Perhaps for those of us who are professionally engaged in it, the answer may seem obvious. Especially for those of us who have suffered for decades in our own flesh the miseries and shortcomings of private banking. It is no coincidence that, in addition to being advisors, we were, are and will continue to be essentially investors, and as such, our interests are still, unfortunately, at the antipodes of those of the banks and their misnamed advice. Having said that, let us now analyse the transcendental decisions that every investor should take to advise on the correct management of their assets.
To begin with, the ordinary investor should analyse his or her asset situation and determine whether, in addition to purely financial advice, he or she also needs tax, legal, commercial, corporate or real estate advice. In other words, they may need to put their companies/businesses in order, their real estate investments or divestments, the administration of these properties, inheritance and family matters, their investments in the stock market and in unlisted companies, the generation of the necessary income for their family or projects, optimising the taxation of all of this, etc. (more…)
The concept is new and meets a logical and increasingly common need in a globalised world. It is common knowledge that Family Offices are companies or groups of professionals that are essentially dedicated to the management and control of the assets of one or several families, as well as to attending to all aspects that may affect these family groups, such as taxation, legal advice or assistance in family logistics and concierge services (concierging), among others. But the new figure that has appeared for the users of a Family Office (whether they are Clients of a Multi-Family Office, or owners of a Single-Family Office), is that of the Outpost FO, or global support network for a Family Office. 
Parece que el mundo se divide entre las personas que ahorran y las que no lo hacen. Pero muchos de los que dicen vivir al día, en algún momento de sus vidas (mayoritariamente en su madurez) y con el permiso de los azotes de esta crisis, tienden a ahorrar algún dinerito para su vejez o para el futuro incierto. Sin embargo la mayoría de estos previsores jamás se han considerado Inversores, sino simples ahorradores. Warren Buffett dijo que invertir es gastar menos hoy para que en el futuro podamos gastar más, y dio en el clavo, como casi siempre. 
No hay peor fracaso que el de quien renuncia al éxito. Algo parecido les ocurre a los fondos de inversión que se ciñen a sus índices de referencia, confiados en que, a pesar de su mediocridad, las entidades para las que trabajan no van a tener ningún problema en comercializar masivamente dichos fondos, y jamás les culparán por no brillar. La capacidad comercial de una entidad bancaria es directamente proporcional a la mediocridad de sus productos de inversión. Será por aquello de que el hambre agudiza el ingenio, y los gestores de fondos de gestoras independientes (que no pertenecen a bancos, al menos directamente) sólo pueden competir por hacerse un sitio en el escenario de la venta de inversiones, demostrando pura calidad y superioridad en los rendimientos en comparación con sus competidores. 
First of all, we must tell you that the subject we are going to deal with today is complex and may offend some professional sensibilities. But that is not our intention at all, but rather our interest is focused on clarifying a situation that is currently generating a lot of confusion and, more importantly, is damaging families with a certain amount of wealth. Both large fortunes and small savers. We will therefore discuss, for example, Santander's convertible bonds, the recent inflammatory statements by Greg Smith (ex-Goldman Sachs), the types of assets that a properly diversified wealth should contain, the Spanish and Luxembourg regulators, banking, EAFIs, Family Office, or how to distinguish between a perverse advice and a perverse advice. comme il faut. We apologise for the length of the post, but we have chosen to publish it in its entirety so as not to lose the thread in the middle of the reflections that follow. 
This week I came across an article published in FundsPeople titled «
Knowing which types of assets or which companies’ shares are going to skyrocket in the coming months is the pipe dream of those who, rather than investing, speculate. Of those who are hoping for a windfall to bail them out of the financial difficulties they have got themselves into through their own foolishness. But even if Lady Luck were to smile on them, their poor judgement would remain just as bad. Consequently, they will believe themselves to be shrewd investors rather than merely lucky, and their cycle of financial difficulties, windfalls and further difficulties will repeat itself, at best. In the long run, the result for most of them is that their forays as speculators (even though they describe themselves as investors), far from supplementing their income, cost them a significant portion of the wages they have earned through the sweat of their brow over the years. And if at any point they were to make an objective calculation of their gains and losses—something they consciously or unconsciously avoid doing—the balance sheet would reveal the harsh reality: that throughout their investing lives, a large part of their own and their families’ well-being has been taken by Mr Market.