Youāre totally right, time will tell if its successful or not and how many take it up. I also agree that in the grand scheme Ā£10 isnt a lot to pay per month if youāre doing well from your portfolio and are withdrawing good profit from it. My issue with the statement of the small loud minority aspect is the whole āblissful ignoranceā stance of it from the majority as you say.
The saying āIf you dont ask, the answer is always noā rings true here. The majority sitting back and saying nothing, while internally to themselves wishing they could have this feature, this stock, this UI design etc doesnt help anyone if they dont speak up. The small majority who do come on here to suggest features, or request stocks are the ones taking more action that those sitting back, reaping the rewards of those who actually bothered to take interest in FT and its development. We may not represent the majority because we dont hear them, because they dont bother to speak up.
Still acknowledge that they dont have to voice their opinions here if they choose not to, its their freedom of choice. I just think its unfair to class us on here as complainers when the majority take no real active interest in the platform, yet are quite happy to have the benefits of the discussions held on here.
I do not want to drag the conversation over and over. I just expressed my opinion and feedback. My feedback as a costumer is that I am disappointed in seeing stock that I regularly invest in going behind a paywall. And this lowered my loyalty to the brand. I always supported them here on the forum, when there were delay with implementing features and other stuff because I firmly believed in their values. I understand that they need to be sustainable as business but seeing stock behind a pay wall is somewhat against their values.
To answer your question, I honestly do not know how they should make money. I hope I did.
As I said in a later message, the loudest are usually the minority. That doesnāt necessarily mean that Iām classing people here as complainers. I could be considered to be too loudly in support.
I donāt in any way mean to suggest that those here donāt care about Freetrade, or not want it to succeed. Certainly, the team from Freetrade listen and so those who post here have a certain level of influence. Again, my core point is just that the forum members canāt possibly represent all the users and time and Freetradeās internal data will show whether or not Plus is a success.
I get that I was trying to attack you I was more so looking for solutions and I was hoping you could help, in terms of coming up with alternatives thatās all
I love the way you have stated on multiple posts that no one has a monopoly on an opinion and yet in these multiple posts have sought to strongly disagree with anyone who has raised any constructive criticism.
This is my issue with the forum at the moment, there seem to be a lot of people (usually with beta tester, founding member, investor in their titles, I appreciate you havenāt) who are overtly critical of anyone with a different opinion.
I think your original statement that people disgruntled with the current Plus offer are in a significant minority is without any basis either way and unhelpful.
From my perspective Iām uncomfortable with the narrative that Plus houses the high risk shares, but includes highly popular and good performing Investment Trusts such as Baillie Giffordās Pacific Horizon, European Growth & China Growth. These are part of my investment portfolio which is 100% Investment Trusts.
For example Baillie Gifford US Growth - free
Baillie Gifford European Growth - plus
Doesnāt make sense to me, whatās the difference? The way FT have categorized the Plus shares has created this anomaly, which doesnāt seem to be logical.
I donāt see these as overly speculative, but have the issue of Scottish Mortgage, Edinburgh Worldwide, Allianz Technology, Worldwide Healthcare being free and the above being in the paywall forcing me into a Ā£10 a month subscription.
Iām an investor not a trader and a relative newbie, so donāt need the ābells and whistlesā that Plus provides, plus donāt trade in massive volumes.
If I could trade all investment trusts highlighted for free I would move my ISA. If Plus included a SIPP, I may move my ISA and add a SIPP
However, at the moment HL charges me Ā£45 a year platform free and any trade I make is Ā£1.50 via the regular investment option. Until ITās are removed from the Paywall, thereās no incentive for me to move.
As a caveat Iād like to move as I like the platform.
Sushi for lunch costs more than Ā£10. Two pints is more than Ā£10ā¦
Personally, I think Ā£10 a month is super good value. I want a financial institution that is looking after my investments to make money so they can afford to have proper governance and controls.
Freetrade is still very young and I agree they should offer 50% off for the first year while the add more features.
And of course everyone will have a different view on what their perception of value isā¦ there will always be those who search out the cheapest available price and that is fine.
Itās fine to have a different opinion but itās seems ironic that you are pointing out this person is jumping on āconstructive criticismā strongly - whilst at the same time in this one thread (youāve also shared these figures on another thread I think). You have gone over the Ā£45 + Ā£1.50 HL costs in 5 separate posts - (even though given you have a 4 stock portfolio it only saves you Ā£3 a year over plus with the limitation that for your Ā£117 you canāt buy any other stocks should the option take your fancy). It seems to be a very specific and limited example you keep pushing to show that Freetrade is more expensive, and as such not particularly constructive as it is pretty specific to your circumstances - only trusts (as they charge a lot more for shares, only 4 holdings as then 5 would cost more than plus).
I am not sure how useful it is to keep repeating the same point over and over when the product hasnāt been released fully yet. Also, no one product is going to be perfect for everyone and clearly Freetrade are listening to the feedback here and will do what they think best meets the needs of the user - both current and future.
As you say you want an incentive to move but even if you expanded your holdings by 1 trust, or wanted to buy an individual stock once in a year, etcā¦ at some point then Plus would become the better value with the competitor for your specific needs immediately.
A Slightly condescending last line (at least it reads that way - if it wasnāt meant that way then feel free to correct me) - I was simply trying to engage with you as I really donāt understand why repeating an argument that saves you 3 pounds a year is helpful. You have focused on the cost side quite a bit in previous posts, and by āignoringā my point I am not sure that proves anything. I am not trying to win an argument, just wanting to get across that it isnāt so much more expensive - you keep saying it should be 6/7 a month but that would make it significantly less than you are happy to pay now - for a product that doesnāt let you have even 1 extra fund or any shares - without paying even more in costs.
But I think the other point you make about understanding the āwhyā is a good one and something that must be frustrating if it is not clearly explained.
That is is much more helpful, and I think you make some good points, especially points 2 and 3.
The constant restating of the fees without reference to a simple Ā£3 difference is what seems unnecessary, but as you have stated it here in the most recent post is very constructive.
Last line wasnt meant to be condescending at all, was more to defend myself from a belief that Iām being critical for the sake of it.
In hindsight I appreciated my situation was quite niche, hence why Iāve not discussed it on this thread. Iāve mentioned the general Ā£45 platform fee and Ā£1.50 regular trading fee only and that was just to give a comparison against the proposed Ā£10 plus fee. This means if you used the regular trading option on HL, you would have to trade over 51 times a year for it to be more expensive than Plus (appreciate its not a 100% like for like comparison in terms of instantaneous trading).
I like the product and platform, moving to FT would allow me to drip feed my investments more regularly (monthly instead of quarterly/yearly). I want to move. I do t want to subscribe to Plus at this moment (SIPP likely time be a game changer) but would leave my portfolio incomplete.
I also think the blanket allocation of free/plus stocks creates nuances (BG US Growth v European Growth) which FT may want to look at (not having ITās in plus in general would help me out further).
I donāt see much criticism but rather constructive feedback. Remember many of us will be investors so actually want Freetrade to do well.
Obviously Plus will evolve over time but Freetrade risk doing what Monzo did with their Plus product - in ignoring the feedback from their community - on the assumption it wasnāt representative. Only trouble was that it was as I suspect are the constructive comments here.
The other point is that consumers donāt like to pay on the basis that something is basic now but will āimprove over timeā - even Monzo had the decency to say ābuy it for what the product is now, not what it might be one dayā.
In my view Plus is
too expensive for what it looks like;
Putting stocks behind Plus the way they have is the wrong approach;
Freetrade need to get the basics right before going for lots of added features - at the moment they havenāt.
Also, there is no point only comparing prices to relatively expensive brokers like HL - the offering needs to be competitive against others: not just T212 but also those like x-o.co.uk and iWeb and needs to be attractive to buy and hold investors - not just traders.
I agree. I think it is a very dangerous lesson to teach newbies that shares in the indexes are inherently less risky than those outside of it. Tell that to holders of Shell and HSBC, both have wiped out 25 years of capital appreciation.
Also it seems mad that BG funds are divided between Plus and Free. I understand some are in the FTSE250 and some are not but in terms of a strategic divide it doesnāt make sense to me.
Iām a Freeetrade shareholder and mostly agree with this move but you donāt offer any funds like HL and AJ Bell because you think investors would be better served by investment trusts and ETFs but now popular investment trusts like Pacific Horizon will only be available to the small percentage of your customer base who can justify paying Ā£10 a month. I think thatās something you should reconsider.
As others have suggested make the Plus stocks tradable for a small fee. This would be a stepping stone for customers to upgrade to Plus in the future once it becomes better value for money.
A lot of their mistakes I would say were because they kept pandering to the ācommunityā. Sometimes the community is wrong, and constantly changing to their ever changing demands isnāt always the right decision.
I understand the idea behind āsafe stocksā for new investors but most people will do their own research and make their own choices regarding what is a low/high risk. So to answer your question, I donāt think FT misjudged but I donāt agree with the separation of stocks behind Plus subscription.
What Iād want from Plus is extensive tools or anything that provides extra support to experienced investors, but to be honest, I donāt think FT needs a Plus service at this time. I would suggest focusing on improving the current GIA & ISA since there are still many features lacking right now. I find myself turning to outside sources and other platforms to fulfil those needs.