I mention this because despite the company’s inadequacies I am still a customer and the question is why? Quite simply I do not have the time, nor the energy, to change provider.

Barclays knows this and acts accordingly. For example, 12 months ago my account was upgraded; I thought little of this only to find a new charge (a tech and support package) added to my list of direct debits. The charge comes to £9.50 and is completely useless to me. In effect, Barclays has taken the best part of £120 from me and I have, until recently, put no effort into asking why and ultimately stopping the direct debit.

I am sure Barclays has sent me a letter, among the raft of advertisements for credit card upgrades I get in the post, about this additional charge but the effort I have had to make to remove it has been laughable. It has taken two visits to a branch to see someone to remove it (on both occasions all the advisers have been busy) and two phone calls before I finally stopped the debit from my account.

Barclays knows I am a long-term customer and have little desire to change my account, and therefore it feels it can make the odd change to their advantage with my “sticky money”. What it has done is left a sour taste in my mouth.

This is symptomatic of all financial services providers who take a similar stance. The customer is the priority when they are new revenue stream, but very few providers — whether they be fund managers, discount brokers, discretionaries or, in some cases, financial advisers — make the effort to reward loyal customers. ‘Familiarity breeds complacency’ – this is a quote many customers should take to heart and keep front of mind when dealing with financial services companies.

All of these groups are now under severe pricing pressure as the cost of their services continues to be heavily scrutinised. Active managers are the best example of this. Gone are the days when they could consistently outperform the market, as evidenced by the fact that 83% of active funds in the US failed to match their chosen benchmarks over the past 10 years. The picture is not so different in the UK where UK equity funds also disappointed: over three quarters failed to beat the wider market over 10 years. Over one year, this figure increases to 86%.

It is no surprise that passive funds have grown four times faster than their active peers in the past 10 years. According to figures from Morningstar, investors globally have poured more than $6trn into passive funds since 2007.

Adviser and discretionary buy lists and fund platforms may not be embracing passive holdings as much as they should. However the FCA recently published a review into the fund industry which added significant weight to the passive cause by claiming financial advisers and fund supermarkets were not doing enough to promote passive funds to customers. Things look set to change big time.

This absence of passive funds on many buy lists is unlikely to continue with regulatory and pricing pressure prominent, while the influence of price on DIY investors is bound to grow.

The billions of pounds stuck in mediocre active funds, or even funds that are simply out of style, may well not stay that way for long. So, what can asset managers do to change this bleak outlook?

Perhaps one way to solve this would be to reward investors for their loyalty rather than the amount of cash they invest. Last week, low-cost investment house Vanguard made trade and national news for cutting the ongoing charge on its LifeStrategy range from 24bps to 22bps. The reduction was the third cut in price on the £5bn range since it was launched in 2011.

Active managers need to start thinking proactively about how to tackle the growing competition from passive. For example, why not look to offer customers who have invested in their funds for a certain period (say three/five years) a discounted annual management charge as a thank you for their loyalty? It would also offer a chance to re-engage with their clients, a prominent part of building new business leads (not to mention the positive press coverage). Clearly active managers cannot compete with passive purely on price, but they can, and must, do so on service.

The active management industry has to offer value if it is to thrive because, while it can outperform its passive peers, the figures simply show many do not have the skill to do this consistently. As times change, active funds will need to start appreciating the customers they have as much as the ones they would like, otherwise sticky money – like consistent outperformance – will become a thing of the past. займ срочно без отказов и проверок взять займ в росденьгизайм микроденьгизайм lime отзывы