortunately there are quite a few parties claiming to be portf mgrs when they are not. A buyer of investment management services would have to check for the individual's name on the IIROC list or, in quebec, on the AMF list.

prior to settling on the title "portfolio manager" the IIROC recognized the term "investment counsel;" however this term has almost disappeared by now.

the noun "advisor/adviser" doesn't mean a tinker's tit. A puppy dog could set itself up with the title.

cmf forum already has a vast, extensive, fairly recent thread, complete with useful links, on this non-issue ...


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

This is the Lawn Cuttor's Association,

Mukhang pera has not paid his professional dues in _over 45 years_, and currently owes $18,569 in back dues and penalties.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

peterk said:


> This is the Lawn Cuttor's Association,
> 
> Mukhang pera has not paid his professional dues in _over 45 years_, and currently owes $18,569 in back dues and penalties.
> 
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention.




lawn cuttors association? today mukhang pera chairs the board of the Greensward Professional Management Trust, they don't really _speak_ to the LCA ...


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Recent discussion of the issue by Guy Dixon (2017) in the Globe:
_Is it financial adviser or advisor?
Ask a regulator. They've heard the question and the controversy. It erupts from time to time, the argument being that spelling it one way may allow some financial planners to flout the rules.
If, for instance, the Ontario Securities Commission spells it adviser, then people calling themselves advisors, with an -or, could conceivably skirt regulations. Charlatans manipulating spell check, or so the argument goes.
But the industry says this is beside the point. The serious issue is the confusion surrounding professional qualifications, in the form of the acronyms that planners and advisers/advisors list after their name to designate their qualifications – certified financial planner (CFP), registered financial planner (R.F.P.) and the like – and the fact that some lack those acronyms and may just be salespeople who may not act in the best interest of investors.
... there are so many professional designations that the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada, the self-regulatory agency overseeing investment dealers and trading activity (and which, by the way, spells it advisors, -or) has a large online glossary of the many designations recognized in Canada.
In order to be considered a financial planner in the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada's eyes, that person needs to have at least one of the following designations: certified financial planner (CFP), certified international wealth manager (CIWM), chartered life underwriter (CLU), financial planner (F.Pl.), personal financial planner (PFP) and registered financial planner (R.F.P.).
_
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/glo...planner-does-the-name-matter/article36124697/

So, I think I'll just stay with the "DIY" financial designation.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Mukhang pera said:


> As explained in the linked article, everything done today to earn money is a "profession". I used to cut lawns and shovel snow as a kid to make a bit of coin. I was a professional. I was a lawn _cuttor. _
> 
> http://www.somegreymatter.com/professional.htm


Well, by this definition (from the article), you were not a professional:



> A profession is a full-time occupation with specific entry training schools, has governing member-associations, has published c*odes of conduct and ethics specific to the occupation*, and is subject to state licensure to practice the occupation.


To be entitled to call yourself a Professional Engineer, you have to meet those criteria (very good Wikipedia!) What I suggested, was that financial advisers should have to meet similar criteria in order to legally call themselves Professional Financial Advisers (or some such title)


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> lawn cuttors association? today mukhang pera chairs the board of the Greensward Professional Management Trust, they don't really _speak_ to the LCA ...


All chairmanships, directorships and shareholder interests greater than 10% require disclosure to the LCA ethics committee for assessment of real or perceived conflict of interest.

Thank you for bringing this additional infraction by Mukhang pera to the attention of the LCA.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ LOL!!!!


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

peterk said:


> This is the Lawn Cuttor's Association,
> 
> Mukhang pera has not paid his professional dues in _over 45 years_, and currently owes $18,569 in back dues and penalties.
> 
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention.





to best of our recollection mukhang pera was never a member of the LCA & furthermore he was only a minor child during the brief few months that he practiced the, ah, profession

therefore there could not be any conflicts of interest

at the same time please remember that canada has laws that protect against extortion, a crime that may be part & parcel of the grim message posted above

we should remember that any malfaisance such as attempting to extort money is doubly reprehensible when practiced against a child. Certainly mukhang pera was a child of minor age when he earned pocket money by mowing lawns.

let us give cmffer sags the last word on extortion, with his timelessly appropriate video about keeping off other people's turf regardless of whether one is a grass cutter or a grass cuttor
.








.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

agent99 said:


> Same issue occurs even when the same title is used. Engineering associations fight this. In Ontario, only licence holders can use the following titles:
>  Engineer
>  Professional Engineer
>  P.Eng
> ...


In the UK, I have heard people refer to themselves as 'engineers' when they were only what here in Canada we might refer to as a Technician. As in an Air Conditioning Engineer being someone who installs and services an air conditioning unit. That they have some specific training for their job is not in question perhaps but in the end, what difference does it make what title someone uses. Either someone is competent at their job or they aren't and that is something a title will never tell you. There are plenty of incompetent, engineers, doctors, lawyers, dentists, etc. out there who are supposedly 'professionals' based on their Education or passing an exam set by some governing body.

Let's not forget that the unspoken subject of this thread is whether or not someone who is an Adviser or an Advisor can be taken to be competent. My answer is NO, neither can be. So the question of the spelling really is meaningless.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^


> ... Let's not forget that the unspoken subject of this thread is whether or not someone who is an Adviser or an Advisor can be taken to be competent. *My answer is NO, neither can be.* So the question of the spelling really is meaningless.


 ... yep and I think either a re-vamp or a cleanup is needed badly amongst all the industry players. As if it is not difficult enough for the average Joe investor to determine who to go for investment advice, but it is becoming scary to consider hiring one!

As if the yahoo article is not enough, here's another:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/globe-advisor/advisor-news/article-are-advisors-acting-in-clients-best-interests-the-tussle-over/

*Are advisors acting in clients' best interests? The tussle over terminology*



> It would seem to be common sense that companies and people who sell financial products and give advice should be required to act in their clients’ best interest. Most investors believe they do, surveys show.
> 
> Securities regulators have been mulling an overarching “best interest” standard since 2012, but the investment industry has been fighting them tooth and nail. What is it about a best-interest standard that evokes such a response? Where do the sales people – the advisors – stand? ...
> 
> ...


 ... not sure why there is a fear amongst the industry to having both standards of acting in the best interest of clients and performing fiduciary duty naturally as expected by clients in the first place? Talk about whose interests come first, clients or advisor/advisers?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Even if they have to pass an exam, it matters very little. A person can usually make an unlimited amount of attempts at an exam. Usually they are working at the time, unless it is the licensing exam, and in those cases where they continue to work, as a multi-time failure, it is business as usual until their 5th attempt, 6th attempt, 7th attempt. Should I go on, I know they will.

The only obstacle the stupid face is perhaps another exam fee, usually below $100.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Maybe the guy looking to move out of his parent's house at age 30 should hang out his shingle as an 'Investment Advisor/Adviser. No need to go 'back to school' or worry about passing any kind of exam.

I'm reminded of the old saying, 'A week ago I cudn't spell Ingerneer, now I are one.' LOL


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Almost any occupation in sales would put him in the "above average" income bracket. The problem is that most people are not cut out for the rejection that goes along with a career in sales. Also, although the jobs are abundant and the money and perks are great, they do not really have any college/university courses in sales. I will admit, a person's personality is probably the primary edge that a good salesman/woman possesses and that personality was probably entrenched by the age of 9, there are still some other skills, that could be taught in a classroom environment, that would help them become a better salesman/saleswoman.

That being said...most college/university courses are pursued by young people, age 17 to 25. As mentioned in other threads, young people think more about fun and fulfilment, then they do money, when it comes to picking a career, so I suspect no one would probably want to take a course in sales anyway. Probably why there are almost none.

That being said. For the original poster of that thread, please keep in mind...sales is where the money is and you do not need a big education to succeed there.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

peterk said:


> This is the Lawn Cuttor's Association,
> 
> Mukhang pera has not paid his professional dues in _over 45 years_, and currently owes $18,569 in back dues and penalties.
> 
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention.


In my defence, permit me to say that I have not myself at all well served by my professional association. 

Over the years, it has become increasing difficult to earn a living as a lawn cuttor. For this sorry state, I think the association should be held to account. While the association has been diligent in billing its members for annual dues, mandatory liability insurance, etc., it has done nothing to protect us from what amounts to authorized practice.

There has been unrestrained growth in the numbers who call themeless lawn _cutters_, who lack our professional training and regulation, and yet they shamelessly compete for our work, generally _undercutting_ our rates. The association has sat on its hands, doing nothing to educate the public or take any other steps to protect our_ turf_.

And so, in response to your demand for arrears, please accept this as my resignation of the association _nunc pro tunc_. My lawyer told me to add that bit of Latin, meaning _now for then"._

I am sure others will follow in resigning in disgust and despair. It's the start of a _grassroots_ movement. We'll be moving our tents to where the grass is greener.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OptsyEagle said:


> Almost any occupation in sales would put him in the "above average" income bracket. The problem is that most people are not cut out for the rejection that goes along with a career in sales. Also, although the jobs are abundant and the money and perks are great, they do not really have any college/university courses in sales. I will admit, a person's personality is probably the primary edge that a good salesman/woman possesses and that personality was probably entrenched by the age of 9, there are still some other skills, that could be taught in a classroom environment, that would help them become a better salesman/saleswoman.
> 
> That being said...most college/university courses are pursued by young people, age 17 to 25. As mentioned in other threads, young people think more about fun and fulfilment, then they do money, when it comes to picking a career, so I suspect no one would probably want to take a course in sales anyway. Probably why there are almost none.
> 
> That being said. For the original poster of that thread, please keep in mind...sales is where the money is and you do not need a big education to succeed there.


Ah the old, 'is a salesman born or made' argument. Similar to the chicken or egg conundrum.

I spent my entire working career in sales OptsyEagle. Beginning with a weekend job (Friday nights and all day Saturday) in a Menswear store. Ending in large ticket industrial product sales. I can't count the number of people who said to me that, they 'couldn't be a salesperson' and gave any one or more of a usual suspect list of reasons for that belief.

But in fact, I personally believe that a salesperson is made not born. There is no doubt that some personality traits make it easier in some ways for some than for others but it isn't about magic or smoke and mirrors. Everyone 'sells' every day, they just don't necessarily recognize that they are doing so. 

You also have to distinguish between an 'order taker' and a 'salesperson'. One simply takes your 'order', they don't actually 'sell' you anything. They are not by my definition a salesperson. Most retail store staff are simply order takers with no real sales skills. And that is the difference, skills. Sales skills do exist and if skills do exist, then they can be taught. Which means salespeople are made, not born.

It may be that you talk about someone and say, 's/he could sell ice to Eskimos'. It may be that they have had no 'formal' training in sales, they just seem to be able to do it naturally. But in fact, they have learned how to do it whether you or they realize that they are actually using skills or not. I began observing human behaviour in my first sales job in menswear. I was fortunate to work for a man who was a master at selling you a suit or tie or shirt. He could probably just as easily have sold Lear jets, if he were in the appropriate situation. He understood PEOPLE and that is all sales is about. Understanding human behaviour and why people do what they do. Again, that can be taught. You can study psychology, interpersonal relationships, philosophy, etc. which are all part of how and why we buy things. 

We also have to distinguish not only order takers from salespeople but different types of ways to get people to buy. The cliche picture of the used car 'salesperson'or the timeshare 'salesperson' or the door to door house siding 'salesperson' who lie, cheat and browbeat someone into buying something they don't want or need is not really what I define a salesperson as. The professional salesperson has only one guiding principle and that is 'win/win'. That philosophy never fails. If you perceive how you will 'win' by buying something I am selling, you will have no problem in also letting me 'win' by making a profit on the sale. Sales is simple to understand if you realize that people buy from people they trust and all you have to do is gain their trust. Simple to understand and you can be taught how to gain a person's trust. But not if your objective is 'win/lose'.

There is no doubt you are right when you say, "sales is where the money is". But I would disagree with your saying, "you do not need a big education". I would agree you do not necessarily need a formal school education, but you do need an education however you go about getting it. An education in understanding people and their behaviour. That can be learned. 

Understanding why people buy let me retire in my early 40s. And I venture to say that if I had told someone I was an advisor or adviser, they would have believed me either way because they would have believed my intent was to help them, not just take from them. The spelling would have made no difference whatsoever in their perception of my intent.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I agree, although I also have seen that some people are natural salespeople. Those natural's seem to have two specific traits that make them good salespeople. 

The first is someone who intuitively understands how to get the other people with completely different personalities to do what they want them to do. Seems quite simple but most people spend the majority of time on what they want and almost assume others would want the same thing and therefore, have absolutely no idea how to get others to do what they want them to do. Some people, however, have learned their skills from some early age, probably around 5 or 6 and then fine tuned it all their lives.

The second trait is a persistence to get what they want. This is not the annoying persistence of the guy who keeps handling your objectives when he doesn't stand a chance at a sale. It is the guy who keeps handling your objectives but for some reason you actually think again about your final decision. You thought you had made it but now you are not sure. Maybe this guy makes sense and you will let him talk a little more. That kind of persistence. There are not going away but you don't really mind. I love those guys. I am not sure all of them even know what they are doing but they are doing it great.

The trait of being very friendly and personable goes without saying. That is what most people think a good salesperson is. I agree that without that, no salesperson can succeed but it does take a lot more then a very friendly personality to be an above average salesperson. It takes at least one of the two traits above and the most successful salespeople I have met, have both.

As for education. There are certainly courses you can take and books you can read that will expedite your success in sales, but I do believe that to reach the highest levels one has to have developed those skills from a very early age. Can it be done later. Possibly, but I am not sure I have seen it, but I certainly have not seen everything, and I have noticed that there are usually at least a few exceptions to the rules I believe to be true.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OptsyEagle said:


> I agree, although I also have seen that some people are natural salespeople. Those natural's seem to have two specific traits that make them good salespeople.
> 
> The first is someone who intuitively understands how to get the other people with completely different personalities to do what they want them to do. Seems quite simple but most people spend the majority of time on what they want and almost assume others would want the same thing and therefore, have absolutely no idea how to get others to do what they want them to do. Some people, however, have learned their skills from some early age, probably around 5 or 6 and then fine tuned it all their lives.
> 
> ...


Well the first trait you are speaking of I think, is empathy and it certainly helps if someone is naturally empathic. However, again, empathy can be learned. It's interesting that you see it as being able to get people to 'do what they want them to do'. In fact, that isn't what happens. What happens is if someone understands something from the other person's point of view (empathy), then they are able to tell that person how their answer will get the person what they want, both in the product and personally, without ever upsetting their feelings in any way and helping them to 'feel good' about their decision. Empathy is about feelings.

Take the automobile. Who ever buys one on price alone? Answer, almost no one. If that is what we all did, we would all be driving the same kind of car, the cheapest one that reliably went from A to B. They all pretty much do that. But an automobile answers needs other than simple transportation doesn't it. The saying is, 'you are what you drive.' In 1989, I bought one of the first Mazda Miatas sold in Canada. Did it just go from A to B? No and in fact it was pretty impractical with a trunk only big enough for a couple of bags of groceries. Did that matter, not at all. It is the biggest selling 'sports car' in the history of the automobile. Totally impractical (try driving one in snow) and yet totally lovable and that is a personal feeling/need we want a car to fulfill.

The interesting thing is that in meeting the personal need some people have, it also gets away with having some 'shortcomings' in terms of the product itself and factors that car lovers pay attention to. Even some SUVs are in fact faster at accelerating from zero to 60. It has no cup holders. What is a Tim Horton's drive through coffee lover to do! Obviously, the personal needs and feelings that it meets are more important to the buyer than the product needs. 

No one, no matter how good a salesperson they are, can 'get you' to buy a Miata if your product needs are for a family of 6. You're gonna buy a big SUV or a family van. But if you only need 2 seats and don't intend to do 'off roading' with it, the Miata may meet those product needs and then it becomes all about personal needs and how it makes you feel. Finding out what those personal needs are is what a good salesperson learns how to do. 

Persistence is interesting also. The only sales process of 'answering objections' really is harking back to the dark ages for a good salesperson today. No one does that any more other than 'hard sell' businesses like time share for example. Pin you down and try to 'force' you to buy. 

But where persistence does pay off is in persevering at asking questions and trying to find what your personal needs and feelings are before trying to suggest any specific product to you. Going back to the Miata example, what would be the point of my showing you a Miata before discovering that you needed to move a family of 6 in your vehicle? So what can be referred to as the 'discovery' phase has to come first and the salesperson has to 'persist' in starting and staying in that phase until they know what you need both from the product and to satisfy your own personal needs and feelings, before they even START to talk about a solution to your needs.

How many times have you gone into say a Best Buy or Staples, etc. looking to buy a new laptop or TV or whatever and right away the 'salespeson' starts telling you all about the specs of the various models on offer and how this one is 'more powerful than that one', etc. They are trying to ''sell' you the product without having any idea of what you need it for in the first place. How likely are you to trust that person?

Contrast that with someone who when you say, 'I'm looking for a new laptop', starts with, 'can I ask you a few questions about what you want to do with your laptop?' When you then give 'permission' to be questioned, it does not seem like you are being 'interrogated' and you will answer quite willingly. Asking permission is part of 'empathy', it's like saying, 'I understand you don't like to be interrogated, neither do I.' Persisting in asking questions until the salesperson has a clear understanding of your needs, will make you more likely to then 'trust' them when they suggest one laptop over another available and EVEN when the one they suggest costs more!

People buy from people they trust. What gains trust can be defined into 4 things. Propriety, competence, commonality and intent. A salesperson can learn how to indicate those 4 things to a buyer and go through a process which can be learned, to find a solution that meets ALL the buyers needs. If you do that, there is no need to 'close' the sale. The buyer simply decides to buy. The salesperson does not get the buyer 'to do what they want them to do', the buyer does what the buyer 'wants to do.'

At one point in my now 29 years of 'retirement', I fell in to designing and selling decks for backyards. It was a part time thing I did for about 2 years in Scotland. I spent about 15-20 hours a week on average doing it. I'd drive to your house, meet with you, discuss your needs, sketch out my answer and say, 'what do you think?' That was my 'close'. In that kind of sales, a decent closing average is considered to be 1 in 3 or 4. My closing average was more like 4 in 5. What's more, my price was NEVER the lowest price. I worked with a company that did quality work in an industry where there were plenty of 'cheap and dirty' competitors. Kinda like asking for quotes to get your driveway asphalted or something. But my design was never like the other competitors, my design met needs you didn't even realize you had until I asked you about them. It was not an apples to apples decision, it was an apples (raw) to an apple pie like you wished your Mother made. You know the best way to compete in a market? Don't have any competitors who can equal you. That has nothing to do with your product.

As for education, I think of it this way OptsyEagle. If I can explain it to you, you can learn it. That's really all there is to it. But what I cannot do is MAKE you learn. That is up to the individual. No one can 'teach' anyone anything. That would imply they could MAKE you learn. Everyone decides for themselves whether they learn something or not from information that is provided to them. The best anyone else can do for them is 'facilitate' their learning by providing information for them. And there is no age at which we cannot decide to learn about something.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I agree with most of what you said. I think we are just saying approximately the same thing, a little differently. You seem to feel that sales education is very useful and if they have any natural skills that would help, where I seem to put the emphasis in the reverse order, although I agree both are important.

Education can work, but one needs to agree with the education. Many people cannot get it through their heads that other people may see things differently and make their decisions differently. They myopically seem to believe that if they think the best car in the world is the Miata, then everyone will think the best car in the world is a Miata. How couldn't they? Sure you could easily explain to them that a family of 6 will not see it the same way, but they still have a hard time believing. In their world, him and his wife would drive to the restaurant for dinner and the 4 kids would arrive later via the bus. lol.

Anyway, I have met a few kids that seem to be natural salespeople. I for one am not. Mainly because I really don't like people down deep in and therefore have little desire to meet everyone that comes into my circle. That being said, I made a pretty good living in sales myself, but that was probably from my natural born ability to see what motivates other people and to use it to my and hopefully to their advantage, assuming they needed what I was selling.

The ability to get people to do what I want I learned very young and by having that, and taking a few courses, I muddled along OK with the rest. I should add that, if I was ever judged against others, and in sales you always are, I was always right in the middle of the pack. Year after year after year. Never won the trip to Hawaii and never was fired. Since I have no desire to fly to Hawaii or earn $1,000,000 a year, I got along OK. The ones that got fired took those same courses and they did them very little good. The ones who earned the 7 figure incomes, never really needed those courses and certainly did not all have even a post secondary education. They were just naturally born salespeople, in my opinion...who of course kept learning new ideas and implemented them very effectively.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

I probably could not sell a bottle of cold water to a rich man dying of thirst, but from what I have seen, it does appear (my limited observation) that salespeople are born. They seem to have, _inter alia_, the "gift of the gab" from youth.

One fellow I have known for a long time has consistently made money from producing an selling his own art. He did not finish high school. Taught himself art. I doubt he has ever taken a sales course. I know the kind of prices he gets for his work and he never has unsold work. He has eaten off the pursuit very nicely. In fact, his works have been presented to at least half a dozen heads of state around the world. Years ago he admitted to me that he was not really that great an artist. He said that there were many better artists around who were starving. He said, quite candidly: "The only difference between me and them is that I can _sell_ it."

It is only as I write this that I realize that my artist friend never took the passive approach of many artists, who produce works they think will sell and then place them on consignment with a gallery, hoping the gallery will flog the stuff. My pal always sells direct. The only exception of which I am aware is that, when he was starting out in the 70s, he sold some work through a shop - Images for a Canadian Heritage - at Burrard and West Georgia Streets in Vancouver. My office was just across the street on W. Georgia and I often went in there on lunch break, or whatever, and saw his work for sale.

He became effective at a kind of pro-active selling. If some important event were about to occur somewhere, say Expo 86 in Vancouver, he would get the ear of a few politicians - or appear in front of City Council, or whatever - and say "hey, you guys ought to commission me to do a work to commemorate the event". And, doggone, they'd do it!

Another stellar salesman I met when I first moved to LA and lived in an apartment. He was a neighbour. His occupation was "toner phoner". He sold toner for photocopiers and such. He worked in a "boiler room" where there would be about 20 people spending all day on the phone trying to sell toner. At each desk (I visited the office) there was a pile of directories listing businesses, law offices, accounting firms, etc. all across the country. 

He would start work at 6 a.m., phoning the east coast (where it was 9 a.m.) and then work back across the US as the day wore on and eastern offices closed. Quitting time was usually at about 5-6 p.m., by which time most west coast offices were closed. I cannot recall if they sold Hawaii. The trick was not just to call cold and to ask if anyone would like to buy some toner. The trick (illegal in a few states) was to call and, without saying so, make it sound as though you were the regular supplier to that office. But, the phoner would not know just what makes and models of office equipment the phonee possessed. So part of the knack of the thing was to get the phonee to _tell _you model numbers without twigging to the fact that the phoner had no idea. Getting model numbers was key. They are all unique, so, for example, a "4600" can only be a Canon (or Mitsubishi, or whatever) machine. So, armed with the model numbers that appear on the front of all machines, the phoner knows just what it is and the type of toner cartridge. Then to close the deal, the phoner would say words such as "I just have the two boxes of toner to ship on your account, is that going to be enough?" Usually, by that time, the phonee was in the phoner's pocket, they would be talking as old pals, and the phonee would reply in the affirmative. It took, I think, a real "feel" for the phonee. They quickly had to be convinced they were talking with someone with whom they had done business before. Depending on how the call went, the phoner might show some feigned familiarity with the phonee's operation, asking such things as "Oh, that big Xerox that was jamming awhile back, has it been running well since?". Then my buddy's boss (the owner of the "room") would ship $50 worth of toner with a bill for about $300 and my pal would get a 40% commission. Very little got shipped back. This was in the 90s. I think the advent of the internet, places like Staples and Office Depot have probably killed toner phoner as a job, even the the best salespeople. 

Another part of the toner phoner job was that you had to quickly establish a link with someone in the office who could deal with the office equipment and order product, making them think you were an old pal. So the phoner would ask the phone answerer to connect with the office supply person, and ask, such as "and what was her name again?" So by the time the call goes through, the phoner knows he'll be speaking with, say, "Julie". That makes it easy to establish a rapport, like "oh, hi Julie, how goes, just doing our periodic review of your account" or whatever. If the person answering the phone turned out to be the one to deal with, as in some small offices, then a different approach was called for. If ever anyone asked questions seeking to really ascertain the identity of the phoner and where the call was coming from, the phoner would simply hang up and get onto the next call. Similarly, if anyone asked a question at all concerning the price of the toner, bang the phone down in their ear!

I could never make it as a toner phoner. The idea is to make hundreds of calls in a day. A good day would see 10 orders written. I could never handle being rejected almost every call. I also would feel a bit slimy trying to fool people into ordering a hugely overpriced product. My friend saw it in a different light. As a game of skill. He was proud of consistently being top salesman. One one visit to his office, he handed me a set out headphones so i could monitor how his calls unfolded. The guy was an artist. Able to think on his feet and to respond to or deflect and question that might knock things off course.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

My dad was a door to door salesman who was paid wholly by commission. What a miserable way to make a living for a wife and 5 kids.

He had a territory that stretched from Kitchener to Windsor, Ontario and a lot of days he would put his last bit of money into the gas tank and end up not earning anything all day.

Some older people may remember when doctors/dentists offices had Bedtime Story books in the waiting room. There were mail in cards that would be "leads" for the sales people.

He got audited one time by the CRA and the auditor wanted to know how he could raise a family on such a low income.

I think that is why I always felt a level of sympathy for sales people.

One day I was working afternoons and my wife was at work. A fella called up to give us a "free" demonstration of a TriStar vacuum.

He came right over and pulled in the driveway with a couple kids in the car. He came in and was giving a demonstration and I told him to bring the kids in to the house.

He said no......he would make it quick. I said no.......I would make it quicker and would take a vacuum since we needed one anyways.

I forget how much it cost but it was a lot for a vacuum cleaner. Made his day worthwhile though.........so there is that.

The wife came home and was angry at the time, but here we are some 20 years later and she has no interest in trading in her "old trusty" for a new one.

We got the 1999-2001 model.......vintage now.......like us 

https://tristarvacuumscanada.com/


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

I wonder if "old trusty" is of quality like the Electrolux vacuum my parents bought circa 1940. It was on runners. It looked a lot like the ones pictured here:

https://www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?30382

It had a cloth bag inside to capture dirt. It lasted for the decades the vacuum lasted. Around 1950 Electrolux started putting wheels on them. My parents relegated theirs to cleaning in the basement circa 1960 when they bought a Hoover Constellation "Floats on Air" vacuum. Both remained in service until the late 1990s.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

LOL...........those old vacuums were bulletproof.


----------



## GreatLaker (Mar 23, 2014)

Those old Electrolux, Hoovers and Filter Queens were vacuum clean*ors*, not vacuum clean*ers*. That's why they were such high quality and lasted so long.

Also their vacuum advisors had to adhere to a fiduciary standard, ensuring that the vacuum was in the best interest of the client, not just something suitable for the client that also paid the vacuum adviser a large commission.
:cocksure:


----------



## fireseeker (Jul 24, 2017)

GreatLaker said:


> Those old Electrolux, Hoovers and Filter Queens were vacuum clean*ors*, not vacuum clean*ers*. That's why they were such high quality and lasted so long.
> 
> Also their vacuum advisors had to adhere to a fiduciary standard, ensuring that the vacuum was in the best interest of the client, not just something suitable for the client that also paid the vacuum adviser a large commission.
> :cocksure:


Awesome post!


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

Mukhang pera said:


> In my defence, permit me to say that I have not myself at all well served by my professional association.
> 
> Over the years, it has become increasing difficult to earn a living as a lawn cuttor. For this sorry state, I think the association should be held to account. While the association has been diligent in billing its members for annual dues, mandatory liability insurance, etc., it has done nothing to protect us from what amounts to authorized practice.
> 
> ...


All complaints should be received, in person, at your regional office, which is open Sundays from 4am to 5am.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Mukhang pera said:


> Another stellar salesman I met when I first moved to LA and lived in an apartment. He was a neighbour. His occupation was "toner phoner". He sold toner for photocopiers and such. He worked in a "boiler room" where there would be about 20 people spending all day on the phone trying to sell toner. At each desk (I visited the office) there was a pile of directories listing businesses, law offices, accounting firms, etc. all across the country.
> 
> He would start work at 6 a.m., phoning the east coast (where it was 9 a.m.) and then work back across the US as the day wore on and eastern offices closed. Quitting time was usually at about 5-6 p.m., by which time most west coast offices were closed. I cannot recall if they sold Hawaii. The trick was not just to call cold and to ask if anyone would like to buy some toner. The trick (illegal in a few states) was to call and, without saying so, make it sound as though you were the regular supplier to that office. But, the phoner would not know just what makes and models of office equipment the phonee possessed. So part of the knack of the thing was to get the phonee to _tell _you model numbers without twigging to the fact that the phoner had no idea. Getting model numbers was key. They are all unique, so, for example, a "4600" can only be a Canon (or Mitsubishi, or whatever) machine. So, armed with the model numbers that appear on the front of all machines, the phoner knows just what it is and the type of toner cartridge. Then to close the deal, the phoner would say words such as "I just have the two boxes of toner to ship on your account, is that going to be enough?" Usually, by that time, the phonee was in the phoner's pocket, they would be talking as old pals, and the phonee would reply in the affirmative. It took, I think, a real "feel" for the phonee. They quickly had to be convinced they were talking with someone with whom they had done business before. Depending on how the call went, the phoner might show some feigned familiarity with the phonee's operation, asking such things as "Oh, that big Xerox that was jamming awhile back, has it been running well since?". Then my buddy's boss (the owner of the "room") would ship $50 worth of toner with a bill for about $300 and my pal would get a 40% commission. Very little got shipped back. This was in the 90s. I think the advent of the internet, places like Staples and Office Depot have probably killed toner phoner as a job, even the the best salespeople.
> 
> ...


That is not a salesperson, that is a con and indefensible in terms of a person with integrity.

When I talk about sales, I am talking about professional salespeople who have principles and integrity. 

In terms of the situation that started this thread, whether someone is called an advisor or adviser, the spelling is irrelevant, it is their intent that matters. Just as it is in any other business selling any other kind of product. If I were selling financial products as a 'financial advisor/er', I would have to believe what I was selling was as good or better than any other product the buyer could be offered. Perhaps that is one aspect of being a successful salesperson that you can't teach. Integrity.

Unfortunately, in today's world, it seems as if we are moving more and more towards a culture of win/lose in interactions of almost any kind. People think that in order for them to win, someone else must lose. They don't really understand win/win even though it seems to be such a simple thing to understand.

Let me describe an exercise I used to use as a consultant that shows how win/win really works. You start with a group of say 10 people. You divide them into two smaller groups of 5 each and tell them they are going to participate in an exercise about 'making money'. Here's how it is set up:

'I have 10 dimes. 
Each dime is worth 10 cents. 
Each group will chose a spokesperson. 
You are going to participate in an auction conducted by me, of the 10 dimes I have.
Each group will be given first bid on alternate dimes which means each group will have first bid on 5 of the dimes.
Before we begin, you can discuss the strategy you wish to use and your spokesperson will then use that strategy.
All bids must be in increments of 1 cent or more.
Now here is the objective you are trying to meet. The objective is to make as much money as possible. 
How much you made will be determined by subtracting what you paid from the value of the dimes you got.

Then the auction begins and as you might imagine, the first spokesperson bids say 1 cent and the other bids 2, then the first bids 3 and the other bids 4, etc. until one or the other says pass. Once all 10 dimes have been auctioned off, the total paid is subtracted from the total value of the times each group has and we see how much money each group made.

So let's say typically one group ended up with 15 cents after subtracting what they paid for the dimes they got and the other ended up with 12 cents. Now here is the question, which group won? The answer is NEITHER group won! That's when all hell breaks loose and they start saying, 'of course the group with 15 cents won.'

But what was the objective? 'To make as much money as possible.' So if the objective was not met, can anyone really say they won? Consider how much money it was possible to have been made.

10 dimes each worth 10 cents. A minimum bid possible of 1 cent. Therefore each dime could have been auctioned for 1 cent. If all 10 dimes were auctioned for 1 cent each and each group had first bid on 5 of the dimes, then simple math tells you that each group would have ended up paying a total of 5 cents for 5 dimes and have 45 cents 'profit' at the end of the auction. But that is not what happened and therefore neither group met the objective of 'making as much money as possible'. They both failed miserably.

So how could they both have made 45 cents? The ONLY way possible is if both groups (now notice I have referred to them constantly as groups not 'teams' and notice I have never referred to a competition) went in with a strategy of win/win. When the first person bid 1 cent, the spokesperson of the other team would have to signal intent by passing. When the spokesperson of the second group then had first bid on the next dime, that spokesperson of the second group would have to signal their intent by passing. Both would then let the other take each dime by passing. Boring for the 'auctioneer' but both groups would in fact 'make as much money as possible.'

If you get any 10 normal people in a room and repeat this exercise using the same terms, you will get similar results. What happens is they automatically think of themselves as being a 'team' whose objective is to make MORE money than the other 'team'. That's how they think you win. It's competitive and there has to be a winner and a loser just like in any 'game'. 

But what happens when you play win/lose is that one 'team' may make more money than the other 'team' but they NEVER make as much as POSSIBLE. Which would you rather do? Make MORE money than me or make as much money as you POSSIBLY can? They are not one and the same. The answer is obvious, we would all like to make as much as is possible.

In order to do that though we have to trust each other and what our intent towards each other is. That is the most important skill a salesperson can have, being able to have the customer see that the intent is for both to win as much as POSSIBLE.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Longtimeago said:


> That is not a salesperson, that is a con and indefensible in terms of a person with integrity.
> 
> When I talk about sales, I am talking about professional salespeople who have principles and integrity.


Yes, he was more of a con man than a salesman. Shared some traits.

I would be curious to know, how many "professional salespeople who have principles and integrity" exist, as a percentage of all salespeople. And that's allowing them to be viewed as "professionals" along with doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants, etc.

I have bought a lot of stuff in my lifetime and dealt with salespeople of divers stripes. Offhand, I do not recall any that I recognized as having principles and integrity to the point of putting my interests ahead of theirs, or at least on a par. Sure they were decent enough folks for the most part, but they wanted a commission. Can't blame them. They have to eat too. 

Take, for example, in buying a big ticket item such as a motor vehicle, how do those of principles and integrity manifest themselves? I have never been asked "may I ask you a few questions" followed by truly probing questions designed to find out whether I am really doing the right thing. In some cases, the seller should be asking "what is your annual income and net worth?". Many spend more on a car that a year's pay and a good chunk of their net worth. They are not really acting in their own best interests. Do sellers ever care so much that they don't want to see you overspend? Does it ever happen that the seller says something like: "It looks to me like that car you are driving is in decent shape and is likely to serve you for some time yet, at modest cost. Maybe you should defer a new car purchase for awhile." Nor have I ever been told to get out of the showroom and over to the used car division because the salesman is a cmf member who has read again and again that one should always buy used, leaving "some fool" to bear the monstrous depreciation in the first few years.

I have purchased a fair amount of real estate. Never did the agent ask about my ability to pay, for eg. Sure, if it's a personal residence purchase, they will ask about size of family, etc. No use showing you houses with one bedroom far from schools when you have six young kids to move in. I have never had a salesman try to downgrade me. If I am looking at a $5 million house in Point Grey, will I be told "Yes, it's very nice, but did you know that you can buy essentially the same thing east of Main St. for less than half?" It's oft been said that houses sell themselves. People get an idea in their head about what will suit and if they see something that appears to match, they buy, even if they stretch their finances. Does a realtor ever say (at least about another's listing) anything like: "This house shows beautifully, but if I were you I would really get that foundation checked out, because I noticed some suspicious signs. Or maybe you'll want to commission a slope stability report on the back yard. I have seen these things before, and your yard looks like it might end up in your neighbour's yard in the next heavy rain." Or, "it's a nice warm, sunny day today, but the other day when I was here, the heat was full on and the place was toasty, but the master suite was like a meat locker." Nope. _Caveat emptor_.

The same applies to just about every type of sales I have encountered. In buying furniture, I have never been asked much and certainly never told anything such as "this $5,000 sofa looks great and we have sold boxcar loads of them, but lemme tell ya', this $2,000 model over here is a lot easier to clean and, from what you have told me about your home and its present furnishings, is much more likely to fit in with your Value Village decor."

As for electronics, there used to be some scope for a salesman to at least impart some knowledge. Less so today, with the advent of the internet. One can research electronics to death online, even finding views and experiences about particular equipment here on cmf. 

I think the internet has rendered many sales types - including the super ethical professionals - redundant. People can research online and order online. I have been buying computers - both laptops and desktops - since 1989. I always have at least one of each, laptops mainly for travel. I used to buy from dedicated computer stores, then places like London Drugs. When you go in and look at a computer, they got what they got. Folks usually buy one of the units on the shelf. The salespeople with never tell you that a certain model had not been updated for the last 3 years and will soon be significantly overshadowed (and receive 3 years less support) by a new release.

I have come to like Apple equipment. I have bought a few from retailers. What was on the shelf. In recent years, I have learned of sites such as MacRumours.com, with its buyers' guide. It offers extensive test results and critiques and good insight into whether any particular model of Apple equipment is likely to see a refresh or total reworking of some device. This past spring I decided to but a new laptop. MacRumours listed the MacBook Pro as a "Don't Buy" because a much upgraded model (and they gave details of the expected changes) was due out in August. So I waited. Got the upgrade. I checked, and it was available online from the Apple Store with free shipping (brought to where we are by floatplane) when not yet in stores. I bought online.

Had I gone into a bricks and mortar store and had some keen salesman asked me about my intended use, etc., I would have haughtily dismissed him, saying I need hear nothing from him about computers. I would be there with my mind made up. Of course, were he learned in his craft, and persistent, he would have learned that my main use is for my work as a legal writer (or is that writor?) and all I _really_ need is a glorified word processor and, should I shun a used IBM Selectric, he could at least sell me a cheap Acer or some such. But I was resolute. I had my eye on my $3,000 machine and not to be dissuaded. Not to be saved from myself. But then, what I got is, on my budget after a lifetime of making money, insignificant. If I could have had a serviceable computer for $2,000 less, I could care less.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

well MP is it lawyer or lawyor?

you yourself are, i imagine, a solicit*or*, according to british usage. You were never a barrist*er*, at least not according to what you have told us.

alas scribes are & must remain lowly report*ers*. They might also be writ*ers*, although the few who publish with big commercial houses can aspire to the glorious title of auth*or*.

(signed)
plain kais*er* roll


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> well MP is it lawyer or lawyor?
> 
> you yourself are, i imagine, a solicit*or*, according to british usage. You were never a barrist*er*, at least not according to what you have told us.
> 
> alas scribes are & must remain lowly report*ers*. They might also be writ*ers*, although the few who publish with big commercial houses can aspire to the glorious title of auth*or*.


Some interesting points, hp.

Here in BC, when one passes the bar, one is admitted as a solicitor and a barrister of the Supreme Court. My business cards usually read "mp, Barrister and Solicitor".

In the UK, there is a clear demarcation. Barristers are the ones who go to court and do trial and appeal work. Solicitors do everything else. Here, all lawyers wear both hats and often do some trial work and some solicitor's work. That is especially so when starting out and seeking one's niche. Try both kinds of work and see what suits. Similarly, young lawyers, particularly practising on their own, or in small firms, or in small towns, tend to take whatever work comes in the door - trial work, solicitor's work, civil law, criminal law, family law, personal injury law, wills & estates, corporate and commercial, administrative law & c. The trend has been away from such diverse types of practise since, over the years, many areas of law have become sufficiently complex that it is difficult to maintain competence in all areas - too much to keep up with. As one prof put it about some areas, even when I was in law school, "there is no such thing as doing a _little bit_ of tax. 

So I started out in downtown Vancouver in a small firm that was known for its corporate and commercial expertise, including major real estate transactions involving such things as office buildings and shopping centres and large new developments. But the movers and shakers behind those deals are, at the end of the day, ordinary people. They get divorced; they want wills and estate planning done, they get picked up for impaired after celebrating their latest acquisition; their kids get busted for a B & E or dealing some drugs; they want to evict a tenant from commercial premises; they get hurt in a car wreck; they want to appeal their WCB assessment or WCB acceptance of a claim; they want to recover a debt; the son of their favourite fishing guide in Bella Bella has been charged with sexual assault and they want a lawyer to help out; they think the LRB is off its scone in granting an app. for cert. at one of its construction sites, and so on. None of that has much to do with corporate and commercial law. But such folks seldom have a stable of lawyers, expert in all areas. So they come to one of the partners in the corporate and commercial firm they know, with whom they have also established friendships, and ask for help. They want justice, with costs. Well, the higher-ups in the firm don't want to dirty their hands with such stuff, so they say, let me take you down the hall to mp's office and introduce you. He'll be happy to help. So, you take on whatever it happens to be.

In the situation I just described, you eat a lot of your research time. I never thought it right that I charge a client for time spent in getting up to speed with a certain facet of the law, when other lawyers out there were already up to speed. But for all of that, you do learn and gain some confidence and experience. But it does not always work out. I never seemed to cotton on to criminal law. All my criminal clients went to jail. Oh, I get it now, because I have studied it (and all areas of the law) extensively for what I do in semi-retirement. Busy practitioners do not have much time to study. Hence the trend to restrict one's practise to one or 2 discrete areas of law. I happily have the luxury of being a paid student of law, as long as I share what I have learned with those with less time to study.

But in my days as a practitioner, in the odd case where I ran a successful defence, I don’t know why it worked. I was expecting convictions. By the same token, I saw convictions entered where I thought my defence was a slam dunk. I think that, in time, Crown counsel came to love me. They were able to relax. If the Crown saw me entering the courtroom, he might say: “My Lord, I see that defence counsel for this trial will be mp. That being the case, the Crown will be presenting no evidence or argument. I would ask that you simply have the clerk read the indictment, take a plea and ask mp to proceed. I am sure he will convict his client out of his own mouth.”

So, while I never really did much trial work, and only a handful of appeals, I’ll say that since retiring from the bar I have had stellar success as a barrister. That is because I have only taken on 2 or 3 cases a year, _pro bono_ (without charge). I will only takes cases friends bring me and cases that are of such obvious merit that a win is almost assured. I also know that I most likely have a better grasp of the relevant law than any opponent. I spend many paid hours keeping up. No practitioner can afford to do so.

It also occurs to me that being a barrister is a bit like being a salesman. You have to be able to handle rejection. You will lose cases, no matter how good a job you did. You cannot take it personally or roll over and die. Some are better at picking themselves up, dusting themselves off, and getting on with the next case. The lawyers on both sides of a case are acting as salesmen. Selling ideas. Another pearl of wisdom I remember from law school is that it is counsel’s job to “come up with a proposition that is _saleable_ to the court”.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

"I would be curious to know, how many "professional salespeople who have principles and integrity" exist, as a percentage of all salespeople. And that's allowing them to be viewed as "professionals" along with doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants, etc."

Well the answer to that question Mukhang pera is either all of them or not many at all. 

The issue is, how you define 'professional salesperson'. I define it as a salesperson with integrity as I have noted. Therefore the answer to your question would by definition have to be 100%. However, if you define it as anyone who you buy something from including a youngster who works part time at London Drugs and you buy a laptop from, then it is not likely that they re going to behave in the way I would expect a professional salesperson to behave. 

Nor does the size of the sale reflect how likely it is that you will encounter a 'professional salesperson' by my definition. You could in theory encounter one at London Drugs who does indeed begin by asking what you plan to use your laptop for but it isn't likely. You could also encounter a 'grab the money and run' 'salesperson' selling you a Lear jet. I've never tried to say that all supposed salespeople have integrity or principles beyond putting money in their own pocket. All I have said is that there ARE salespeople who understand what win/win is all about and who will attempt to indicate that to a buyer and do business accordingly.

Let's also not forget that there are plenty of buyers who are not interested in playing win/win. They want to play win/lose but have the seller lose. The 'ten dimes' exercise above makes that quite clear. That is how our culture today has taught them to behave. 

You mention a real estate agent as an example. Let me give you a real life example of a real estate agent with integrity. A close relative was looking at buying in a small Ontario town. He picked an agent based on a recommendation by another family member. The agent did indeed refuse to take him to see one house he had seen listed online, stating that the foundation of that house had issues. So Yup, exactly what you say 'Nope', never happens. The agent make it abundantly clear that she would not even entertain taking him to see that house. Now guess what agent he would recommend to you if you were looking to buy in that area. That agent understands that while she might have made a commission in the short run, saying no would gain her more in the long run. She was prepared for the buyer to not see anything else he wanted to buy and as a result she might make no sale at all. That's integrity.

I recently had a repair done to my car at my local garage. As is normal, I took the car in and left it for them to find the problem. They called me to say what was wrong and quoted me a price for repair. I authorized them to go ahead with the repair. The next day I went to pick up the car and was ready to pay them the (let's say) $500 they had quoted me. The bill they presented to me to pay was $400. I kid you not. I asked what happened to the $500 they had quoted and the answer was, 'it went smoothly and didn't take as long as we expected it would.' That garage owner could easily have just stayed with the $500 quote and I would have been none the wiser. But he chose to charge me what he felt was the right price for the work done. That's integrity. Now ask me who I would suggest you take your car to for repairs. Everyone in the small town I live in take their cars to him for service and repairs. I wonder why. Win/win is often about a long term game, not a short term gain. and people who understand that can be found in any business. They just aren't the 'norm'.

As for the internet making professional salespeople redundant, I disagree. Someone might have a question that on the surface seems quite straightforward and simple to answer. But what's missing is some background info that if you were aware of it, would change the answer you would give the person, entirely. It's like someone asking, 'can you give me driving directions to the edge of a cliff?' You could easily answer that question, but should you? The internet could probably provide the answer to their question for them, but only another person could ask them, 'why do you want to go there?' The internet can only provide you with answers to the questions you ask, it cannot question whether or not you are asking the right questions. 

Here's a real life example that is not so dramatic as driving to the edge of a cliff. A buyer asked me to quote on a project along with several other competitors. As part of the specification for what the solution must do, he included (simplified) 'generate reports'. As it happened, NO one had a system that could generate the reports he wanted. So the simple answer to his requirement was obviously, 'we can't do that.' Of course what he actually got was quotes that answered every other requirement but not the reporting function. My quote included the reporting function! 

But wait, how can that be when I just told you that no one could do it? The answer is because I asked him a question. The question was, 'when do you need the system to start generating these reports?' His answer was, 'as soon as the system is fully up and running.' Makes sense doesn't it. But it would take a year for the system to be 'fully up and running'. So I went to the appropriate people in our company and asked if they could have a reporting function ready within a year and they said yes. I did not 'take exception' to the reporting function in my quote. When he questioned my not having taken exception, I told him the answer. 'We will have it ready to add on within a year.' Of course he had to trust me and what I was saying and he did. We got the contract obviously and what's more, we were not the lowest bid at all. How could we be, we were providing more than the others.

So regarding the internet and making a sales professional redundant, no, not now and probably not ever. The internet can't tell you the right questions to ask, it can only answer the questions you do ask.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Longtimeago said:


> "
> So regarding the internet and making a sales professional redundant, no, not now and probably not ever. The internet can't tell you the right questions to ask, it can only answer the questions you do ask.


I do not believe I suggested that in the future, no one will be in sales. But I do think with online shopping, etc., we might see a trend to fewer bricks and mortar stores with sales staff. I also said I see it as rendering "many sales types" redundant. That does not mean that new fecund territory for salespeople will open up. 

I recently had a tour of a hospital where I got to see firsthand some of the modern equipment used that I had heard of, but never seen before - CAT scanners, MRI machines, etc. These are sophisticated and expensive machines. While I have not looked, I am guessing not many are sold an Amazon, eBay and such. I also suspect that there are indeed salespeople involved behind a lot of purchases my hospitals, medical clinic, etc. That would be a sales area that did not exist 40 years ago.

I disagree that the internet cannot tell one the right questions to ask. In a number of my product researches I have encountered a wealth of materials that have made me realize I knew not so much as I thought about the product being investigated. I have found answers to questions I would never have thought to ask. On top, I seldom limit myself to one internet site for investigating a product. One will often lead to another, and then to a discussion forum which, again, will have people who live and breathe this stuff and will display a depth of knowledge I will never have (nor need or care to have). 

I'll give another example. I recently purchased a flashlight online. We have a handful of headlamps and other stuff around the house purchased from Mountain Equipment Co-op when we moved to the sticks. They still work fine. Sometimes in winter, when the SE wind blows hard in the middle of the night, I start to wonder if all the lines on our main boat are secure. I don't want to get dressed to go down to the dock or be out in the wind and rain longer than necessary. But I usually walk right onto the dock, past the seal who likes to sleep there, and check the lines. I now have my new Fenix 3200 lumen light that lets me see through the dark across the 700 feet to the boat without actually walking down onto the dock. My point here is that I only learned of Fenix lights by going online. They have many competitors. I am amazed there is all that much interest in flashlights. I found that there are whole forums of flashlight aficionados who actually take time to write about such stuff and share questions, etc. Before I started I did not know (hate to admit it) the difference between a lumen and a watt, or a candlepower. I did not know of all the various battery types out there now and the virtues and shortcomings of each. I found endless material about why you would by this type of light over that type and on and on. Would a professional flashlight salesman have provided me with any better? Maybe.

I had a similar recent experience with knives. The topic seems pretty mundane. Not so, there are a number of sites dedicated to buying, making and using knives. They wax eloquent about why this type of steel is preferred over that for knives for certain purposes. What one design is best for this or that. You could spend days online absorbing it all. Maybe a knife salesman could spare one all of that and impart the same information in a 10-minute conversation.


----------



## rocketscience (Dec 19, 2018)

So that's the difference! I was under the impression that advisor and adviser were practically the same.

Thumbs up for this heads up.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

rocketscience said:


> So that's the difference! I was under the impression that advisor and adviser were practically the same.
> 
> Thumbs up for this heads up.


FFS. The only difference is one has an e and one has an o. And difference places use different spellings.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

advisor vs adviser is an urbon myth

no i mean it's an urben myth

the only title that means anything for investors is *portfolio manager*

even then an investor has to check the IIROC registry of portf managers who have passed the exam & gained the required years of experience to earn the title

check em out because some advisors(ers) calls themselves portfolio managers anyhow, eg my dog paws furraWhile is a portf mgr, plus he's also a financial advisor & even an adviser on days when he's feeling extra pip pip

.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

'Met' (by phone) an advis0r with an 0 (as in a big zero) this week. They either knew very little or they were bullsh^ting. This was at a large bank branch. 
Sibling has a lump sum to invest. We devised a portfolio to fit their needs, lack of investing experience and lower confidence. 16% of the total was a 5-figure 4yr gic (2.0% posted rate) at their home branch to match a funding requirement due in 4yrs. 

Then this week, I received a text - they were sitting in the branch with advis0r who was saying they'd actually lose money because of low rates, they couldn't provide 0.25 percent over their posted gic rates, and they were suggesting their global neutral MF (1.9% MER) as a better choice. What should I do?
How about I'll call and you put me on the speaker phone, we'll have a 3-way conversation -that's what you should do.

It was difficult to stay civil with this young clown. They knew nothing of the complete client picture, seemed ignorant of the need for capital preservation for the 4 year money, but really thought this actively managed fund that earned 6.4% over 10 years was a good idea (3.3% over 5yrs, 2.2% over 3ys, -4.7% over 1yr). We all agreed to wait a week and give it further consideration before doing anything. 

Today I spoke w sibling and they are now comfortable opening a self-directed tfsa and trading account online with same big bank (they already pay bills online). This allows them to buy a 4 yr gic paying 3.1%, not 2.0% - an extra $2100 over 4 years. And they'll have accounts that aren't beholden to branch MF's for the balance of funds (planning a 5yr gic ladder, VCNS and perhaps some dividend inc).

So I kind of like this advis0r now. They were so blatant that they drove sibling away and into what was always a better solution IMO anyway.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^


> ... It was difficult to stay civil with this young clown. ...


 ... LOL!!!! Maybe you want to have a talk with the older and bigger clowns supervising these younger clowns over there.



> ... Then this week, I received a text - they were sitting in the branch with advis0r who was saying they'd actually lose money because of low rates, *they couldn't provide 0.25 percent over their posted gic rates*, and they were suggesting their global neutral MF (1.9% MER) as a better choice.


 ... seriously?... that "advis0r" either needs retraining, or a demotion given he/she doesn't even have a .25% (or any for that matter with the direct mutual fund suggestion) discretion on their rates.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

More clarity or confusion?










New rules coming for financial advisors in Ontario. This is what they'll mean for you


Anyone in Ontario can call themselves a financial planner or financial advisor, but now under new rules those titles will come with added protections for consumers.




toronto.ctvnews.ca









__





Financial Professionals Title Protection Rule and Guidance


Thank you for providing your feedback on FSRA’s Proposed Financial Professionals Title Protection Rule and Guidance. We appreciate the comments and questions received to date. Your feedback will help to inform our final rule and approach. The request for submissions is now closed.




www.fsrao.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Do those in the profession read or keep up with them "rules"? I'm curious (and wouldn't be surprised more than half don't even know of these "updates", never mind rules. Like they go for annual testing or licensing requirements.]

As far as I'm concerned, you can have A to Z alphabetical designations besides your name. It's the name of the firm you're associated with that's of "interest" to me first. Then we'll move on to references and down a checklist.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Do those in the profession read or keep up with them "rules"? I'm curious (and wouldn't be surprised more than half don't even know of these "updates", never mind rules. Like they go for annual testing or licensing requirements.]
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, you can have A to Z alphabetical designations besides your name. It's the name of the firm you're associated with that's of "interest" to me first. Then we'll move on to references and down a checklist.


Most, if not all, advisors or planners or whatever you want to call them, have required annual training in the form of CE (continuing education) credits. 
even the lowly branch based MF representative is required to complete annual training and report it to the regulatory body.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Money172375 said:


> Most, if not all, advisors or planners or whatever you want to call them, have required annual training in the form of CE (continuing education) credits.


Would be nice to see simple list of minimum requirements needed for advisors or planners. I think the bottom line though is if they have a fiduciary relationship with their clients.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

cainvest said:


> Would be nice to see simple list of minimum requirements needed for advisors or planners. I think the bottom line though is if they have a fiduciary relationship with their clients.


A planner should have a CFP Designation. Takes a few years to complete if I remember. I believe all “advisors” have a fiduciary duty as outlined by the regulatory agencies. 

advisors/wealth managers/portfolio managers should have *CIM and FCSI designations.

For a branch level employee, you’d expect to see IFIC or the CSC. Bare minimum accreditations.*


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Money172375 said:


> I believe all “advisors” have a fiduciary duty as outlined by the regulatory agencies.


IIRC there was a previous thread on this where only a small % are deemed fiduciaries in Canada.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Most, if not all, advisors or planners or whatever you want to call them, have required annual training in the form of CE (continuing education) credits.
> even the lowly branch based MF representative is required to complete annual training and report it to the regulatory body.


 ... with open books exams, right?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Beaver101 said:


> ... with open books exams, right?


Of course. And everybody gets a trophy. That’s The way the world is Now.

Of course, the average DiYer knows more than the average advisor/adviser Anyway.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Of course. And everybody gets a trophy. That’s The way the world is Now.
> 
> Of course, the average DiYer knows more than the average advisor/adviser Anyway.


 ... book-worming does not mean real life experience. Also, having charisma helps alot.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> ... with open books exams, right?


Yup, just like the real world.


----------

