Contents:

Contents Scope and Themes What you need to know Scope of this report Methodology Abbreviations and terms Abbreviations Terms Executive Summary Limits of convergence A jaded advertising audience Perceptions of branding attributes Battling for mindshare Independent financial advisors Investment preferences How investable funds are categorized Convergence and insurance Convergence and telecom Attitudes toward Financial Services Advertising: A Jaded Audience It’s hard to score big with a disinterested crowd Figure 1: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by gender, September 2007 Figure 2: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by age, September 2007 Figure 3: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by household income, September 2007 Figure 4: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by Hispanic/not Hispanic, September 2007 Figure 5: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by student/no student, September 2007 Figure 6: Attitudes toward financial services advertising, by race, September 2007 Perceptions of Brand Attributes Branding summary The most honest, familiar, safe, and/or reliable companies Figure 7: Rankings of financial companies described as “honest,” “familiar”, “safe”, “reliable” and “no opinion”, September 2007 The most unique, knowledgeable, expensive, and/or convenient companies Figure 8: Rankings of financial companies described as “knowledgeable”, “unique”, “expensive”, “convenient” or “none” or “no opinion” for all attributes, September 2007 Battling for Mindshare Self-identification with the Outsider Youth and the unconventional spirit Figure 9: Self-identification with the unconventional, by age, September 2007 High rollers and the unconventional spirit Figure 10: Self-identification with the unconventional, by household income, September 2007 Figure 11: Self-identification with the unconventional, by student/no student, September 2007 Case study: WaMu’s outsider branding strategy Figure 12: Rankings of financial companies described as “unique,” by age, September 2007 Figure 13: Rankings of financial companies described as “unique,” by household income, September 2007 Figure 14: Rankings of financial companies described as “unique,” by race/ethnicity, September 2007 Figure 15: Rankings of financial companies described as “unique,” by student/no student, September 2007 Figure 16: Rankings of financial companies described as “unique,” by region, September 2007 Sample advertising tapping into the ‘outsider’ spirit: Washington Mutual Figure 17: WaMu print advertisement, August 2007 Honesty and Trust Figure 18: Rankings of financial companies described as “honest,” by region, September 2007 Figure 19: Rankings of financial companies described as “don’t know,” by region, September 2007 The anxious crowd Figure 20: Feelings of financial security, by gender, September 2007 Figure 21: Concern about identity theft, by gender, September 2007 Sample advertising targeted at the anxious crowd: State Farm Figure 22: State Farm, September 2007 Figure 23: State Farm, September 2007 American lifestyles Figure 24: Fitness and sports activities, by gender, September 2007 Figure 25: Leisure time activities, by gender, September 2007 Sample lifestyle advertising: Bank of America and Chase Figure 26: Bank of America print advertisement, October 2007 Figure 27: Bank of America print advertisement, September 2007 Figure 28: Bank of America print advertisement, September 2007 Figure 29: Chase print advertisment, October 2007 Figure 30: Chase Print advertisement, August 2007 The Limits of Convergence The dominance of the traditional model: preferred choices for savings and investment accounts Figure 31: Preferred choices for savings and investment accounts, by gender, September 2007 Figure 32: Preferred choices for accounts, by income, September 2007 Figure 33: Preferred choices for accounts, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 The dominance of the traditional model: preferred choices for checking accounts Figure 34: Propensity to follow traditional banking model, by gender, September 2007 Figure 35: Propensity to follow traditional banking model, by income, September 2007 Figure 36: Propensity to follow traditional banking model, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Figure 37: Propensity to follow traditional banking model, by work status, September 2007 Trust issues and banks versus brokerage Figure 38: Trust—banks versus brokerage firms, by gender, September 2007 Figure 39: Trust—banks versus brokerage firms, by age, September 2007 Figure 40: Trust—banks versus brokerage firms, by income level, September 2007 Figure 41: Trust—banks versus brokerage firms, by race, September 2007 Figure 42: Trust—banks versus brokerage firms, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Is there any difference? Figure 43: Perception of differentiation, by gender, September 2007 Figure 44: Perception of Differentiation, by income, September 2007 Figure 45: Perception of differentiation, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Figure 46: Perception of differentiation, by work status, September 2007 Perceptions of Independent Financial Advisors Independent financial advisors are not used by mainstream America Figure 47: Independent advisors, usage, by gender, September 2007 Figure 48: independent advisor, usage, by income level, September 2007 Figure 49: Independent advisors, usage, by marital status, September 2007 Figure 50: Independent advisors, usage, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Figure 51: Independent advisor, usage, by region, September 2007 Mainstream America not likely to trust independent advisors more than banks and brokerage Figure 52: Trust, independent advisors versus banks and brokerage, by gender, September 2007 Figure 53: Trust, independent advisors versus banks and brokerage, by income level, September 2007 Figure 54: Trust, independent advisors versus banks and brokerage, by marital status, September 2007 Figure 55: Trust, independent advisors versus banks and brokerage, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Where Do Consumers Like to Invest? Their money? Figure 56: Investment preferences, earnings, by gender, September 2007 Figure 57: Investment preferences, earnings, by age, September 2007 Figure 58: Investment preferences, earnings, by household income, September 2007 Figure 59: Investment preferences, earnings, by race, September 2007 Figure 60: Investment preferences, earnings, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Their retirement savings? Figure 61: Investment preferences, retirement savings, by gender, September 2007 Figure 62: Investment preferences, retirement savings, by age, September 2007 Figure 63: Investment preferences, retirement savings, by income, September 2007 Figure 64: Investment preferences, retirement savings, by race/ethnicity, September 2007 Figure 65: Investment preferences, retirement savings, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Figure 66: Investment preference s, retirement savings, by employment status, September 2007 Their inheritance? Figure 67: Preference for investing an inheritance, by gender, September 2007 Figure 68: Preference for investing an inheritance, by age, September 2007 Figure 69: Preference for investing an inheritance, by income, September 2007 Figure 70: Preference for investing an inheritance, by race, September 2007 Figure 71: Preference for investing an inheritance, by marital status, September 2007 Figure 72: Preference for investing an inheritance, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Their lottery winnings? Figure 73: Preference for investing lottery winnings, by income, September 2007 Figure 74: Preference for investing lottery winnings, by race/ethnicity, September 2007 Figure 75: Preference for investing lottery winnings, by level of educational attainment, September 2007 Appendix: Trade Associations