A newsletter about money, athletes, and the financial life nobody prepares you for.
Before we get into this week's topic.
Last issue asked who owns the spaces between the professionals on an athlete's team. This issue asks something that comes earlier: how did each of them get there?
Many athletes find the people who help with their money through someone they already trust: a teammate, an agent, a family friend, a coach. That's natural, and it's also exactly why it needs a second step. Trust in the person who made the introduction is not the same as checking the person who was introduced.
Get this in your inbox every Monday.
Free financial education for athletes, parents, and advisors — written by a former pro athlete turned finance professional.
What an introduction does and doesn't tell you
An introduction tells you that someone you trust was comfortable with this person. It doesn't tell you what that comfort was based on. The introducer may have checked carefully, or may simply have had a good experience. They may not know about a complaint, a regulatory action, or how the person is actually paid. And, as the last issue noted, it's fair to ask whether anyone benefits from the introduction.
Regulators also warn about what's sometimes called affinity fraud: schemes that spread through groups whose members trust each other, such as teams, communities, and circles of friends. Most introductions are made in good faith, but a group's trust is exactly what such schemes rely on, which is a good reason to verify, however warm the introduction.
Five things worth verifying
The first is whether they're registered or licensed for what they're actually doing. Check the regulator's own register, not the professional's website or brochure. In the United States, for example, Investor.gov offers a free search that routes to the SEC's adviser database and FINRA's BrokerCheck. Other countries have their own registers, and the UK's Financial Conduct Authority keeps one. Where an agent has to be certified by a union, federation, or league, check that register too. A name that doesn't appear where you'd expect it to is a question to ask, not something to wave through. Check both the individual and the firm, including their current status and permission to provide the service being offered. Match the contact details against the official record and use independently verified details to contact them. A genuine registration number can be copied by an impersonator, and registration itself is not a guarantee of competence or honesty.
The second is their disciplinary and complaint history. Registers can show regulatory actions, customer disputes, and similar disclosures. A complaint is not the same as a finding of misconduct. Read its status and outcome, ask the professional to explain it, and compare that explanation with the published record. Equally, no reported disclosures does not mean that every complaint or problem would appear there.
The third is how they're paid and what conflicts they have, in writing. In the United States, registered investment advisers disclose fees, conflicts, and certain disciplinary matters through Form ADV, including its plain-language brochure. SEC-registered advisers and broker-dealers serving retail investors also provide a short relationship summary called Form CRS. Elsewhere the documents differ, but the principle holds: ask for the fees, the services included, and any conflicts in writing, and match them to what each person has actually agreed to do.
The fourth is who holds the money and who can see it. Be cautious about any arrangement where the only record of your account is what the person managing it chooses to show you. Wherever possible, statements should come directly from an independent bank or custodian, and you should be able to see the position yourself.
The fifth is the paperwork and the proof. Ask for a written agreement that sets out scope, fees, how it ends, and who you could complain to. Verify any claimed credential with the body that issues it, and speak to references yourself. Where possible, seek an independent perspective beyond the references supplied, while respecting client confidentiality.
Verification isn't distrust
Asking these questions isn't an accusation. Reasonable professionals expect them, and answering clearly is part of the job. If someone becomes evasive about registration, fees, or independent statements, that's useful information, though it isn't proof of anything on its own.
This varies by country and by role
Which professionals must be registered, and which registers exist, differs from country to country, and some roles aren't regulated at all in some places. This issue is a framework, not a statement of what any market requires. Where no register exists, that's a reason for extra care, not less.
One action this week
Choose one professional, whether you're about to hire them or have worked with them for years, and spend thirty minutes starting the five checks. Write down what you verified, where you verified it, and what remains unanswered next to your team map from last issue. Then ask whoever introduced them two questions: did you check them yourself, and does anyone benefit from the introduction? Treat unresolved questions about identity or required authorisation as reasons to pause before signing or transferring money.
This isn't financial, legal, or regulatory advice for your situation. That conversation belongs with a qualified professional who can look at your actual circumstances. But a warm introduction and a completed check are two different things, and it's better to find out which one you have before you rely on it.
Final Whistle Finance is written by a former professional basketball player and ACCA-qualified finance professional with Big Four audit experience. This newsletter is for educational purposes and does not constitute regulated financial or legal advice.
If you found this useful, forward it to one athlete you know who needs to read it.
Next issue: who can move your money — and what have you actually authorised them to do?