Perhaps it is also timely to remind the public that being licensed does not automatically make someone's advice trustworthy. This is particularly so when the overwhelmingly dominant form of compensation model in Singapore’s financial advisory industry is commission-based. Whether it’s finfluencers or financial advisers, consumers need to understand the types and extent of conflicts of interest present.
It's all about money. They create content to garner views so they earn directly or indirectly from youtube, referrals, adverts. So it's all about money.
if your influencing is sponsor, what makes you think that your "advice" is that trustworthy? this bill should be there to protect the SBF and Madoff of Singapore
Even banks that have license will give wrong investment advise but can clients sue ? NO! It’s a suggestion unless the bank has a finance product that has dodgy areas then maybe there’s a case but it’s rare client can win any lawsuit against banks that makes you sigh a thick book of t&c
Financial influencers could be potential market manipulators too. We need policies to review this kind of content to avoid young people falling into these kinds of high-risk investments, especially when influencers discuss cryptocurrency.
Financial influencers came to be due to gaps in the market: Public who were not well informed wanted to develop financial literacy and grow wealth, yet the existing licensed bodies are not incentivized to provide all rounded, objective, easy to understand advise, but instead are remunerated based on the product their company is selling. At the same time, not all licensed personnel's advice is legit either (except for those with professional certifications like CFA, CPA etc) The issue is, even for Financial Influencers the quality of content varies - some have genuine intentions but may have unintentionally provided partial truths; some may not even have awareness to realize their own gaps but offered advise with certainty. There are many grey areas, not just the accuracy of content, but the timing also matters. However too much regulation is detrimental, key is for public to make the effort to self educate, take a part time finance course to better distinguish the credibility, validity of an advise.
Regulating for 5 complains a year? Waste of public funds. Anyways heard all these came about because of insurance agents writing to authorities they themselves. Maybe they’re the ones complaining to begin. One of them is Kenny from reit whois very vocal about it and tag finfluencers on social media platforms to nicely warn them. 2 of my friend got "warn" by him as well. Or I see on my fb the agents telling investors not to listen to anyone with no license. But we all know how credible insurance agents advice are sometimes too. Maybe we actually got more than 5 complains per year on agents. That would be funny. But honestly good video done. We now learn what makes something a financial advice. Next step is say we can open more avenue to complain the errant ones instead. We no need to have a nanny state and we can self regulate. Just complain and take out the lousy ones.
Free market can self-regulate. There is no need for more oversight. If influencer put out fake content, consumers can stop watching. The call for more regulation is organized mainly by big banks to put up barriers of entry for influencers, increase information asymmetry, and to retain its monopoly position in the financial market. Singaporean consumers beware and resist call for more oversight.
Selling passive funds with nearly 1% management fees by banks to those who don’t know how to invest is already a scam. Plus, high penalty fees on withdrawal. Banks’ investment terms should be regulated first.
So how do you determine it's fake content? When you know you lost your money? Damage has been done. Your hard earn money is lost. So technically, you realize it's fake content. A thousand views, maybe 10% of them lost money. That's when you know it's fake content, you warn others. You complaint. But 10% of the people lost their hard earn money. Nice analogy from you btw.
Some of these influencers are persuading on certain financial or investment strategies over another and not products specific. More like delivering general finance tutorial online.
how do they survive? by taking sponsorship from those platforms and ask ppl to invest right? pushing ppl to authentic platform is still fine, but what if you push ppl to shady platforms and close overnight? reference to SBF
I don’t mind people trying to be financial influencers but I do not wanna see any of their ads on UA-cam anymore (yes I know there is UA-cam premium but that’s beside the point). I would appreciate if the government is able to do something about this.
What about overseas influencers? What if some of these influencers are credible and are providing information and analysis that official channels are not giving? People should be educated and be trusted enough to make their own decisions. Is government the final arbiter of truth? Many times, they are also following foreign practices/governments. And citizens can’t do the same? Government does not have the jurisdiction for truth.
if any Singaporeans think we first to the gate on this, our neighbours Malaysia already chuut guideline on their own Finfluencers liao. its all over their own social media 3 months ago. so yes its happening just dunno what is the penalties lol.
Information should be free flowing to avoid the big fishes to manipulate n move mkts one-sided. However, regulators should also maintain its watch n step in for public awareness, discussions, etc. only then can consumers grow n become smarter.
6:15 hmm legally, you said “ALL” to those questions and “ALL” to those stages. I wonder what’s the actual wording of the financial advisers act if it includes “ALL”. Case in court to argue by finfluencer that says I only watch CNA that says “ALL” to those stages by didn’t know that allegedly ( I didn’t read up on the act) if its “OR”. Thus Finfluencer given much reduced court sentencing or acquitted which result in miscarriage of justice. Interesting case study to monetise as mass communications cum legal thesis.
It's all about money. They create content to garner views so they earn directly or indirectly from youtube, referrals, adverts. So it's all about money.
Guys whatever financial advise you hear from UA-cam is like listening to your uncle kopitiam giving shares investment strategies 😂 take it or leave it . The choice is in you hands .
It is up to consumers to evaluate the advice before acting. I am not sure of regulating helps. What is the point if MOP don't do their own due diligence😊😊
How about those regulated and license given by MAS who turned out to be delinquent? We need a gov institution for investors in SG which CASE or local authorities cannot help too! She is v right at around 853 on the grey areas where these gaps, if not closed, will be widened and caused more damages to the society at large.
That only apply to sg law. Then do it else where but still continue with this content. Is it just a way to earn money? Sg can’t even enforce zero scammer :/
fininfluencers can video what they want. Pls do not believe them. It is better that finfluencers show us their bank accounts that there are really better than licensed ones.
Social media MUST NOT HAVE any finance, law of any kind by unauthorized, unlicensed, a smart alex who might led to issues with laws and personal finances' issues. It should be banned totally. Social media is a place for fun, hobby, relaxation mainly.
![[CNA 24/7 LIVE] Breaking news, top stories and documentaries](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XWq5kBlakcQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Perhaps it is also timely to remind the public that being licensed does not automatically make someone's advice trustworthy. This is particularly so when the overwhelmingly dominant form of compensation model in Singapore’s financial advisory industry is commission-based.
Whether it’s finfluencers or financial advisers, consumers need to understand the types and extent of conflicts of interest present.
Buyers beware.
It's all about money. They create content to garner views so they earn directly or indirectly from youtube, referrals, adverts.
So it's all about money.
if your influencing is sponsor, what makes you think that your "advice" is that trustworthy? this bill should be there to protect the SBF and Madoff of Singapore
Many are very unethical and will try to push what is profitable and which gives them more commission instead of offering what suits the customer.
The funny thing is property agents constantly talking about “financial planning” and they don’t get regulated on that.
I fully support regulation because most of these influencers are paid to promote financial products without any proper license.
Even banks that have license will give wrong investment advise but can clients sue ? NO! It’s a suggestion unless the bank has a finance product that has dodgy areas then maybe there’s a case but it’s rare client can win any lawsuit against banks that makes you sigh a thick book of t&c
Financial influencers could be potential market manipulators too. We need policies to review this kind of content to avoid young people falling into these kinds of high-risk investments, especially when influencers discuss cryptocurrency.
Financial influencers came to be due to gaps in the market: Public who were not well informed wanted to develop financial literacy and grow wealth, yet the existing licensed bodies are not incentivized to provide all rounded, objective, easy to understand advise, but instead are remunerated based on the product their company is selling. At the same time, not all licensed personnel's advice is legit either (except for those with professional certifications like CFA, CPA etc)
The issue is, even for Financial Influencers the quality of content varies - some have genuine intentions but may have unintentionally provided partial truths; some may not even have awareness to realize their own gaps but offered advise with certainty. There are many grey areas, not just the accuracy of content, but the timing also matters. However too much regulation is detrimental, key is for public to make the effort to self educate, take a part time finance course to better distinguish the credibility, validity of an advise.
Regulating for 5 complains a year? Waste of public funds. Anyways heard all these came about because of insurance agents writing to authorities they themselves. Maybe they’re the ones complaining to begin. One of them is Kenny from reit whois very vocal about it and tag finfluencers on social media platforms to nicely warn them. 2 of my friend got "warn" by him as well. Or I see on my fb the agents telling investors not to listen to anyone with no license. But we all know how credible insurance agents advice are sometimes too. Maybe we actually got more than 5 complains per year on agents. That would be funny.
But honestly good video done. We now learn what makes something a financial advice. Next step is say we can open more avenue to complain the errant ones instead. We no need to have a nanny state and we can self regulate. Just complain and take out the lousy ones.
Free market can self-regulate. There is no need for more oversight. If influencer put out fake content, consumers can stop watching. The call for more regulation is organized mainly by big banks to put up barriers of entry for influencers, increase information asymmetry, and to retain its monopoly position in the financial market. Singaporean consumers beware and resist call for more oversight.
Yeah too much regulation on this makes the society sound more communist
free market self-regulate AFTER investors lose their savings. its not for everyone, but it marketed as a quick money platform.
@@clement-su exactly, after SBF, still not everyone understands what is regulatory
Selling passive funds with nearly 1% management fees by banks to those who don’t know how to invest is already a scam. Plus, high penalty fees on withdrawal. Banks’ investment terms should be regulated first.
So how do you determine it's fake content? When you know you lost your money? Damage has been done. Your hard earn money is lost. So technically, you realize it's fake content. A thousand views, maybe 10% of them lost money. That's when you know it's fake content, you warn others. You complaint. But 10% of the people lost their hard earn money. Nice analogy from you btw.
Some of these influencers are persuading on certain financial or investment strategies over another and not products specific. More like delivering general finance tutorial online.
how do they survive? by taking sponsorship from those platforms and ask ppl to invest right? pushing ppl to authentic platform is still fine, but what if you push ppl to shady platforms and close overnight? reference to SBF
Didnt CNA insider or the financial part of CNA interviewed the first lady before?
Hmm what about trading courses ....does the Financial Advisers Act applies ?
How about MAS who “approved” FTS and many in Singapore flock from binance to FTS and lost thousands or even hundreds of thousands ?
That episode had proven that well-educated or highly-connected pros with the greatest credibility can be 100% wrong.
I don’t mind people trying to be financial influencers but I do not wanna see any of their ads on UA-cam anymore (yes I know there is UA-cam premium but that’s beside the point). I would appreciate if the government is able to do something about this.
And then there are mortgage brokers who advise on what property to buy and what insurance products to invest in..
What about overseas influencers? What if some of these influencers are credible and are providing information and analysis that official channels are not giving? People should be educated and be trusted enough to make their own decisions. Is government the final arbiter of truth? Many times, they are also following foreign practices/governments. And citizens can’t do the same? Government does not have the jurisdiction for truth.
It’s kind of funny how a “financial guru”selling courses appeared immediately after this video.
if any Singaporeans think we first to the gate on this, our neighbours Malaysia already chuut guideline on their own Finfluencers liao. its all over their own social media 3 months ago. so yes its happening just dunno what is the penalties lol.
How about the finfluncers from outside sg?
Chyna mostly
Information should be free flowing to avoid the big fishes to manipulate n move mkts one-sided. However, regulators should also maintain its watch n step in for public awareness, discussions, etc. only then can consumers grow n become smarter.
Regulations are mainly for job creations, same as licensing, etc. Do not expect them to know so much.
6:15 hmm legally, you said “ALL” to those questions and “ALL” to those stages. I wonder what’s the actual wording of the financial advisers act if it includes “ALL”. Case in court to argue by finfluencer that says I only watch CNA that says “ALL” to those stages by didn’t know that allegedly ( I didn’t read up on the act) if its “OR”. Thus Finfluencer given much reduced court sentencing or acquitted which result in miscarriage of justice. Interesting case study to monetise as mass communications cum legal thesis.
It's all about money. They create content to garner views so they earn directly or indirectly from youtube, referrals, adverts.
So it's all about money.
Guys whatever financial advise you hear from UA-cam is like listening to your uncle kopitiam giving shares investment strategies 😂 take it or leave it . The choice is in you hands .
Just dont watch their stupid investment ads lol
It is up to consumers to evaluate the advice before acting. I am not sure of regulating helps. What is the point if MOP don't do their own due diligence😊😊
Government needs better and more you tube channels. CPF doesnt even have anything other than short clips that say nothing.
Why does the reporter keep saying influencer like influenza 😆😆😆😆
I wonder what happen to that “if you can give me 5 mins of your time” guy on UA-cam.
More regulation vs. More education. You choose.
Finfluencers... Go live in Malaysia.... No restrictions there...
Or at least get rid of Singapore and live elsewhere.
"Trust me bro!" Thing
Better regulate adam khoo.. the national reverse indicator, only good with repeating textbook theories..
😂😂😂finally mentioned come come good investment come come,
Alot on UA-cam. we ourselves need to think, see and consider carefully. I normally skip .
My Siamese cat is my trusted beloved financial consultant and manager
Playing the devil's advocate here.
How many complaints against finfluencers vs how many complaints against insurance agents/property agents?
Finally... The online financial influencer normally didn't put disclaimer, could mislead those without right knowledge.
Now, got so many Guru call themselves Expert on UA-cam. Government must ban all this scammer
Any average educated Singaporean would know these are scams. Would love to see one of these guys do a DCF 😂
so annoying and disgusting !!!! especially those youtube ad investment "guru" keep telling buy Invesment property options ....argggg sooooo disgusting
Any wonder why Singapore has become a nanny state ???
Hawk tuah spit on dat thangg
I agree. Many are too young to give financial advice
I see how many general investment agent in the 90 yes very good, but in another few year all debt😂😂😂😂
How about those regulated and license given by MAS who turned out to be delinquent? We need a gov institution for investors in SG which CASE or local authorities cannot help too! She is v right at around 853 on the grey areas where these gaps, if not closed, will be widened and caused more damages to the society at large.
Just read them for laughs.
FLFC
That only apply to sg law. Then do it else where but still continue with this content.
Is it just a way to earn money?
Sg can’t even enforce zero scammer :/
Baker tilly
fininfluencers can video what they want. Pls do not believe them. It is better that finfluencers show us their bank accounts that there are really better than licensed ones.
Social media MUST NOT HAVE any finance, law of any kind by unauthorized, unlicensed, a smart alex who might led to issues with laws and personal finances' issues. It should be banned totally. Social media is a place for fun, hobby, relaxation mainly.
license needed