Copy article

Are you experiencing approach fatigue?

ended 21. August 2026

IFAs and mortgage brokers have told Newspage they're being targeted by recruiters, networks, wealth firms, compliance providers and technology businesses more than ever. This is fairly easy, as FCA Register data and public Appointed Representative listings are readily available, 

While some welcome the opportunity to hear about alternative propositions, others report receiving a steady stream of calls, emails and LinkedIn messages despite having (often repeatedly) expressed no interest in moving firms or changing providers. We’re looking for industry views on:

  • Are advisers becoming frustrated with unsolicited approaches?
  • Has the volume of prospecting increased in 2026 relative to previous years?
  • ⁠Is using public AR and FCA Register data a legitimate business development tactic, or is it becoming excessive?
  • ⁠Where is the line between healthy competition and harassment?
  • What types of approaches are advisers most receptive to?
  • ⁠Are firms damaging their reputation through mass outbound campaigns?
  • ⁠Should there be greater focus on relationship-led introductions rather than volume-based prospecting?

7 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Using public data to make an initial sales approach is perfectly reasonable, however continually repeating it after a clear, and repeated, 'no' is a different matter entirely. The intermediary market is not large and reputations travel quickly, and networks running mass outbound campaigns are making an impression. Just not the one they want. The approaches that actually get a hearing are from people who have clearly done some homework, lead with something specific rather than a generic proposition, and treat a 'no' as an answer rather than an objection to be overcome at thirty day intervals. The firms treating the FCA Register as a cold call list are generating unsubscribes and quietly damaging the reputation they are simultaneously trying to build. Firms that prospect like a double-glazing company in a market that runs on referrals and relationships are making a choice, but not a particularly good one.
Copy

Some businesses appear to have confused business development with nuisance marketing. The fact a financial adviser’s details appear on a public register doesn’t create an open invitation for endless calls, emails and LinkedIn messages. Good firms build relationships. Lazy firms build lists. The firms most obsessed with our advisers are usually the firms that should be spending more time worrying about their own.
Copy

I don’t have an issue with being approached. We’re all in business and prospecting is part of the game. A well-timed approach can actually introduce you to something you wouldn’t otherwise have considered. Where it becomes frustrating is the relentless follow-up. If someone has politely said they’re not interested, another five emails, three calls and a LinkedIn message probably aren’t going to change their mind. Using FCA Register data to identify prospects seems perfectly reasonable to me. The problem isn’t the data, it’s how you use it. Personally, I’m far more receptive to someone who’s taken five minutes to understand our business and has something genuinely relevant to say. Relationship-led prospecting might be slower, but I’d bet it’s far more effective — and much better for your reputation.
Copy

Public FCA and AR data is there to create transparency, not to give the industry a licence to spam advisers into submission. I have no issue with one intelligent approach. Tell me why your proposition is genuinely better, show me the value, then leave me alone if I say no. What damages reputations is the relentless sequence of calls, emails and LinkedIn messages after an adviser has already declined. The deeper problem is structural. Moving network, changing provider or going directly authorised can be expensive, slow and operationally painful. That gives parts of the market too much leverage over advisers and, ultimately, their clients. Healthy competition is good. Harassment is not. The firms I remember are not the ones that contacted me 14 times, they are the ones that understood my business, respected my answer and built a relationship first. If the industry wants advisers to move for better propositions, make mobility easier not prospecting louder.
Copy

The line is already drawn, and it sits at the first no, not where patience runs out. Under PECR, the rules on marketing calls, you cannot keep ringing a line once the subscriber has told you to stop. That rule stands on its own: it covers a limited company as well as a sole trader. A TPS or CTPS listing is that no, recorded in advance. A named individual can object to their data being used this way, and the ICO says that right is absolute. Looking one firm up on the public Register is fair business development. Working it as a call list isn't fair business development. Prospecting off the Register has already tipped into excess. The FCA's own terms of use bar scraping tools without its written consent. We run outbound and get prospected off public registers ourselves, so mass campaigns damage the sender's name, because the recipient can tell you never read the rule. Relationship-led introductions are a better use of an hour than working a list.
Copy

Given that more people are going to be needing financial advice going forward, especially with the pension changes fast approaching in 2027, there is a competition for talent. That, coupled with private equity cash, is putting advisers and firms firmly in demand. For those looking to attract the talent, bombarding them with LinkedIn messages, emails and calls is not the answer. Focus on the proposition and those that are interested will find you.
Copy

It's got worse this year, so I've become much fussier about who I'll engage with. If a message has obviously been written by AI or fired out by an automated tool, it goes straight in the bin. The best one is recruiters offering me a job doing exactly what I already do, at somebody else's firm. The same public data that told them my name told them I run this business. They just didn't bother to read it. Then the networks. Three or four of their recruiters inside a few weeks, all pitching the same thing, nobody talking to anybody internally. And a steady stream of software vibe coded in a weekend by people who've never worked in a regulated firm. We're careful about what we let near our clients and our data. The Register and AR listings are public and using them is fair enough. Ignoring a no isn't. And if you open by pretending we've spoken before, you've told me exactly how you'd treat my clients. Most of it gets ignored. But I remember the firms that annoy me.