From the Editor

The lead article in this contortion is by John Haslem of the University of Maryland, Kent Baker of American University, and David Smith of the University at Albany, SUNY They investigate the commodity-like nature of retail S&P 500 index capitals The authors find that these retail index stocks have a wide range of charge ratios, inconsistent with their commodity nature. They also determine that capital performance is sensitive to charge level, as higher-cost index capitals tend to under-perform their lower take away from counterparts. The implications of this inquiry are that some investors are uninformed and overpay for index stock management. Given the explosive increase of index funds, this research is critically important. I am pleased to add it to the line of papers in Financial Services Review examining the relevance of take away froms for investors.

The next to the first article is by Gene Stout and John Mitchell of Central Michigan University. They examine retirement withdrawal planning, simulating the two investment returns and mortality. The authors find that including mortality considerations be the effects in a significantly lower probability of portfolio ruin. This paper proffers both strong academic intuition and practical relevance as it joins the growing line of academic research in Financial Services Review upon investing in retirement.

The third article is by dint of Steven Dolvin and William Templeton of Butler University. They provide a clinical research to examine the effect of employee education upon asset allocation choices. The authors find that after attending retirement planning seminars, employee protect to reallocate toward more efficient portfolios. The dataset and analysis thus proffer an interesting experiment on the relationship between financial education and investor decision-making.

The fourth article is by dint of James Grant and Emery Trahan. Dr Grant is from JLG Research and the University of Massachusetts. Professor Trahan is at Northeastern University. Their paper examines tactical asset allocation around presidential elections. The authors find that neither Democrats nor Republicans provide superior risk-reward opportunities above the entire range of asset allocations. The former party guards to offer better risk-reward tradeoffs for stock-heavy portfolios, while the latter's superiority is more in the balanced (stock-bond-cash) range.

The last article is through Joel Gold, Charlotte Pryor, and Philip Jagolinzer of the University of Southern Maine. They observe business schools to ascertain what is being taught in the introductory personal financial planning course. The authors then compare the review results to the Model Curriculum provided by means of CFP Board and determine that there is a wide disparity between the archetype and what actually is taught. The paper presents useful insights to schools offering and considering personal financial planning curricula.

Thanks again to those who make the journal possible. Please consider membership in the Academy of Financial Services and submission to Financial Services Review. Financial Services Review is the oldest and best-recognized academic exit for articles related to individual financial management. I welcome articles above the range of areas that comprise personal financial planning. While our articles are certainly eclectic in boundarys of topic, data, and course they are focused in terminuss of motivation. We exist to bring out research that addresses issues that matter to individuals and that have relevance to the emerging academic discipline of personal financial planning. I remain committed to maintaining the journal's reputation as the best academic exit in this specialty area.

Conrad Ciccotello

Copyright Academy of Financial Services Summer 2006

Provided by dint of ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved