Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Dissatisfied MFAA brokers a minority: Kane

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 08:00 AM Agree 0
MFAA president Steve Kane has hit back at critics of MFAA value, saying these brokers are in the minority among the association's membership
  • ozboy | 13 Feb 2012, 10:23 AM Agree 0
    What percentage of members actually filled in the survey? Most people keep quiet as apposed to complaining. Couple this with 51% only being satisfied and I think the MFAA is well down on where it should be
  • Country Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 10:52 AM Agree 0
    I agree with ozboy but I am still one who believes that the MFAA provide value , a prime example is the new securities registers , the MFAa information vis John Denovon has been excellent compared to the information about from some of our lenders.
    I question the cumpulsory membership aspect from the lenders and aggregators.
  • Paul Gollan | 13 Feb 2012, 10:57 AM Agree 0
    With the greatest respect to Steve, whilst my personal view is the MFAA is a wonderful organisation that does great work, if the requirement of compulsory industry membership was removed by all lenders as condition of accreditation large numbers of brokers would exit faster than a colony of ants on a blueberry muffin.
  • DB VIC | 13 Feb 2012, 11:01 AM Agree 0
    I would agree with statements made by OZBOY. Of the MFAA membership - how many completed the survey and how many failed to respond at all? That cannot be a true reflection of accurate data. I have yet to see what value the MFAA provides to the brokers out there who are desperatly working their guts out to ensure that that service their clients, whilst satisfying the Licensing requirements, and in the end hope to make a dollar to feed their families. When lenders cut commissions, increased claw backs and the overall cost of doing business sky rocketed, what significant involvement has the MFAA had in working with the BROKERS to bring this back in line. Talk about third line forcing... The government regulates if and when we charge a fee, how we go about doing so, the banks control the commissions they pay, interestingly do not keep us in the loop with the performance on clients accounts, and will either stop commissions (trail) or apply claw backs in line with their trading terms and policies without notice or notification to us, and we are expected to just accept that. I love this industry for many reasons, the primary being the clients, the solution and the support we can provide them, but i see so little new blood coming in to what is suppose to be a professional industry or profession. MFAA needs to spend more time building broker realtions, supporting us, removing banks from their membership and become a broker body, and equally as important, they need to bring new industry participants to the table. All we are doing is building the line share / increasing the % of broker indtroduced business essentially means we are doing all the work for the banks and lenders, when in fact this industry will fall away slowly with no new entrant growth, and what will be left...The banks to take back all lending. MFAA what do you actually do?
  • Qld Country Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 11:08 AM Agree 0
    MFAA is "dreaming " if it thinks it only 22% are dissatisfied , all functions are capital city based , webinars are expensive - what do we actually get for membership ?
  • Aaron | 13 Feb 2012, 11:14 AM Agree 0
    "Only 22% were dissatisfied" surely this should not be okay.
  • Donut | 13 Feb 2012, 11:26 AM Agree 0
    As a broker,I value the MFAA and what they do. I am of the opinion that to be the Industry Body that represents all stakeholders in the industry is a major bonus, not a handicap. To be able to communicate with all stakeholders in the industry as closely as the MFAA can, and does, is for me, a serious reason why I belong to the MFAA and not any other contender.
    Further if you are a member and you don't see the value in the MFAA, maybe you don't use the Website. I feel the website is great value and use it all the time!
    Further, in a future time when we do not need to be a member of an industry body, (and I feel this time is inevitable, thanks to beurocrtaic interference), who is going to be there for us,and with us....... the Aggregators? hahahha. I don't think so. The Aggregators are in this for money, no other reason. Why didn't the Aggrgators stop the lenders dropping commissions? because they are not tough enough and too scared of the banks.
    The MFAA is not in this for profit. They are in this for the good of the industry and if you can't see that, then don't join it, join something else and stop whinging.
  • iMac | 13 Feb 2012, 11:31 AM Agree 0
    The broker / members that did Not respond because they are totall dissatisfied with MFAA. The MFAA work for the big end of town, not for the brokers.
    Apathy is the problem. Lets face it, if you had a large Ballroom full of brokers, there'd be plenty of room, but not many balls.
  • Alwyn Beardmore | 13 Feb 2012, 11:32 AM Agree 0
    Perhaps the MFAA would be better served by understanding why so many negative comments are made about MFAA's lack of contribution to the broker area rather than simply saying that most of their members are happy - because regardless of whether it is 30% or 50% there are consioderable unhappy members.
  • Brookvale Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 11:32 AM Agree 0
    My position is simple, I believe the MFAA does provide value and has a place in the industry but shouldn't sit back and pat itself on the back. A good example of where it gets it wrong is the requirement I faced recently after upgrading my Cert IV to Diploma level, where I had to sit a further 'exam' to get MFAA recognise the qualification as the particular provider, despite having a nationally recognised course under the Australia Qualifications Framework course was not on the MFAA 'preferred supplier' list. This cost me additional time and effort with no added-value which translates to real cost. Also, I see no value in mandatory membership, especially in a nationally regulated environment as regards qualifications. One last comment, the MFAA is happy with nearly 50% of constituents either not happy or neutral (and no indication of how many abstained) suggests to me that it should set its sights and those of the MFAA quite a bit higher!
  • Nicki - Broker 13 yrs | 13 Feb 2012, 11:33 AM Agree 0
    A survey done in 2009.....Wow talk about a dinasaur in the room. A survey done in 2009 ad totally irrelevant today.
  • palms | 13 Feb 2012, 11:34 AM Agree 0
    It is not dissatisfaction with MFAA that is the question, they do a good job. Compulsory membership is the problem 88% say they are dissatisfied with that.
  • Regional Member | 13 Feb 2012, 11:41 AM Agree 0
    Donut....If you think the aggragators are not tough enough, surely you can not say the MFAA is strong, where were they when the commissions were being decreased ? Would you think that because the banks either individually or through affliates were going to listen tho the MFAA ? ithink not !
  • Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 11:56 AM Agree 0
    It is now 2012, so many changes since 2009 isn't there?
  • Donut | 13 Feb 2012, 12:09 PM Agree 0
    Regional member............the MFAA is not a signatory to our agreements with agregators/lenders..........maybe they should be, and then they could fight for us.And Palms is right, the main focus should be on the fact that some lenders and agregators are forcing us to join. Do Doctors have to belong to he AMA, do Lawyers have to belong to the Law Society? Do Accountants have to belong to an industry body?...........I am not sure that they do and are they any more professional than us? Definitely not!!!
  • Will - Perth | 13 Feb 2012, 12:11 PM Agree 0
    The absolute majority of brokers are NOT happy with MFAA. I do not know of a single individual who thnks it adds value to our business. MFAA by most has ben seen as a Bankers Policeman against us.

    Many brokers like me just kept quiet. I wrote to MFAA before and the response from MFAA left me stunned. The reply was incredibly dismissive and almost agressive. I never wrote back, waste of time. But I did show others the reply and they were not surprised.
  • Duncan | 13 Feb 2012, 12:12 PM Agree 0
    All I can say is that, in my business if I had 51% of my customers happy and 25% neutral than I would have a hard look at my business. The question is if you did not have to be a member of the MFAA and it was NOT a lenders requirement would you still be a memeber. if there was value than everyone would. I suspect the answer would be NO! I am sure if only 51% of FAST members were only statisfied it would cause worry about the business.
  • Constable Care | 13 Feb 2012, 12:18 PM Agree 0
    Someone use Surveymonkey.com, hit the whole database and see what we think. I gtee more dissatisfied with MFAA and ASIC demands. Its like joining a union, but the union has invited the banks to the party. Aggregators, please help. Anyone want to start a brokers only membership that actually does something.i.e. maintain std of service to brokers, stop discrimination on commissions, charge fees to banks for mistakes, help with compliance and ASIC.
  • not a fan of MFAA | 13 Feb 2012, 12:27 PM Agree 0
    MFAA does so little for it's fees for the average Broker, and then expects that we will accept compulsory Diploma requirements? I will not be renewing our memberships this year - we're going to try FBAA. Maybe they also represent brokers adequately, not other industry members? They accept that we don't need to spend another few thousand getting our brokers another Diploma for their wall.
  • John | 13 Feb 2012, 12:45 PM Agree 0
    Maybe its time for an updated survey to be conducted .
  • NB Broker | 13 Feb 2012, 01:23 PM Agree 0
    2009 survey completely out of date, I would hardly be hanging my hat on a client I gave good service to in 2009 being 51% happy.
    When the commissions were cut where was MFAA?
    When banks decided to have individual quota's on loans submitted where was MFAA?
    Forcing anyone to belong to a 'self appointed' industry body is ridiculous. Not to mention bordering on illegal based on third party forcing laws.
  • Wayne Armstrong | 13 Feb 2012, 01:25 PM Agree 0
    After ASIC say its up to the broker to join ( no third line forcing )
    They will need to shut the doors
  • NoTimeLikeTheFuture | 13 Feb 2012, 01:37 PM Agree 0
    I didn't know brokers where such whingers.

    Have a read of your comments above, then have a long look at yourselves. Worse than a bunch of children.

    MFAA did really well steering us through all that licensing stuff and overall they represent us well and speak up for us as best they can.

    Who really cares about $405 a year? If you do then leave the industry.
  • Laurie - a NSW country broker | 14 Feb 2012, 08:51 AM Agree 0
    Could not agree more with "No Time Like The Future" We earn great money, with tremoundous job satisfaction and have lots of fun on the journey. The MFAA have helped us much more than most release, and I for one will continue to give them my full support.
  • James Green | 14 Feb 2012, 01:34 PM Agree 0
    The MFAA have done an excellent job building the membership base to now. They have done a great job assisting with legal obstacles and challenges we face with licensing. This movement relates to the future of the association.
    How is the MFAA going to grow it membership base and revenue?
    Oxygen has supported MFAA since inception and we have two brokers currently volunteering their time to further support the association’s development.
    We believe the MFAA can grow its membership base and revenues.
    The facts are the MFAA needs to ramp up its value proposition and not rely on a passive compulsory membership base to drive its growth. I believe this includes facilitating the hard debate between its sponsors and its core membership base. Hard debate on a variety of subjects including but not limited to:
    * Membership growth from the sponsors staff and contractors e.g. bank branch representatives,
    * Developing deeper partnership between brokers and the sponsors e.g. balancing broker commissions with the banks objectives to grow profitability.
    Win/Win debates not the current environment, explained to me as “we have been told we can’t discuss this because it may upset the sponsors.”
Post a reply