[lookout123]

TW, I've said it before and I'll say it again. You have no idea what it is I (or other advisors) do for a living. You refer to numerous studies, but show me the actual numbers. Many mutual funds do under perform the market. Fewer underperform if actually compared to the appropriate benchmarks. That's the point. But many, MANY, outperform the market. Finding them is the trick. That is what I do. I match my clients up with the appropriate investments for their A) risk tolerance, B) time horizon, C) goals. When you take that into account, you'll realize that the benchmark isn't the end all, be all.

I've often stated that it is not necessary to have a financial advisor. One can successfully build their own retirement plan, they may also be capable of planning for the catastrophic needs that come up. A few can effectively assemble an efficient estate plan as well. Unfortunately, most individuals would be just as successful doing all of those things as I would be building a computer, writing a program, mounting a successful legal defense, performing surgery, or designing a revolutionary component for the space program. The point is that not everyone has the time, ability, or desire to learn what it is that I spend all day every day doing. Most of those people aren't concerned with making sure they get to brag about milking every last basis point out of the market at the next geeks-r-us meeting. Believe it or not, successful individuals don't begrudge me my fees because they've taken the time to learn what I do for them. I provide returns in line with the market in up times, I protect them in down times, I walk with them through both up and down times, and I do this all with less risk than the overall market.

But you can keep reading your white papers about my industry, and thinking you know it all. BTW, care to venture a guess as to who is bankrolling the studies you refer to? I'm sure they don't have an agenda. But I'm sure you thought of that.