As far as my research shows, there is no mutual fund extant that owns "gold bullion and very little else." I wish there were! I was excited when I saw that article, and very disappointed when it turned out untrue.

Please inform us if/when your journalists discover a "pure play" gold instrument, other than owning the bullion on the LME, will you?

Dave Congleton, CFP, RIA
San Diego, Calif., and Camden, Maine

A Better Alternative: IAQFP

Financial Advisor editorial articles in the January 2004 ("Parting Shot," Wagner) and November 2003 ("Contest For The FPA‚s Soul," Simonoff) issues contain histories of the financial planning profession that surprisingly omit the seminal role provided by IAQFP (www.IAQFP.org).

You include the eventful "CFP Lite" debacle (watering down the CFP® mark via the CFP Board‚s ill advised backroom expansionist theory), but leave out the more insidious CFP PRACTITIONER controversy (chronicling the CFP Board‚s over-four-year failure to disclose to stakeholders the board‚s pended CFP PRACTITIONER trade mark while uninformed certificants were exploited to promote it). The ruse was spawned by a simple statement within the certificate renewal form that failed to state that the pending mark was anything more than a descriptive term. When exposed by IAQFP, then-CFP Board Chairwoman Patricia Houlihan furthered the deception by stating in writing and at open FPA Chapter forums that it was nothing more than a harmless "descriptive term." Our efforts resulted in withdrawal of the mark, which otherwise would have further divided the profession between "entry level" and so-envisioned "elite planners."

The CFP Board and FPA have foisted a dishonest proposition upon the public and profession: namely, that primarily (if not only), CFP® certificants, who represent less than one-third of the profession‚s total financial planners, are qualified, while the other two-thirds (whom they wish everyone would just forget about) are not.

IAQFP efforts to counter this misleading and errant proposition are resulting in a unified membership that includes CFP® certificants and ChFCs (who even the CFP Board wrote to us are equivalent to CFP® but who they refuse to grant usage of the CFP® mark), as well as PFS, MSFS and MS (the latter two with financial planning concentration).

IAQFP efforts at uniting the profession include an association run for and by its members, with the clout of a vote, thereby making IAQFP the profession‚s only true trade association and resulting in realization of one profession, one designation. It is the other two-thirds of financial planners, together with the one-third of CFP® certificants, that IAQFP unites, another historical accomplishment that shouldn‚t be overlooked.

Mr. Wagner suggests that the "appropriate mission" of the CFP Board is as the profession‚s regulator, a frightening outcome to many certificants and thousands of others whom the CFP Board and FPA intentionally disenfranchise. Because of the structure of the CFP Board and its history of self-created controversies, nothing Mr. Diesslin does with rewording a "mission statement" can truly fix anything. The CFP Board makes its intentions clear–to become the professions SRO/PRO; however, in light of such tawdry history, the full universe of financial planners has every right to be concerned and downright resistant to such a "mission." Further, its FPA "marketing arm" (as called by some) continues taking steps to disenfranchise the two-thirds majority of the profession‚s professionals, as the CFP Board both directs and intends. Should honest CFP® certificants or others support such a dishonest proposition of permanent disenfranchisement and disunity?

Mr. Simonoff concludes "for an association to succeed, it will need a more viable raison d‚ etre than simply exploiting disgruntlement within various quarters of the FPA." The FPA is largely unaware of such disgruntlement because it fails to poll its members and continues to self-appoint its Board. IAQFP is that "new association" with programs rooted in precisely what the FPA and the CFP Board have refused: namely, a unification of the profession and its professionals under one profession, one designation.

IAQFP permanently addressed the disenfranchisement problem with the 2003 introduction of our unifying professional designation "QFP" (Qualified Financial Planner). It also introduced the QFP Registry, where the public can both verify (our user-friendly form of sensible regulation), and find from the "designations alphabet soup" those specifically educated and trained in the financial planning discipline with its integrative perspective. The CFP Board could have done so years ago, but instead it has continued its history of disenfranchising qualified professionals, not listening to its stakeholders, ignoring issues of concern until they grow into unwieldy controversies, and otherwise further splintering the profession.