Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Comments

  • If shareholders approve the agreement, FPA distributes the funds and their expense ratios drop by 0.14 - 0.30%. Day to day management doesn't change and, so far as I can tell from talking to both sides, there's no plan to make any changes that would affect the funds' investors.
  • While I think this move is good for investors, something will be changing. The objective is to: "(ii) increase each Fund’s potential asset base" via FPA's marketing, or as the proxy statement puts it, by accessing "more distribution channels via FPA’s industry presence".

    The funds are so small now that increasing size should not be detrimental. Sometimes when a new company takes over distribution of a fund (or family), it tries to grow the assets without bounds. This seems to be more common when the new distributor is a load family. I don't expect this problem here, as FPA has shown responsibility in closing funds from time to time.
  • edited September 11
    If the OEF's are ntf, that could greatly increase the asset base.
  • I bought Queen’s Road due to the excellent write up here and have held FPACX as my largest holding For a decade. So I hope it works out for the best selfishly.
Sign In or Register to comment.