Investment consulting firm adds industry veteran to company roster
ORLANDO, Fla. (June 16, 2015) – AndCo Consulting, an institutional investment consulting firm headquartered in Orlando, Florida with over $61 billion in assets under advisement “AUA” announces today the addition of Paul Murray to its defined contribution team. Paul will assist the firm in its continued expansion of the defined contribution practice, which provides advice to over $6 billion dollars in assets.
Paul brings 25 years of retirement plan experience to his new role as retirement consultant, including his time as a plan consultant for hospitals and higher education organizations in the defined contribution space for 401(k) plans and 403(b) plans.
The addition of Paul to the defined contribution team is a result of AndCo Consulting’s continued expansion of its defined contribution practice as a whole, which has grown significantly over the last few years and currently advises 80 defined contribution clients.
“Paul’s expertise in defined contribution plans is something we are very excited to be adding to our team,” said Steve Gordon, director of retirement solutions at AndCo Consulting. “We’ve been very strategic in selecting people who will help take our practice to the next stage, and Paul is an excellent choice to help us do that.”
AndCo Consulting’s seasoned defined contribution team works with plan sponsors and retirement committees to deliver comprehensive retirement solutions to all institutional plan types, with a specific expertise in public plans, including 457(b), 401(a) and 403(b) plans.
About AndCo Consulting
Established in 2000, AndCo Consulting offers a full range of investment consulting services for all types of institutional plans, including defined contribution, deferred compensation, defined benefit, non-qualified, other postemployment benefits (OPEBs), voluntary employees beneficiary associations (VEBAs), operating reserves and endowment and foundations. The firm serves as a fiduciary to each of its clients while assisting them in making important investment and retirement plan decisions, delivering customized services to meet each client’s unique needs.
Dr. Dre is often looked at as a pioneer. Legendary rapper, music producer and Founder of Aftermath Entertainment, the man born Andre Romelle Young is now 50 years old and worth an estimated $700 million dollars. Surely, this rough-and-tumble kid from Compton, California made a name through his music, but he sustained his wealth by means outside of the music industry that he’s so frequently associated with. Though many still assume that performance is his main breadwinner, Dr. Dre made much of his wealth with the popular line of speakers and headphones, Beats by Dre™. Before he sold the company to Apple, Dr. Dre’s income model was not unlike many Defined Contribution (DC) plan recordkeeping models:
Because of the lesser-known nature of SV and GA funds in particular (compared to Dr. Dre’s lesser known, but substantial income from Beats by Dre™), it is imperative that we evaluate providers in an “open architecture” environment. However, ensuring this transparent, open architecture environment may not always be as easy as it sounds. The incumbent, for example, can make assumptions that assets will be retained in proprietary SV or GA due to restrictions, politics or simple inertia. This will result in a bid that appears far more competitive than it actually is, comparatively. A couple of years ago, an incumbent provider for a public DC plan bid -5 basis points on their recordkeeping Request for Proposal (RFP), fully recognizing that they could generate excessive fees from their General Account and believing that the fund would not be removed for political reasons.
This is only one example of how venders can skew the facts and make it difficult for a Sponsor or procurement department to accurately compare competing offers. As a result, they often reward, or even hire, the vendor that most effectively hides their total fees! For this reason, Sponsors should never conduct an RFP for bundled recordkeeping without leveraging an advisor with extensive experience in conducting similar searches. Similarly, using the wrong advisor (one with brokerage associations or other conflicts of interest) could provide you with equally poor results.
More importantly, the inability to accurately understand fees and the value that will be delivered for those hidden costs not only rewards murky vendor practices, but forces participants to bear the ultimate cost of a poor process, adding up to substantial loss in savings over time and jeopardizing your ability to obtain a dignified retirement.