They are seen as a potential conflict of interest between the investment manager and its client. The manager is getting a benefit from the broker-dealer (generally, research) for choosing that broker-dealer to effect transactions on the client’s behalf. The client pays the transaction costs to the b/d, which may be higher than others, but the manager gets the benefit.
Here is a law firm article describing the state of play a couple years ago: http://ssbb.com/index.php/publications/entry/188
But doesn’t the client still pay for the b/d research, even in a default situation? Clients still pay fees to the investment manager, which still pays the b/d for the research information. So, indirectly, the client would still be paying for b/d research in a default situation.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.