Jump to content

Talk:American Academy of Financial Management/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Globalprofessor 20:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


This site is not an advertisement. The entity has 40,000 members in 145 countries. It is legitimate to maintain this entry for informational and regulatory purposes.

bking 9:20, 01 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure where to start with this article. The size of the organization isn't important (in terms of the advert flag). It has a strong self-promotional flavour. Having a dozen external links to the organizations websites, for example. I'm not saying the references aren't there, but it needs to be made clearer where statements like The American Academy is said to be the 1st Graduate Financial Organization in the world to have mutual cross- recognition agreements from the AACSB and ACBSP. are sourced from. At the moment it reads like a promotional brochure. To go back to a comparison made before, take a look at the Harvard article; it's not perfect but there's less one-upmanship and more actual information. Marasmusine 22:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The words 1st were removed to satisfy your request even though it is referenced already. As a note, there are link references at the bottom of the page from the 2 accreditation organizations AACSB and ACBSP that state their mutual global recognition. Also, how many links to this worldwide organization's country specific activities do you suggest? The Harvard page is extremely advert related, but I am sure most respect their factual self promotion.

Thanks for the help, and please remove your advertisement header logo if the present content is acceptable to your needs. Globalprofessor 19:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)]

This article was cleaned up again over a month ago. Not sure if Marasmusine has logged into this to review the prior posts and the Advert code ?

globalprofessor



This page keeps getting corrupted by vandals. Have fixed all of the citations and clarified references. Further, the advert style language was deleted.

Globalprofessor 19:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)GlobalprofessorGlobalprofessor 19:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It really is irrelevant what programs the AAFM recognizes. What is much more important is what evidence is there that reputable external parties recognize AAFM designations. No evidence of that is currently provided.

Being "featured" in a journal is in itself, meaningless. Psnae 05:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Have you reviewed all of the references to this neutral article?

Financiallawyer 19:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)financiallawyerFinanciallawyer 19:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Good points again,

Please remove any reference to Newspapers and their recognition; however, the AAFM has received positive commentary and editorials as having prominent and cutting edge executive training and certification courses from many mentioned major news sources worldwide over the years. Note: AAFM was featured and compared to the New York University Certificates in Wealth Management in Finanical Management in the WSJ article.

Please review the included external reference links to the listings in the SEC/NASD, AACSB Legal recognition agreements, ACBSP legal recognition agreements, Department of Labor links or other. As far as external recognition, the AACSB and the ACBSP are the to most prominent & government recognized accreditation agencies in the USA for business school college and degree education. There are links at the bottom of the page that clearly show this alliance.

In the USA, legal sanction or accreditation is not provided to professional or self regulated organizations or board certification such as: Chartered Accountants, CFPs, ChFCs, CFAs, or other. If an organization is run or taken over by the state or federal authorities, then such recognition or government sanction is possible. As you may already know, examples of state run or regulated professional groups that provide credentials and licensing are: Lawyers/JDs, CPAs etc. This is just my legal and academic opinion based on research.

Thanks for the editing and please remove the advert code after you have removed any other overtly self-promotional wording that has been added by surfers. After a review of similar and germane associations, many of them or their members seem to be involved in shameless self-promotion. Thus, I am sure it is a tough call on the other sites. If you need help in a legal review of other sites that you focus on, please advise.

Globalprofessor 17:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)globalprofessorGlobalprofessor 17:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

This section has been updated with a few of the bodies that recognize AAFM on a global basis. It should satisfy all but the harshest opponents of the association. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brett k (talk • contribs) 20:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

It's not a question of being "opponents" of AAFM (or otherwise) but rather seeking a fact-based and objective article suitable for inclusion in WP. That means verifiable and reputable sources of information, other than AAFM itself. Psnae 02:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


References

The article was backed up with several new verifiable government agency references, two government recognized accreditation agency sources, along with citations, references and links a few weeks ago. Hope this helps you quickly remove the Advert tag.

Globalprofessor 20:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)globalprofessorGlobalprofessor 20:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

If the ACBSP is an recognized accreditor of educational courses, why is its domain name ending in .org and not .edu? Psnae 05:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Last time I checked, .edu domains are strictly held for educational institutions that are insitutionally accredited. ACBSP does have a .edu domain, which is held by one of our member schools (Mount Saint Vincent). All it does it redirect to acbsp.org. For more information on the .edu domain, go to Educause[1] PhnxFyreG 16:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

First, accreditation agencies are NOT colleges. Last time I researched and checked, the CHEA is a FEDERAL Government Recognized Agency which is also at a DOT ORG address. Further, the NASD is a GOVERNMENT Recognized agency and is on a dot com address. So, please review CHEA http://www.chea.org/default.asp?link=7 Thus, ACBSB and AACSB are the two most recognized AND government sanctioned accreditation agencies in the USA specifically for regionally accredited business schools. Therefore, if a business school has AACSB or ACBSP accreditation; then, they are DOUBLE accredited by the regional accreditation agency AND the Business School Accreditation. This organization, AAFM is the only financial organization that does what is most legal and ethical by recognizing government recognized and accredited business school education, courses and degrees. Other oganization create their own schools from scratch. AAFM recognizes and accepts business school credits from NYU, Stanford, Harvard, Princeton and 560 other double accredited business schools & law schools....through the legal cross recogniztion agreements of the AACSB and ACBSP and specific law school programs...

Financiallawyer 19:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)financiallawyerFinanciallawyer 19:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Government Recognized Accredition Agencies

Here is a list of government recognized accreditation agencies from the CHEA: http://www.chea.org/Directories/special.asp#acbsp Many of these accreditation agencies are .org and .edu.

AACSB and ACBSP are the 2 USA Government recognized professional accreditations specific for USA business schools. Thus, a top tier business school would generally be double accredited. i.e. regional accreditation plus AACSB or ACBSP.

http://www.chea.org/default.asp?link=7

Hope this helps..

Globalprofessor 19:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)globalprofessorGlobalprofessor 19:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Financiallawyer 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)financiallawyerFinanciallawyer 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The advert tag should not be dropped and left on the page without prompt talk or discussion. It seems that the references and citations have been enhanced and fixed several times by various editors. Thus, it should be ok, or somebody should simply remove a reference that is not cited instead of putting the advert tag up for weeks at a time.

There is still a paucity of verified references to reputable sources. Psnae 03:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems that all of the relevant facts now have citations. Other than that I can not find any advert style language. If there are facts that readers would have trouble with, please advise. Otherwise, this article should not have advert spam on it and should only have a style or cleanup link on it with suggestions provided for quick cleanup?

It is confusing that there has been so much discussion over this page? Is there a cultural misunderstanding? Under the USA laws, this article seems to have all of the documentation necessary and is more authenticated that most other articles in the same sphere. Globalprofessor 22:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)globalprofessorGlobalprofessor 22:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


Most of the "citations" are completely irrelevant to the point at hand. And the "mutual cross-recognition" agreements from AACSB and ACBSP seem to be nothing of the sort. All the press releases refer to is the fact that AAFM is extending recognition to these programs. No reference is made to anyone recognizing or accrediting any AAFM designations. There is not a single reference to suggest that AAFM qualifications are given credence (AAFM accrediting others is irrelevant) by any official or reputable souce - eg U.S. or state governments, reputable universities, professional bodies like AICPA etc. Psnae 03:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This article is backed up by multiple legal and academic sources including the NASD, Dept of Labor, the 2 best accreditation agencies for business schools in the world. Clear legal and global recognition. Please read the AACSB and ACBSP legal press releases. The AAFM is a global organization with about 40 thousand members in something like 150 countries.... Plus, AAFM is only for college grads. The above post can not be serious and must be vandalism? Further, I agree with the prior post that some people must not be familiar with US, Latin & South American, or Canada Laws which represent over 25 countries. Again, in the West, having recognition and disclosure with AACSB, ACBSP, the NASD, Dept of Labor, Dept of Education is the highest you can go without becoming absorbed by the government. AAFM is also recognized in many other countries by their laws. Please do research before making such claims against such a large and esteemed global organization.

For example. This AACSB press release states that "The American Academy of Financial Management (AAFM) Board of Standards officially recognized AACSB International accredited business schools on Feb. 11, 2003.". However nowhere does it refer to AAFM designations being recognised or accepted by any third party. There is a similar lack of references to any third party recognition of AAFM designations in all the other cited references. Psnae 04:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Glad you read that press release. I too was impressed by it. The AACSB is the most recognized accreditation agency in the world for business schools. Further, AACSB is Government recognized by several authorities. As you can see, they accepted recognition from AAFM along with posting a global press release on their website about it. Thus, the AACSB International and their director welcomed and promoted the alliance. It looks pretty clear. In sum, this press release is a recognition, sanction and approval of the AACSB courses and degrees by AAFM that was well received. This recognition was acquiesced to as per this press release. In any event, this is the first alliance of its kind. Most other insurance or financial planner organizations will go from school to school to try and form an alliance. The AAFM and AACSB simply formed a direct alliance which covers over 400 of the best business schools at the best universities and colleges worldwide. Overall, this type of recognition and mutual acceptance is probably the strongest type of reference that any financial organization could ever desire.

Globalprofessor 19:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)globalprofessorGlobalprofessor 19:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


Neutral Views and Citation Quality already addressed in 2006 and Early 2007

This advertisement type concerns were already addressed in late 2006 and early 2007. Since those major corrections, there have not been major content added that is confusingly different than the other financial credentialing organizational articles that are self regulated such as CFA or CFP etc. Compared to the industry standard, this AAFM article is written in a neutral point of view as per the corrections in 2006,7

This article contains legitimate citations from several branches of the United States Federal Government, listings in the financial regulatory registry, along with references and recognition from the top 2 federal government recognized USA business education accreditation agencies.

The Supreme Court Case reference is directed toward "general financial planning credentials" and also generalized designation use & industry protocol.

Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC).

The question is whether this company's notability is established by reliable, secondary sources (see WP:RS); primary sources do not do this. This is required by WP:COMPANY. Having credentials is not the same as notability. Being the subject of a landmark Supreme Court case might confer notability, but this company was not the subject of that case. RJC Talk Contribs 23:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

You are 100% correct about the Supreme Court Case. The Ibanez case was previously used in this article as a reference to standards of certification use and the use self-regulated designations such as C.F.P. The correction regarding the Supreme Court case has already been fixed in this article. As such, AAFM has not been the subject of any controversial law case such as Ibanez. The Ibanez case appears to not be a part of AAFM's claim of recognition, but rather a legal point of observance of standards or behavior as per Federal Court dicta.

AAFM credentials and executive training has been the subject of articles and or coverage from: The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, The Arab Times, The China Daily, the Hindu National, El Norte Mexico, Black Enterprise, along with many others. Not sure if this helps with notability? but it should probably be discussed here.

As for other notability, the AAFM is the first US organization to have direct legal articulation agreements with the top 2 US government recognized accreditation agencies. The federal government recognizes via the CHEA recognizes the AACSB and ACBSP where the AAFM has cross recognition agreements with both organizations which accredit over 560 business schools globally.

In the USA, the AAFM works directly with the Diamond LLM Program and an American Bar Association Accredited Law School for the delivery of online courses in wealth management, international tax, compliance, AML, financial crimes, risk management and so on. Thus the AAFM is the first Board of Standards to use "post graduate" law school and LLM courses as a pathway for Board Certification.

Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC).

The articles in the Wall Street Journal and some of the other newspapers mentioned would be relevant. Could you point some hyperlinks toward these stories? A search of the WSJ and FT websites for "American Academy of Financial Management" returned no stories. RJC Talk Contribs 22:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


Associated Press and Wall Street Journal http://www.marconews.com/news/2004/nov/07/ndn_is_your_wealth_manager_certifiable/?print=1 AACSB http://www.aacsb.edu/publications/enewsline/Vol-2/Issue-4/assoc-aafm.asp ACBSP http://www.acbsp.org/index.php?mo=st&op=ld&sid=s1_025about&stpg=142 The HINDU http://www.hindu.com/edu/2005/06/13/stories/2005061300240200.htm ASIA NEWS http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geu.NmwtJIDi4BmytXNyoA?p=AAFM+CWM+wealth&fr=&ei=UTF-8&vm=p&vs=.cn&vf=all FINANCIAL TIMES: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-20356766_ITM Kuwait Times http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=NTM1MTUyNzU= AME INFO Middle East News http://www.ameinfo.com/news/Company_News/A/AAFM/ Mexico News http://www.postgradoupsa.edu.bo/ndip_pfp.htm http://viewer.zmags.com/getMagPdf.php?mid=hwrtp Gulf Times http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=97895&version=1&template_id=48&parent_id=28

Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC).

Not to nitpick, but several of these aren't news stories, and one is an advisement. The rest read like press releases, except the first which barely mentions AAFM at all. RJC TalkContribs 19:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


The AAFM is the first Board of Standards in the USA to have a joint ABA backed law school certification program. http://llmprogram.tjsl.edu/certifications AND http://www.llmprogram.org/Graduate Program 2008-09.pdf

The AAFM is the first organization in the world to facilitate a direct articulation with the AACSB and ACBSP regarding the eligibility of Board Certification for graduates of these double accredited business schools. AACSB International recognizes AAFM in press release: http://www.aacsb.edu/publications/enewsline/Vol-2/Issue-4/assoc-aafm.asp

The AAFM recognizes only business schools that are accredited regionally by the state governments and nationally by the AACSB and ACBSP which are recognized by the CHEA US Department of Education of the Federal Government USA. www.aacsb.edu and acbsp.edu

AAFM First to offer Wealth Management Training in Mainland China - http://www. accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-21422902_ITM 1st CWM programme kicks off in China. Source: Asia Africa Intelligence Wire Publication Date: 24-MAY-04 and http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-91149735.html

China Daily – AAFM 1st to Offer Westernized Banking and Wealth Training to top banks in the world including China Construction Bank. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-05/09/content_440362.htm AAFM trains for Top Banks. http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Three_Chinese_banks_in_worlds_top_four_study_999.html and Asia Banker http://www.thebankingacademy.com/workshop_wma_kl08.asp

AAFM first to work direct with Qatar’s top banks on training. Commercialbank’s investment team gets US body certification http://www. gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=97895&version=1&template_id=48&parent_id=28 and The Peninsula http://www. thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=Business_News&subsection=Local+Business&month=July2006&file=Business_News200607189638.xml

AAFM expands into Saudi Arabia: http://www. ameinfo.com/124311.html

UAE News - AAFM Sponsors Sovereign Wealth Funds Conference for Finance Gurus: http://www. albawaba.com/en/countries/UAE/230586

AAFM Kuwait Training News: http://www. alqabas.com.kw/Article.aspx?id=289772

AAFM Recently Mentioned in the Congressional Testimony of the US Congress: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_house_hearings&docid=f:33655.wais

India News: The Hindu: http://www.hindu.com/2004/11/22/stories/2004112211920600.htm AND http://www.hindu.com/edu/2005/06/20/stories/2005062000640700.htm

AAFM Front Page of Business News Mexico: El Norte News Paper: http://www. accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-832342_ITM

AAFM is 1st Wealth Management Training in the USA followed by New York University: Wall Street Journal Business: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB109883075169856486.html?mod=googlewsj

United States Department of Labor lists AAFM in Finance Industry Brochures: http://stats.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs029.htm#addinfo

AAFM Sponsors Scholarships in Arabia: http://www. arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&article=94685&d=8&m=4&y=2007&pix=kingdom.jpg&category=Kingdom

AAFM and UAE Government Join Forces for Training and Education: http://www. khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/business/2006/July/business_July526.xml&section=business&col= And: http://www.albayan.ae/servlet/Satellite?c=Article&cid=1151303008267&pagename=Albayan%2FArticle%2FFullDetail

Government Backed Dubai Quality Group News - http://www. albawaba.com/en/countries/UAE/215228

Bahamas Registrar General a Member of AAFM: http://www. thenassauguardian.com/business/288269734178184.php

Black Enterprise - Zinio - Aug 31, 2007 Work enhancements: how certification increases your professional worth - http://www. accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-32980646_ITM

National Bank of Kuwait 6th Largest Bank in the Middle East: http://www. nbk.com/NBK/About+NBK/Press+Room/Latest+Press+Release/cwm.htm

Taiwan Business Training News: http://www.gocharter.com.tw/m2/detail.asp?main_id=1418 eHow Article on How to Become an Investment Manager : http://www. ehow.com/how_2104007_become-investment-manager.html

eFinance Portal – Financial Designations: http://www. efinanceportal.com/efp/showlicenseforsearch.do?industryId=

CFA Institute Official Strategy Paper File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML This case study was used as part of the CFA Institute Vision 2012 strategic planning. process. ...... Use and Publication of Official AAFM Certifications on Page 31 of their Internal Report. http://www.cfainstitute.org/aboutus/overview/governance/volunteer/pdf/vision2012_casestudy.pdf

America’s Top Financial Professionals – Credential Listing: http://www.consumersresearchcncl.org/06-07_top_financial/fp_chapters.htm

Approved Courses in Singapore: http://www.optionetics.com.sg/cpsSummary.asp

Globalprofessor (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC).


Government References and Disclosures

The article mirrors the listings and disclosures in the links above to the United States Government, The Department of Labor, the FINRA NASD Government Regulatory Authorities, and to the accreditation authorities...

The Sources are rock solid and there are simply the facts regarding the AAFM Institution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.93.5.84 (talk) 17:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Links to these sites constitute primary sources; WP:RS, WP:NOR, and WP:V require secondary sources. These have not been provided. The idea that requesting this kind of thing is vandalism is tendentious; to suggest that it is spam ... well, that's just not even sensible given what spam is. I'll restore the tags. RJC TalkContribs 19:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


It seems that 20 or reference links directly above the RJC post are the links and sources that he wants? Let's keep things ethical here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.247.69.253 (talk) 21:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Early March discussion

It appears that someone keeps changing this site back to the old record erroneously. The AAFM has changed it's name in all but the US location to the International Academy of Financial Management. Can we delete this article and just redirect to the IAFM article? See the membership homepage www.aafm.org for external proof.

MrCWM 20:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The offending user seems to be this globalprofessor. I did a trademark search on the US Patents and Trademarks website and the only entry for American Academy of Financial Management is owned by a non-profit society set up in Hong Kong and has nothing to do with US entities. Therefore, the advice given on the latest edit and the member homepage (wwwm.aafm.org NOT other fake sites) is correct. This individual claiming IP rights held in the US (on history page) is obviously mistaken or trying to cause trouble. Can anyone explain how to ban this globalprofessor and his IP address from making more changes to this article? Maybe MrCWM's suggestion is best just to simply delete the AAFM article and redirect to International Academy of Financial Management Asian Lawyer 21:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow, this is an amazing attempt to spread false information. Anyone in the world can go to www.aafm.us to read the laws, truth, facts, trademarks, American/USA corporate filings and so on. There is nothing on the official AAFM.us websites that recognizes any new China or Dubai group or authoritity. Not sure why this other group of posters wants to claim recognition from the AAFM.us?
Not sure how or why anyone from Hong Kong has authority over an existing US American company brand identity. Under whose authority do you act or what information do you use? Anyone can spend a few dollars to create a company in Hong Kong.
Deleting both articles would be a much better idea to protect the consumer. Sooner or later the lawyers with the American Academy in the USA will need to exercise simple rights to prevent corporate identity issues to protect the American Consumer. Otherwise, there is no reason to have a fake article about the www.aafm.us listed in WIKI... Globalprofessor 01:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Globalprofessor. Firstly, posting notices on a website in the US does not make it a law. Secondly, registered trademarks are fairly clear in respect to ownership. Who says aafm.us is the official site? Not the association or the membership. If it is an existing US 'brand' as you have said - how come this US company doesn't own the trademark? According to a BR search the company listed in Hong Kong has been in place since February 19, 2003, so this is not a company 'setup by spending a few dollars'. If a US corporation has the rights as you claim, then why is this not backed up by verifiable public information instead of simple claims on a website in the US. It is even cheaper to spend a few dollars to create a website and spread disinformation!
Clearly the aafm.org website is professional, the legal structures transparent and the trademark rights clearly established in the United States with trademark registrations. Please desist from making any further changes to this article without ensuring that the professional association and the members agree with these changes. This global association is for members and is not the personal property of an individual or a company making claims from the United States.Asian Lawyer 3:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
You should do your research on pre existing trademarks and pre existing brands and domains. Your clever remarks do not mean much. I refuse to argue about 1st use and company law with somebody who does not comprehend international law.

This webpage is being misused and is hurting the consumer. It should be removed if the fraudulent information continues....Globalprofessor 12:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Mr Globalprofessor - it appears from your responses that you are not an independent editor in respect to this article. I believe this would make your repeated edits a case of conflict of interest. If you feel strongly about such, then it is best you let an independent editor make such edits based on information available in the public domain. As you are aware, Wikipedia is not a court of law and is not here to make assertions about legal matters. Please do not continue to vandalize this site or your IP address will be blocked.

MrCWM —Preceding undated comment added 19:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC).

Edit War of March 2009

There seems to be an edit war going on regarding whether this entity has changed its name or not. There are claims of vandalism and copyright infringement all around. I have been utterly unable to find anything about this conflict in reliable news sources. What is going on? Why is this not evidence that this page refers to a minor entity whose "travails" are not worthy of press coverage? RJC TalkContribs 07:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I have protected this page for a week to force the participants to discuss this here rather than continue to "edit war". John Vandenberg (chat) 21:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I would suggest that both sides in this dispute familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's core principles, especially Neutral Point of View and Verifiability (and perhaps also Talk Page Guidelines). Regarding the question of taking over this page or establishing their own page, no editor owns Wikipedia articles. Where is the third-party coverage of this dispute in reliable sources? I had my doubts that this organization met Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and the fact that so profound a dispute could occur without anyone noticing only increases my doubts. RJC TalkContribs 20:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Notice from the IAFM Board of Standards

NOTICE FROM THE IAFM BOARD OF STANDARDS - WITHOUT PREJUDICE

AAFM/IAFM Members should be aware of the following information.

On December the 8th and 9th a global board meeting of the offshore board of standards was convened in Dubai. At that board meeting, a number of key decisions were made in respect to the association. Amongst the discussions was a complaint by members and licensed providers, in respect to the US Board of Standards practice of 'grandfathering' or offering certifications for sale online without any governance or pre-requisites attached. This strategy has resulted in accusations being made by members of the public that AAFM is selling fake certificates online. Thus the board requested that the US chapter and Board of Standards review this activity as to the damage it was doing to the reputation of the Academy.

Subsequently in the months that followed, the Chairman and Legal Counsel of the US structure was found to be directly involved in the sale of certificates to members who did not qualify for recognition in territories outside of the United States, namely Singapore, Hong Kong and the UAE, and such was in breach of multiple license agreements in place with training providers and chapters offshore. The offshore board then passed a motion of no confidence in the US chairman and legal counsel and moved that he should be dismissed. At this point the discussions between the offshore body and the US body became acrimonious. The offshore body represents more than 90% of the total membership of the professional association.

The decision by the offshore board was to split from the offending US chapter, and utilize the offshore non-profit legal structures as the appropriate global issuing authority for certification. The non-profit structures have been in place for many years and are legally the structures used in locations like Hong Kong and the UAE for the legal issuance of certificates, and the offshore board has legal recognition broadly to ensure continuation of the association's goals and objectives. These association, non-profit entities are also the entities who have legally registered trademarks on behalf of the association. The board further made the decision to rebrand the association to separate the members from the questionable activities of the US chapter - the new name being the International Academy of Financial Management.

The legal counsel, who is now one of only two remaining individuals on the US Board of Standards, is now in complete control of the US legal corporation (a simple for-profit, privately owned company) known as the American Academy of Financial Management Ltd in the United States, and is claiming various common law rights as to the intellectual property for the United States territories. However, this leaves the question as to the appropriate governance structures and ownership of IP outside of the US. Given that the US "Board" is now essentially a legal structure for the distribution of paper certificates with the sole beneficiary being the so-called Chief Legal Counsel, and that there is no independent corporate governance or structure regarding the issuance of the "AAFM" qualifications, there remains a very real cloud over the operations of the US chapter.

Accordingly, the membership as a whole has voted to separate itself from the US chapter in both name and legal structure. The trademarks associated with both the AAFM and the renamed offshore entities - International Academy of Financial Management - have been registered in multiple jurisdictions and have been in commercial use since 2003. The registrar of these trademarks are in all cases the non-profit structures established outside of the United States, thus these trademarks remain the property of the membership as a whole and no one individual, despite any common law claims any one individual may make in respect to the US territory.

The governance structure of the International Academy of Financial Management is very transparent and clear and can be seen on the primary association website www.aafm.org or www.theIAFM.org under About IAFM as an independent structure for the operation of the non-profit societies.

We understand that our members must be distressed by these events, and for that we apologize, but to protect the association from the actions of individuals who could bring the entire association's reputation into disrepute we felt the need to act swiftly and decisively to isolate the US chapter.

The wiki editor Globalprofessor and financiallawyer are clearly acting to bolster the legitimacy of the US chapter which has fallen out of favor with the global structure. We must ask who would benefit from such? If members have any questions about the appropriate operation of the association we simply refer you to http://www.financialcertified.com/paymentcenter.html and ask you to identify any corporate governance in operation in respect to the issuance of qualifications. Clearly, such is an effort to simply generate transaction fees for the benefit of IIPA™ Certified eCommerce consultants which clearly could have no rights to collect fees on behalf of the American Academy or International Academy of Financial Management as a professional association because it is a third-party entity with no connection to the membership. However, it is owned by the same individual making claims on this article and the same individual who directly receives the benefit from the online sale of our membership's qualifications.

I'll let members decide whether they think that this website and it's subsequent activities should be supported through recognition on the Wikipedia site and should be allowed to continue to represent themselves in this forum as the legitimate representatives of the members of the association whether called the American Academy or indeed, the International Academy of Financial Management, or whether collectively as a membership we make a stand to protect the legal and ethical operation of the association as a whole.

I move here a motion on behalf of the professional association and members that this article be edited to clearly establish and protect the essential nature of the Academy as a non-profit association/society for the primary benefit of members and that no one individual should be allowed to hijack this article to promote commercial activities that could result in damage to the brand and our trademarks. If you agree - please make your comments known here...

Brett_K —Preceding undated comment added 08:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC).

I think it is disgusting that this individual is trying to take advantage of our membership. The AAFM should move to protects us against this person! I agree saudiprincess —Preceding undated comment added 11:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC).
The below [now above] posts are a clever attempt in hijacking or coopting a pre-existing AAFM Board corporate identity. The newly fabricated IAFM is claiming to be a new organization that for some reason desires to have or keep recognition from the AAFM. As per public warnings from AAFM, the associates below [now above] appear to be ousted and disgruntled x-members who desire to siphon business and revenues away from the founding and pre-existing AAFM Board of Standards.
The below [now above] IAFM folks desire to run quick 3 day certification courses and sell certificates to people offshore who do not have a college education. Overall, this is a waste of time. This unregistered IAFM organization should stay away from other WIKI articles and create their own article if they want to establish themselves. There is absolutely no reason to vandalize the AAFM Board website while attempting to assume quasi recognition from a company that you apparently also hate? So, the IAFM hates the AAFM, but also begs to have AAFM recognition and integrity at the exact same time? It makes no sense. IAFM people need to go and get their own wiki page and create something new instead of trying to fabricate little stories and mucking up the accuracy of long standing wiki pages.
Anyone is free to check the Archive.org and see www.financialcertified.com http://www.aafma.8m.com/ www.financialanalyst.org and see the AAFM Board's pre-existing legal existance and long standing trademarks and copyrights. Check the AAFM trademarks or company filings in LA, NY, CA etc. On each and every AAFM Official Board website, the AAFM Board is listed as a Certifying Body and Regulatory Body in charge of: Standards, Ethics, Requirements, Certification, Membership, Exams, and Graduate Designations. In the same way as the CFP or CFA model and organizational structure. This unregistered and newly created organization IAFM is simply a quickie training company that desires to also sell unauthorized and unrecognized certificates....
As per global public notices to AAFM members, the below posting/persons [now above] were repudiated because of unauthorized behavior, probable counterfeiting, and anti-money laundering concerns. As per Global AAFM notices, the below folks [now above] are governed by an International Contract that prohibits their behavior or use of any brand, IP, certifications, designations or issuing any certifications related to AAFM. Therefore, we can only assume that the below [now above] terminated AAFM members and x-members are simply angry that they have zero rights. As per the AAFM official websites, founding and pre-existing AAFM online documents, the authentic board certifications are only available direct from the USA.
As per the Board notice from AAFM USA over 5 months ago, the AAFM Board of Standards has repudiated and terminated recognition of the Offshore Operations in Dubai/Africa or otherwise which includes the below poster person/Brett K below [now above] for incompetance and probable misuse/self dealing with funds. There is no reference to any Offshore Board of Standards on any official AAFM Board websites. We can only assume by the post below [now above] that Brett K is the grand leader of the freshly fabricated IAFM Dubai based certificate printing company. Below [now above], Brett K is also making motions to take over this article? while also claiming authority over the AAFM membership??? This whole talk section is absolutely confusing?
As mentioned below [now above], the unestablished IAFM should go and create a new brand and new wiki page for themselves and leave alone such esteemed organizations as the AAFM Board of Standards, CFP Board of Standards or CFA Board of Standards.
After the IAFM creates its own accurate new wiki page, we can then vote on allowing it or deleting it...
Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment added 18:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC).


Can we be simplistic about this please. AAFM (or IAFM) is supposed to be a professional association for the rights and development of the members is it not?

Therefore, which of the two organizations purporting to be the 'association' has better transparency on it's governance, structure and operation. In my view www.aafm.org appears to be the more legitimate of the two claimants, and financialanalyst.org simply is making claims about it's IP rights - but I see nothing substantive from the later about members rights. Which is the whole point of the association...

In respect to Globalprofessor's legalese below [now above] - I would simply ask him to address publicly on the aafm.org/financialanalyst.org websites or in this forum, how the funds collected by the "Certified E-Commerce Consultants" are possibly used to promote the AAFM association and to give an accounting of how funds are used to assist the membership - this is a very basic governance requirement for transparency.

In respect to the comments below [now above] about hijacking, this again appears to be misinformation. The www.theIAFM.org/www.aafm.org sites and the International Academy of Financial Management wikipedia article clearly articulate the structure of the society that issues certificates and the legal status of these entities. It is not, as GlobalProfessor has portrayed as a freshly fabricated IAFM Dubai based certificate printing company. Anyone can do a BR company search in Hong Kong and see that the IAFM non-profit has been in existing since 2003.

This makes me further think that the financialanalyst.org sites that Globalprofessor are either a scam, or at best a structure that is taking advantage of the brand name to benefit a few individuals rather than the members. Simply put, there is to much focus on the rights of the IP holder here and not enough on the core value proposition to members. I challenge Globalprofessor and financialanalyst.org to open up the ledger to show the budget for member services or member benefits this year - instead of claiming 'rights' to collect fees. Give us the transparency the membership deserves - not claims about YOUR rights, or the rights of a commercial entity.

Asian Lawyer 4:29, 28 March 2009


Again, this rambling below [now above] makes no sense. It simply appears that a Dubai or African group/company called IAFM wants to defraud people overseas and on the WIKI. There is no other explanation or reason for an offshore company to attack a Wiki Article about an American Company. The official AAFM websites discloses itself to be a Board of Standards/Institute and certifying body in the USA. The websites for the official AAFM Board do not claim to be any legal association.
Unfortunately for the offenders below [now above], you can't fabricate ownership or reality. If anyone goes to the original and official AAFM USA websites, you will find that they are registered US companies with trademarks, service marks, copyrights and so forth.
If the IAFM Africa/Dubai wants to create its own accurate wiki page, then go do it.
Because it appears that the AAFM will not recognize your existence, you seem to be confused and angered. However, one can't legally acquire recognition without legal consent.
As a note, the CFP, CFA and AAFM boards all have the primary mission to protect the brand, the board, the certifications, create standards, mandate ethics, dictate continuing educations, increase authoritative recognitions and so forth.
The IAFM appears to be some sort of chapter activities or training organization. As such, the below folks [now above] should understand the industry standards of Certification Boards which are: Boards of Standards and Certifying Institutes ARE NOT INTERESTED in conducting: test prep courses, quickie Training, chapter services, and so forth. Boards are Certifying and Regulatory related.
Based on the arhvive.org, it appears that the financialanalyst.org and financialcertified.com have existed many years before the aafm.org in Dubai USA. As per simple web research and Archive.org, the IAFM offshore websites are just a few days old. Based on this research, we can only assume that the founding company of the AAFM BOARD USA is the real company and that the IAFM is a knock-off/rip off brand much like a fake Gucci bag..
After doing this investigation, I feel a duty, in respect to the WIKI, to warn any consumers of the bad faith intent and activities coming from this "days old newly concocted group" operating from Dubai....
Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment added 18:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC).


Globalprofessor - you have made clear your stand. You are not interested in the members, just making legal claims about your rights or how others have infringed on those rights. When you and your organization are ready to represent the members maybe we will listen to what you have to say.
For us as professionals who have had faith in the designations offered, it is not about any claims about who owns what. It is only about what AAFM will do for the members of the association on an ongoing basis - it is clear financialanalyst.org and whomever it represents is not in the slightest interested in the best interests of us as members.
If you and the AAFM Board of Standards in the United States do not understand that - it appears we are honestly better off with IAFM and it's efforts to give something back to the financial profession and to us as members. If you were smart, you would join this effort and stop fighting against what appears to be a superior offering to us - the members.
You like to quote CFP, CFA, and others, but with your communication below [now above]- you do not belong in this class or company. The journey for members does not end once we get a certificate - it is just the beginning. On this test - you fail. IAFM was right to move on...so will we.
But by all means, ignore us as members if you feel that is within your rights. When AAFM is ready to act on behalf of us again, we will be ready to participate. I will not bother participating in this ludicrous discussion any longer.
You've just lost my vote... AAFM 0 - IAFM 1!
To others participating in this discussion - I am sorry, I did try my best to get the US body to see reason, but it is a hopeless case.
Asian Lawyer 11:48, 28 March 2009

Overall, the AAFM Wiki page should probably be deleted if it continues to be vandalized by un-affiliated or outside organizations that only want to include their marketing, links or hate speech.. Further, the fantasy content above is not cited or referenced in any way. It seems to be fraudulent conjecture or hate speech directed at the AAFM.

The AAFM Board of Standards is an independent US Based organization as per their websites. The AAFM is a certifying body and regulatory body. If disgruntled former associates or x members in Africa and Dubai want to create their own association, then that is fine, but it is unreasonable to make bogus negative claims against the AAFM Board while also claiming a chain of authority from the AAFM Board by virtue of your posts and links etc.

The reason there is no news to report about this incident is that it appears to be purely a WIKI or hack attack. It is apparent that the AAFM has notices on their American/USA home pages regarding their position as the globally recognized Board Certifying authority. Other than that, it appears that the AAFM Board does not want to provide undue attention to a wiki attack or a simple website hijacking....

As a note, it has been documented in recent years that the CFP board spends roughly a million dollars a year protecting their trademarks and IP, on legal expenses defending itself from false attacks, or stopping misuse of their intellectual property.

Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment added 02:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC).

GlobalProfessor

I am an IAFM Member. Who is this Global Professor person ? What is their motive ? Professor from where ? Professor of what ? What is this persons credibility ? I am new to this, but I am shocked at some of the stuff that this person is being allowed to upload. Identify yourself PROFESSOR or please stop degrading my qualifications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IAFM member (talk • contribs) 13:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

GlobalProfessor - further research

TIME OUT !! - I went to the website referenced by the GLOBALPROFESSOR. Seems that all I have to do to get qualified under his method is to submit a resume and some documents, and of course pay money to get some letters after my name. I went through a highly professional training session, with many very experienced industry specialists, sat a difficult examination and basically worked very hard to get my qualifications. If only I had known that the PROFESSOR could have saved me all this trouble and issued me the credentials. I have some spare discount coupons avalable, can I have an MBA too please Professor ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IAFM member (talk • contribs) 14:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

AAFM Board USA Requirements

The AAFM Global Board USA websites clearly require an accredited college degree for board certification along with meeting the 6 Global Requirements of Education, Ethics, Experience, Accredited College Testing, Continuing Education, and Government recognized Degree. If anyone took time to learn about the AAFM Board of Standards, the AAFM Board Policies, AAFM Board Criteria, etc the seeker would quickly learn about industry standards of CFP, CFA CPA and others along with the long-held Graduate Requirements for AAFM Board Certification.

Board Certification, Charter Certification, and Graduate Designation Marks are issued by a certifying board to those who meet strict requirements of government recognized education and meeting the other criteria. As an example, on the AAFM USA websites it shows that the AAFM is the first Board of Standards in the world to offer certification for the completion of accredited law school program courses. After some quick online research, it seems that the AAFM USA Global Board offers the highest certification educational path and requirements in the format of post-doctorate masters courses. http://llmprogram.tjsl.edu/certifications

In contrast, a multitude of training certificates are available from offshore organisers for attending a siminar course.

Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment added 22:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC).

Online Certification

Yes but can I please use my discount coupons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IAFM member (talk • contribs) 05:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

merge the titles here

I have proposed to merge here Chartered Wealth Manager. It was already merged back in 2006, but it's been unmerged. If there are no third-party independient sources showing that it's notable outside the context of the Academy, then it shouldn't have its own article, per the notability guideline --Enric Naval (talk) 23:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know that this is a merge so much as a speedy delete: it is a product offered by a particular firm. The page seems to serve no purpose other than an advertisement. Thoughts? RJC TalkContribs 07:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Diploma Mill

Yes, this is an advert for a Diploma Mill organisation from USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IAFM member (talk • contribs) 00:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Certification and Charter and Masters Designations

Training certificats/Diplomas are unregulated paper issued offshore for taking a training course. Legally, in the American Sector, diplomas are considered a degree from a college or school.

However, Board Certification is a different legal concept. Any person who understands CFP CFA PMI or AAFM and the 40 year old financial standards certification industry, would know that CFP and CFA and AAFM offer Certification and Charters. These are certification marks and designations and professional qualifications.

The AAFM does not and never has issued a diploma in the Americas. The AAFM website and terms are pretty clear. www.aafm.us However, the AAFM is the only organization in the world to recognize by legal articulation the AACSB and ACBSP double accredited business school degree programs that are also recognized and sanctioned by the governments. Therefore, the AAFM as an accreditation standards body for the profession has over 600 qualified colleges and accredited programs in the AAFM network as registered/recognized providers globally.

User:Globalprofessor —Preceding undated comment added 22:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_Academy_of_Financial_Management/Archive_1&oldid=304941790"