Setting The Record Straight: We’ve Never Intended To Kill AssetBook Classic

Tuesday, October 01, 2013 13:40
Setting The Record Straight: We’ve Never Intended To Kill AssetBook Classic

Tags: Portfolio Management Software

In a review recently published here on A4A, an advisor using our portfolio management application and services said something that needs to be corrected. And that's why I have written this post.

For the record: We’ve never intended to kill AssetBook Classic.
I can’t imagine who gave you the incorrect information, why published it in your review. It’s untrue.
We do not plan to retire AssetBook Classic and have never stated we would. Maybe you misunderstood something we said?
A handful of the RIAs using AssetBook have not switched to RADAR, our new version, because it Classic costs less. However, RADAR provides a lot more features, graphics, and reporting features for RIAs, as well as account reconciliation services. It does cost a bit more.
AssetBook has ISO-compliant quality policies, which all of our employees are required to memorize. We adhere to this policy yet maintain a highly competitive price point. You get the same features and more from AssetBook at half the cost of some of our biggest competitors, and you get service that has earned the trust of 225 investment advisory firms.
Switching performance reporting software applications, as you have done, can be a complicated task, depending on the data we are given. Yet we have received rave reviews on A4A and elsewhere. As is shown in the screen shot below, AssetBook has received 15 rave reviews on A4A and your one less-than-flattering review.
In any business there are certain relationships that don’t’ work no matter how hard you try, no matter how many hours of staff time you put into it. That you have bashed us like this and made public misstatements about us tells me that we have little hope of ever making you trust us or appreciate the work we have done to respond to your firm’s needs and clean up your portfolio data for use on our system.


Comments (1)

Having been a user of AssetBook for over three years now, and also presently being a Top 10 reviewer for A4A, I feel it is important to come to the defense of AssetBook on this issue. I read this post but don't know exactly who at AssetBook wrote it because there is no by-line. I also do not intend to disparage the reviewer because of course everyone's experience is different with any vendor and he/she is entitled to their opinion. However, I am one of those advisors who has elected to stay with Classic. When I asked my contact person at AssetBook, I was told that Radar would not be a mandatory change and that the Classic version would be available for "at least the next five years". That's a pretty long time in today's world of rapid technological advancements and was more than a satisfactory answer for me. I didn't feel the added expense of Radar was necessary for my practice, but I have a very narrow niche practice with a very small number of clients, many of whom are just not interested in elaborate performance reports anyway. So for me, the Classic version is certainly more than adequate. I have personally had good service from the Support staff and certain individuals have gone out of their way to assist. I've found them to be very patient and courteous in all their dealings with me. I also feel that the personal touch they provide to their clients is invaluable in this day and age of automation and computerized menus. No one, and no company, is perfect, but AssetBook personnel and the clearly client-centric company culture are certainly not accurately reflected in the September 20 review posted here.
FamaFiduciary , October 02, 2013

Write comment

You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.