Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 568

Reader feedback from our 2024 survey

Thank you to those who responded to last week’s reader survey. We love to hear what you think of Firstlinks and appreciate your engagement.

Some trends that have become clear already include:

  • Over 65% do not use a financial adviser
  • Favoured investments are Australian equities and cash deposits
  • Articles are mostly easy to understand, quick to read, and credible
  • Readers enjoy being able to comment on articles, and read others’ reactions
  • Keeping Firstlinks free and independent is important
  • Relatable, personal investing stories are well received
  • Most popular topics are superannuation / SMSFs and retirement planning

I’ve included a selection of comments below. Do you have anything to add?

If you had planned to do the survey ‘later’ and haven’t quite got there, we’ll be keeping it open until Wednesday 17th July.

Lastly, thanks to the majority of readers who recommend Firstlinks to friends and family. If you know someone who would benefit from regularly reading Firstlinks, please forward this subscription link to them.

 

Leisa Bell is Assistant Editor at Firstlinks.

 

Survey comments

  • Firstlinks is a great source of information that helps guide me in planning my own investment. I have been reading Firstlinks for years since the days of Cuffelinks.
  • Not all articles apply to my situation but I generally read them with varying degree of interest. Never too old to learn something new.
  • Easy to understand and often give no value or knowledge to the reader .Keep them hard but useful.
  • Relatable and educated articles. Like reading the comment sections as well.
  • Variety of topics, mostly not pushing anything, free, short pieces and the reports on LICs at the bottom.
  • Covers a multitude of issues. Allows access to authors of topics [if of interest] , allows reader feedback, provides factual info, w/out bias in most articles.
  • I find the articles quite well written and easy to follow. Not particularly bogged down with too much detail unless the subject demands it.
  • Needs a lot more focus if this newsletter is directed to the long term on market trends and the primary investment vehicles of ETFs and shares.
  • Wide range of topics excellent authors and comments section is always really worth reading and contributing to.
  • Not too many articles each week.
  • Relevant and interesting.
  • I like the super and retirement focus.
  • Aside from articles that inform about my personal situation, I also skim read most of the other articles for general interest.
  • The writing approach appears to be more considered, with great discussions in the comments. The overall feeling is that this is information being provided, as opposed to an attempt to sell the reader on a particular idea.
  • Takes time to digest and time is not always available.
  • Your focus on structuring of affairs and planning ahead for SMSF changes is excellent.
  • It must be hard to come up with new ideas. Keep up as you do, I am not looking for changes, but I do miss hearing from Graham H.
  • The occasional webinar would be useful depending on the topic. It is a very good newsletter already. Well done.
  • Keep doing what you have successfully been doing & don't put it behind a paywall!
  • Broad range of articles. I really like how people share personal experiences warts and all. James and Graham are best at this. (Mark Lamonica is also good at this). I don't do what they have done. But it is refreshing. Not just the standard stuff which is rehashed regularly. It makes me think. It sometimes opens up new ideas....that I can look into via Morningstar....and see how/if they work/don't for me.
  • I reckon you have the mix pretty right. A broad range of subjects and presenters. Not everything is relevant...but that is what happens with a broad range. I don't know what I don't know. So...keep throwing stuff at me. Sometimes some of the articles are biased to the authors' company. I know you are aware of that. Not sure it is a huge problem. Keep up the great work.
  • It's all about the curated articles. Some are very useful, others not. Which, I suspect, is what this survey is about.
  • While I check the new articles every week I don't read that many. There are a lot of articles about retirement and SMSFs that are not relevant to me as a middle-aged woman with no intention to start an SMSF. More content relevant to women, people who are some way away from retirement and those with more moderate income/investments would be great. There also too many articles by fund managers justifying the outlook for their active funds or LICs, but I suppose that is necessary to keep the website content free.
  • Steer readers towards long term investing. Avoid subjects and topics that are mainly short-term in nature and gambling such as Cryptocurrencies. In simple terms aim to be a high-class publication to attract high class readers.

 

5 Comments
Bee
July 17, 2024

Hi Again
(I can't add re-enter the survey, it disallows because I have already commented, so I am adding another thought here.) As someone invested in property, I separate out the Investor world of Firstlinks from more familiar territory. However when it did come up in Firstlinks some months ago, there did not seem to be the recognition of capital gains as being a significant part of the wealth creation in the comparison with other investments.

Istvan
July 14, 2024

Global data indicate that "Huston, we have a problem" (climate changes, global financial system, society decline, etc.; our current way of life, in general, is in crisis and/or in continuous decline in the past 8-10 years). The way we operate is simply not sustainable and new technology cannot solve everything, but we don't want to hear, or acknowledge any of this (i.e. not visible and/or considered anywhere in our generally optimistic view of the investment universe).
Note: Past performance is not indicative of the future. :) (The future I cannot see, but I'm a pessimistic optimist.)

john
July 14, 2024

Firstlinks is a terrific source of balanced and educational information while at the same time being inspiring

Lakshmi
July 12, 2024

First Links' articles are informative and easy to read. Excellent mix of topics which keep the readers well informed. I look forward to reading them each week.

charles
July 11, 2024

In the interests of recognizing the complete investment universe, my memory of the survey is that it did not include recognition of investments in Corporate Bonds or direct real estate although it did include things like cryptocurrencies. I think this is out of balance.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Reader feedback from 2017 Survey

Results from the 2015 Reader Survey

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

The huge cost of super tax concessions

The current net annual cost of superannuation tax subsidies is around $40 billion, growing to more than $110 billion by 2060. These subsidies have always been bad policy, representing a waste of taxpayers' money.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.