he said after discussing ESG and DEI, lolBut I agree it's best to keep ESG out of the discussion. Political discussion isn't allowed on this forum, and ESG is extremely political.
he said after discussing ESG and DEI, lolBut I agree it's best to keep ESG out of the discussion. Political discussion isn't allowed on this forum, and ESG is extremely political.
Fund ERs were significantly higher in Bogle's day right?I do not have a link but I read an opinion article saying how Vanguard is now nickel and dimeing their customers.... and that Bogle would not like what is happening... that the charges are gong to hit 'grandma'...
I doubt that it is going to get any better...
Oh yea, much higher... and with a load up to 7.5%....Fund ERs were significantly higher in Bogle's day right?
Fidelity would be on my short list if I moved also. I noted today a post on BH by someone who states that Fidelity will not allow a POA holder to transfer money out using their website. I don't know if that extends to having funds transferred out to an account in the name of the person for whom POA is being exercised. That might be a deal-breaker for me. If I ever get close to considering a move I will start a thorough due diligence.Oh yea, much higher... and with a load up to 7.5%....
He was the king of low cost index investing... Vanguard pioneered indexing and low costs... they used to have great service also... I was happy to have the vast majority of my funds in Vanguard for over 35 years... and recommended them to SOOO many people that I should have gotten a commission (lol)... and I still have a big chunk there...
But, things have moved on and now all the major brokerages are low cost and some even lower than Vanguard... and with better service than Vanguard... If somebody asks me today I recommend Fidelity or Schwab...
Me, too. If you need more services/handholding, why shouldn't you expect to pay more? Why should those of us with basic accounts and simple needs have to subsidize you? And if you're leaving Vanguard to go elsewhere, why should those of us not leaving have to pay the costs of transferring your account?I will just wait and see. I have basic accounts and very simple usage at Vanguard. Everything I need to do I can do online, so as long at that process does not change I doubt anything will impact us.
I do not have an experience with an POA but my mom had an account there and the first thing you needed to do was to open an account in your name. For me that meant my siblings had to open theirs also. They moved the money into the individual account and then you could move it. A couple of my siblings did move it out.Fidelity would be on my short list if I moved also. I noted today a post on BH by someone who states that Fidelity will not allow a POA holder to transfer money out using their website. I don't know if that extends to having funds transferred out to an account in the name of the person for whom POA is being exercised. That might be a deal-breaker for me. If I ever get close to considering a move I will start a thorough due diligence.
Well, let's see... it is industry practice to do these without charges... why would it cost more money for Vanguard to do these things that others are doing for free? And they are for profit entities and think that providing them for free is a good thing.Me, too. If you need more services/handholding, why shouldn't you expect to pay more? Why should those of us with basic accounts and simple needs have to subsidize you? And if you're leaving Vanguard to go elsewhere, why should those of us not leaving have to pay the costs of transferring your account?
Vanguard is owned by its customers, like me. I don't want to pay even my infinitesimal share for them to coddle you.Well, let's see... it is industry practice to do these without charges... why would it cost more money for Vanguard to do these things that others are doing for free? And they are for profit entities and think that providing them for free is a good thing.
They generate other revenue elsewhere in their business that perhaps VG does not.Well, let's see... it is industry practice to do these without charges... why would it cost more money for Vanguard to do these things that others are doing for free? And they are for profit entities and think that providing them for free is a good thing.
he said after discussing ESG and DEI, lol
I suppose the concept of nickel-and-diming is in the eye of the beholder. No one likes to pay fees for anything, but the examples of the "nickel and dime" in the piece seem pretty reasonable to me. The piece suggests that Vanguard could "absorb" those costs - but that really means that those who don't consume the extra phone time or who do meet the investment minimums pay extra for those who don't comply with the limits set by Vanguard. If the fees were excessive or truly burdensome, I guess I could see the complaint, but, realistically, it's not that much extra for the extra service. As far as the $100 for exiting - I'm sure most of the other big Houses will cover that for anyone willing to transfer their funds.Article on the evolution of Vanguard Vanguard 'nickel-and-dimes Grandma' after 49 years without junk fees
We only have tIRAs and Roth IRAs (Wellington, Wellsley, and MM funds for dividends) at Vanguard. We don't plan to make any changes at our age so I am not concerned. Eventually it will all be inherited so I hope to convince our 2 grown children (61 and 56) to leave it alone and only harvest the RMDs as it is set up and they will be set for retirement along with their SS. Neither of them is knowledgeable about investing so I hope they listen. I don't think the new CEO will have much of an impact for us or them. If it ever becomes a problem then I will be recommending that they move them from MFs to index funds.All I care about is their index funds. If he raises expense ratios a basis point or two to fund better customer service, that’s ok too.