sent e-mail to all, and started to call. no violation.
I said no violation
I put no violation.
no violation
I think I change to “violation” there because I think he send a quick email to everybody and then started calling clients to give details. Some sound information should already be in the email if not, this is a violation regarding communication with clients. In addition, he started giving the information to the largest clients which I don’t think is fair - although understandable. MH
+1 for the Smarsh dog
mhannebert, you are wrong. This was an end of chapter question. He gave everyone an email but started calling bigger clients to GIVE THEM A HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE. Different level of services are ok as long as no one is disadvantaged. Him sending the email first is making sure of that.
PtrainerNY Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mhannebert, > > you are wrong. This was an end of chapter > question. > > He gave everyone an email but started calling > bigger clients to GIVE THEM A HIGHER LEVEL OF > SERVICE. > > Different level of services are ok as long as no > one is disadvantaged. Him sending the email first > is making sure of that. +1
my problem with this was that the calling of clients based on AUM was not disclosed as a second tier of service nor was it offered to all clients as an option to pay for the additional level of service. But i see your point about the email covering it off.
PtrainerNY Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mhannebert, > > you are wrong. This was an end of chapter > question. > > He gave everyone an email but started calling > bigger clients to GIVE THEM A HIGHER LEVEL OF > SERVICE. > > Different level of services are ok as long as no > one is disadvantaged. Him sending the email first > is making sure of that. Ptrainer, Can you cite the specific question so I can see it for my own eyes? I was 95% sure this was legit.
^ I’d like to see that source as well. I have written this one off as a -1 because I put it was a violation for not treating clients fairly.
there is a specific example in the CFAI text where the manager calls a client after an email release to discuss a new report in detail.
Dwight Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ I’d like to see that source as well. I have > written this one off as a -1 because I put it was > a violation for not treating clients fairly. Nope Not a violation, as long as you send the communication about the report. You can choose clients to talk depend on the level of service the pay for. Understand that he sent the realese to everybody as the same time. If you paid for higher service , he could you for further details. No a Violation.
no viol
i think i put no violation at first - i forgot if i changed it… oh fuck… i dont want to talk about it anymore
no violation
Guys its just common sense. He wants to start calling ppl, and he must start somewhere. You expect him to call ppl all at once? You want him to start in the middle of the list? You want him to start with the smallest account? There is nothing wrong with starting to call with the biggest account if for no other reason than he has a list and he wants to call in an orderly fashion so he can remember who he has called. This is of course given that he has made a decent effort to disseminate the info to all clients first.
No violation
it’s in the books, also doing an e-mail first and then calling the bigger clients. That was perfectly okay, he gives everybody the information they require and can’t talk to everybody at the same time.
No Violation. R.I.P