TIAA CREF is changing and not to the better.

If you are in TIAA CREF I would mention this to your .org folks who
deal with TIAA CREF. I really don't understand who the board members
represent anymore. This article came from Morningstar. You can read
TIAA CREFf special announcement on there web page.

TIAA-CREF Tries Again
We first reported
<> in mid July
that TIAA-CREF wanted to change the expense structure for most of its
funds. However, shareholders rejected the idea, which would have seen
fees rise in some cases from two to six times what they cost now. But, a
Wall Street Journal article this past week claimed that the firm is
considering holding another vote and lobbying several large
institutional clients to change their votes.

Aside from the fact that we view TIAA-CREF's continuted attempts at
raising fees to be extremely unfriendly to shareholders, we're hard
pressed to understand how institutional voters--who mostly represent 529
plans--can honor their fiduciary responsibilities by changing their
votes. Moreover, one has to wonder why TIAA-CREF's fund board doesn't
consider hiring Vanguard as the funds' advisor, if TIAA-CREF is truly
incapable of managing the funds at their current expense levels.

Re: TIAA CREF is changing and not to the better.

"L" <> wrote in message
news:9NDzf.9808$
> If you are in TIAA CREF I would mention this to your .org folks who deal
> with TIAA CREF. I really don't understand who the board members
> represent anymore. This article came from Morningstar. You can read TIAA
> CREFf special announcement on there web page.
> TIAA-CREF Tries Again
> We first reported
> <> in mid July
> that TIAA-CREF wanted to change the expense structure for most of its
> funds. However, shareholders rejected the idea, which would have seen fees
> rise in some cases from two to six times what they cost now. But, a Wall
> Street Journal article this past week claimed that the firm is considering
> holding another vote and lobbying several large institutional clients to
> change their votes.
>
> Aside from the fact that we view TIAA-CREF's continuted attempts at
> raising fees to be extremely unfriendly to shareholders, we're hard
> pressed to understand how institutional voters--who mostly represent 529
> plans--can honor their fiduciary responsibilities by changing their votes.
> Moreover, one has to wonder why TIAA-CREF's fund board doesn't consider
> hiring Vanguard as the funds' advisor, if TIAA-CREF is truly incapable of
> managing the funds at their current expense levels.

The only arguement that would fly is that they need to pay more for top
performing managers.

Utilizing an outside management firm might be possible for some of their
funds, particularly index funds...I would think that they would want some
uniqueness in their management, so as to remain differentiated in the
marketplace. TIAA-CREF is rather unique, in that they cater primarily
(exclusively?) to college faculty...good and bad for them--outside investors
cannot participate if they wanted to, but their customer is usually free to
invest elsewhere (usually meaning opting for mutual funds outside of their
403(b) or funds from other families in their 403(b)).

TIAA-CREF's forté seems to be distribution, so they should consider farming
out the investment selection.

D

Re: TIAA CREF is changing and not to the better.

Dave Hannes wrote:

>"L" <> wrote in message
>news:9NDzf.9808$
>
>
>>If you are in TIAA CREF I would mention this to your .org folks who deal
>>with TIAA CREF. I really don't understand who the board members
>>represent anymore. This article came from Morningstar. You can read TIAA
>>CREFf special announcement on there web page.
>>TIAA-CREF Tries Again
>>We first reported
>><> in mid July
>>that TIAA-CREF wanted to change the expense structure for most of its
>>funds. However, shareholders rejected the idea, which would have seen fees
>>rise in some cases from two to six times what they cost now. But, a Wall
>>Street Journal article this past week claimed that the firm is considering
>>holding another vote and lobbying several large institutional clients to
>>change their votes.
>>
>>Aside from the fact that we view TIAA-CREF's continuted attempts at
>>raising fees to be extremely unfriendly to shareholders, we're hard
>>pressed to understand how institutional voters--who mostly represent 529
>>plans--can honor their fiduciary responsibilities by changing their votes.
>>Moreover, one has to wonder why TIAA-CREF's fund board doesn't consider
>>hiring Vanguard as the funds' advisor, if TIAA-CREF is truly incapable of
>>managing the funds at their current expense levels.
>>
>>
>
>The only arguement that would fly is that they need to pay more for top
>performing managers.
>
>Utilizing an outside management firm might be possible for some of their
>funds, particularly index funds...I would think that they would want some
>uniqueness in their management, so as to remain differentiated in the
>marketplace. TIAA-CREF is rather unique, in that they cater primarily
>(exclusively?) to college faculty...good and bad for them--outside investors
>cannot participate if they wanted to, but their customer is usually free to
>invest elsewhere (usually meaning opting for mutual funds outside of their
>403(b) or funds from other families in their 403(b)).
>
>TIAA-CREF's forté seems to be distribution, so they should consider farming
>out the investment selection.
>
>D
>
>
>
>
D,
I think they now have funds that anyone can invest in. What makes me
wonder about TIAA CREF is that even if the management fee is less then
the average TIAA-CREF total funds worth is in the hundreds of billions
and growing (at least in the past). Which mean their cut in absolute
dollars has been growing. I was under the believe that as the funds
value increase that the charges should decrease (Boggle thinking). The
only think that comes to mind is Greed and I don't like using that
word. If I understand it correctly the proposed by TIAA-CREF was voted
down last year. Why the board allows this to continue is strange. If
TIAA CREF can't handle the job then heads should role. It really seems
that no one is responsible anymore except the low man on the totem pole.
L