Jump to content
Kim

Comparing 403bs

Recommended Posts

Guest Sierra

Equally in the spirit of "full disclosure," Kim, you should know that a.) I have no affiliation with ING, other than being a very satisfied client who tires of hearing them bashed on this board,

===============================================

Are you an employee of NYSUT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

You divulged that you are not employed by ING. Why do you refuse to tell us your employment status with NYSUT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joel,

 

Do you think your lack of response from French Teacher could be because he/she NEVER posts during school hours. Oh no, nothing so logical. You couldn't be bothered with something like actual data. You had to leap to the nefarious schemes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You divulged that you are not employed by ING. Why do you refuse to tell us your employment status with NYSUT?

No, I'm employed by a NYSUT local. I teach French.

 

I also don't sit right at the computer 24/7, so the responses can be sporadic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

No, I'm employed by a NYSUT local. I teach French.

==============================================

A NYSUT local is a union not a school district. So one can be employed by the local union and the school district. Please clarify your status.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I'm employed by a NYSUT local. I teach French.

==============================================

A NYSUT local is a union not a school district. So one can be employed by the local union and the school district. Please clarify your status.

 

I thought that saying I was a French teacher was a pretty solid clarification. I work IN a NYSUT district. Clearer?

 

More to the point, why does that matter? Does it have any bearing on anything that I'm saying factually? It's pretty clear that you'd rather try to question my motives for writing, rather than address the factual matters on which you find yourself corrected, time and again.

 

The factual matter which we were discussing, for the record, is that the AFT endorses ING, has done so at every turn, and in fact has never indicated in any way, shape or form that they have ANY problems with the way ING does business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

No insult intended, I just wanted full disclosure. Thank You.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The average 403(b) annuity charges administrative costs of 2.11 percent of assets a year, according to Morningstar Inc., a financial research firm. By comparison, the average mutual fund has expenses of 1.36 percent. Many large mutual funds, such as those offered by the Vanguard Group, have expenses as low as 0.18 percent of assets each year. Compounded over the span of one's career, the difference in fees means serious money.

================================================

The author of the Shark Attack is paid by the AFT. The above quote comes from his article. If, as you say the aft has no problem with ING, please tell us what was the author attemting to convey with the above facts?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

Life insurance, covering only the amount invested (not growth on the investment) runs about 1.25 percent. Some insurers will guarantee a minimum amount of investment growth but little more than can be realized in the most conservative investments.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What was the author of the Shark Attack attempting to covey by the above disclosure? That if you get it down to 1 percent it is a worthwhile fee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No insult intended, I just wanted full disclosure. Thank You.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The average 403(b) annuity charges administrative costs of 2.11 percent of assets a year, according to Morningstar Inc., a financial research firm. By comparison, the average mutual fund has expenses of 1.36 percent. Many large mutual funds, such as those offered by the Vanguard Group, have expenses as low as 0.18 percent of assets each year. Compounded over the span of one's career, the difference in fees means serious money.

================================================

The author of the Shark Attack is paid by the AFT. The above quote comes from his article. If, as you say the aft has no problem with ING, please tell us what was the author attemting to convey with the above facts?

Probably that lower fees are better. That's why that same author was so pleased with NYSUT's work on behalf of its membership...NYSUT's dealings with ING have lowered the overall expenses for a full-service investment by a substantial margin. Of course, no-loads are also available if you're willing to accept an even lesser level of service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Joel, I have all of my funds at Vanguard except for the one at TIAA-CREF where my new 403b funds go now. I pay an average of .25% for all of those funds. If I paid the average of 2.11% for annuities and 1.38% for mutual funds, I would be paying $5000 to $8000 more a year than I am now paying. That is year in and year out. That is serious money! I hope that Kim (if she is still reading this) takes notice that cost matter. Best Wishes.

 

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

Probably that lower fees are better. That's why that same author was so pleased with NYSUT's work on behalf of its membership...NYSUT's dealings with ING have lowered the overall expenses for a full-service investment by a substantial margin. Of course, no-loads are also available if you're willing to accept an even lesser level of service.

===============================================

Would you care to quantify the term "substantial margin"?

 

Don't you find it curious to note that he never mentioned that if you pick that Vanguard fund with an expense ratio of 0.18 you have to expect substantially less service. Moreover, he never asserted that you can expect to receive "full service" if you choose a 2 percent plan. HE NEVER EQUATED COST WITH SERVICE! By the way where did you pick up that term "a full service provider"?

 

Additionally, don't you find it curious that he never gave the details of the NYSUT/ING/Opportunity Plus Variable Annuity to back up his assertion that NYSUT is working to reduce administrative costs. Did he mean by "administrative costs" that annual $50 account fee that was eliminated? Because you know that the expense ratio of the underlying investment fund does not include "administrative costs".

 

In fact he never mentioned Opportunity Plus/ING as being NYSUT's endorsed vendor. That says volumes about how pleased he was about the product. He never mentioned as you so often do that no-loads are readily available in all the school districts of New York.

 

He was simply told by his editor to give NYSUT credit for something. So the people at NYSUT told him that they reduced the administrative costs associated with Opportunity Plus. He knew very well that the City teachers union (half of the NYSUT membership) rejected Opportuniy Plus/ING out of hand but he also knew that fact would never be published

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably that lower fees are better. That's why that same author was so pleased with NYSUT's work on behalf of its membership...NYSUT's dealings with ING have lowered the overall expenses for a full-service investment by a substantial margin. Of course, no-loads are also available if you're willing to accept an even lesser level of service.

===============================================

Would you care to quantify the term "substantial margin"?

 

Don't you find it curious to note that he never mentioned that if you pick that Vanguard fund with an expense ratio of 0.18 you have to expect substantially less service. Moreover, he never asserted that you can expect to receive "full service" if you choose a 2 percent plan. HE NEVER EQUATED COST WITH SERVICE! By the way where did you pick up that term "a full service provider"?

 

Additionally, don't you find it curious that he never gave the details of the NYSUT/ING/Opportunity Plus Variable Annuity to back up his assertion that NYSUT is working to reduce administrative costs. Did he mean by "administrative costs" that annual $50 account fee that was eliminated? Because you know that the expense ratio of the underlying investment fund does not include "administrative costs".

 

In fact he never mentioned Opportunity Plus/ING as being NYSUT's endorsed vendor. That says volumes about how pleased he was about the product. He never mentioned as you so often do that no-loads are readily available in all the school districts of New York.

 

He was simply told by his editor to give NYSUT credit for something. So the people at NYSUT told him that they reduced the administrative costs associated with Opportunity Plus. He knew very well that the City teachers union (half of the NYSUT membership) rejected Opportuniy Plus/ING out of hand but he also knew that fact would never be published

Joel...and I mean this with all due respect...you're talking out of your here. Do you know for a fact that the author of the article was "told by his editor to give NYSUT credit for something"? No...didn't think so. In fact, the way in which the author credits NYSUT with such good work on behalf of its membership is CONSISTENT with what they've said all along about ING. Indeed, if they WERE to say something disparaging about ING, it would be completely OUT of character with what they have said EVERYWHERE else.

 

By the way, the annual account fee that was eliminated was $30, not $50. Amazing that you have yet another fact WRONG.

 

Here's another one that you have wrong: the city teacher's union never rejected ING out of hand, as you wrongly assert. Indeed, it was never put to a membership vote!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

"Some school systems are revamping their 403(b) offerings. In Chicago, for instance, a new program is expected to save employees more than $6 million a year in fees. Before the change, according to a school official, teachers paid 2 percent to 3 percent in fees and more than two-thirds of their money was tied up in fixed investments. Now Chicago school workers can buy no-load funds and reduced-fee annuities through three companies."

 

"The New York State United Teachers, Education Minnesota and the United Federation of Teachers (New York City) have also used their significant clout to force positive changes in the 403(b) options offered to their members and to reduce administrative expenses."

================================================

The article has 2443 words and 40 of them refer to NYSUT/MINN/NYC. It says that these THREE organizations, not just your NYSUT "have also used their significant clout to force positive changes in the 403(b) options offered to their members and to reduce administrative expenses"

 

But the author doesn't give the specifics of these positive changes like he does about Chicago. Additionally, it makes no sense for him to include NYC in the statement because NYC always had only no-loads. In my view these 40 words are simply a screwup!!

 

In Chicago he asserts that they use to have 2-3 percent plans and now they have no-loads. So he is saying 2-3 percent plans are bad and thus "sharks" and having no-loads is ideal. Now, this makes logical sense.

 

Your Opportunity Plus is a 2 percent plan so I leave it up to you as to what the author would advise you to do especially in light of the fact that your district offers no-loads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...