Mergers - Who Really Benefits?

One of the things that intrigued me about the 20 year anniversary edition of Professional Pensions was the article by JonathanStapleton looking back at the names of the companies that were advertising in that very first issue.

Names that have now disappeared: Hill Samuel. GAN. Dibb Lupton Alsop. Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander. Capel-Cure Myers. Gartmore. Abbey Life. Hogg Robinson. Morgan Grenfell. Hewitt. Norwich Union.

All gone- and mainly forgotten in a plethora of mergers and takeovers over the years.

And now another one. Aberdeen and Standard Life are to merge.

I suspect the name Standard Life will survive. But then I thought that of Norwich Union before it gave way to the clinically globalised name Aviva.

Pensions Age Magazine quotes the marketing gobbledygook: ‘[the] merger would harness Standard Life and Aberdeen’s complementary, market leading investment and savings capabilities which would deliver a compelling and comprehensive product offering for clients covering developed and emerging market equities and fixed income, multi-asset, real estate and alternatives.’

They mention synergies. And surely there will be. In the way of job losses for the back-room functions mainly. But what about the investment managers- the individuals tasked with making the strategic decisions? Changes are not always welcomed to the people that do the work. They are used to a system, used to a style. When that style changes, so might their appreciation of the job they do. This in turn can affect returns for clients.

Synergies? Cost savings more like. And cost savings don’t always mean benefits for clients.

A Vote For The Pensions Manager

Professional Pensions Magazine has started this year’s search for Pensions Personality of the Year. Was there ever a greater oxymoron? Pensions and personality. Not usually held in the same sentence. And yet…

When I started in pensions 38 years ago (first job Clerical, Medical & General Documentation Clerk- only staying for a short while to bring in some money. Not interested in pensions….), pensions really was a bit of a backwater. How times have changed.

Contracting out, Maxwell, the Goode Report, personal pensions, mis-selling, the Turner Commission, DC takeover, surplus and deficit, Auto-enrolment, pensions freedom…. And much more. Headlines in the Daily Mail and Daily Express on a regular basis. Scare stories mostly.  Much of it driven by an ageing population.

Nevertheless. A pensions personality? The well-known names tend to be self-publicists. I vote for the little known pensions manager working long hours for an employer that doesn’t understand and dealing with a government that can’t help but meddle.

In (Modest) Praise of Pensions

We don’t always get it right. And it’s in our psyche to be critical of ourselves; disparaging even. But, actually, we’ve not done such a bad job with pensions.

We have a State system that works, that despite the recent changes, meets the needs of the poorer in society, and gives the rest of us a ‘not too bad result’ for our time in the workplace.

And we have an occupational pension system that is the envy of many. The Italians have had governments fall because of attempted pension reform. The French are in trouble- surely it is only a matter of time before their system collapses with the emphasis on PAYG and such low retirement ages? And the Greeks… Well, the Greeks.

We’ve made mistakes for sure. The day the accountants beat the actuaries at their own game and insisted on present market values. That was, to my mind, the death knell for Defined Benefits. But our Defined Contribution system works well if the employer is willing to put in a decent amount.

And the new Auto-Enrolment legislation is working. Lots more people in pension plans. A greater awareness of pensions. Less stress on the State as a result. I know… it’s only a start, not enough going in, etc, etc. But don’t be so hard on yourself! It’s a success!

Not only that, we have the longest standing Pensions Minister in history- and he actually understands his brief!

I do wish we would be more careful with the headlines we feed to the press (especially to the Express and Mail!) If we can get into the habit of presenting challenges in a more positive way, we may get a more positive slant on the problems we face in pensions.

Since Samuel Pepys had to pay a pension to his predecessor as Clerk of the Navy Board, we’ve done alright. Not great. Not fantastically. But just about alright.

Doing Things Differently

The headlines in today's Telegraph make sobering reading for those in the pension industry:

'I lost £150,000 due to Nineties pension sales frenzy.' 

This refers to the mis-selling scandal of course and tracks the story of one ex-soldier who was persuaded to transfer to a personal pension from the Armed Forces Plan. Disastrous results. And with many of those poor decisions reaping a poor pension, we will be seeing more of this in the press as people reach retirement.

'Pensions' doesn't have a great reputation anyway and these stories are not going to help. Warren Buffett said 'it takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently.' And we are doing things differently. But history and reputation are against us.