The financial services world has changed - and not for the better Fewer champagne glasses: there are fewer financial advisers (IFAs, bank advisers and wealth managers) now than there used to be. At the beginning of 2012 there were 38,317 according to the Financial Conduct Authority, which has replaced the FSA in supervising conduct of financial firms. At the end of July this year there were 32,000 - a fall of 16pc. Larger champagne glasses: earlier this month, the Investment Management Association published data showing that retail flows for Q2 of this year were up 44pc at £5.7bn vs Q1 - the highest quarterly level of inflows since Q2, 2011. This is great news for fund managers who captured that flow but there's nothing really sensational about this. After all, money into equity funds ebbs and flows depending on fear and greed, among other things. What was really significant was that flows of £3.3bn were transacted by the five top fund platforms (Hargreaves Lansdown, Fidelity, CoFunds, Skandia and Transact). This was up 70pc on the previous quarter and was the best quarterly flow on record. The statistics get even more significant: nearly 100pc of all net flows in the past year came through platforms. No one can doubt that the objectives of RDR are well intentioned and have intended consequences - clearer charges for the investor so that advisers agreed their charges up front; clearer services so that the investor knows how much of the market his chosen adviser is able to help with, and where he is not; more professional advice obtained by advisers being suitably qualified; and those qualifications being up to date through a process of continuous professional development. But there are unintended consequences. My conversations with some in the industry indicate that many in what's left of the adviser market are not prepared to deal with clients with modest amounts of money. Banks are worried about regulation and are pulling out. So where do smaller investors and savers get advice in the new world? Platforms are slimming down their focused list of funds. So perhaps the choice for those who execute through them will be reduced in future - although open architecture will help choice here. Research indicates that the proportion of money invested in the top 10 UK funds has increased in the past two-and-a-half years to 38pc. Tracker funds are more popular, accounting for 32pc at the last count. There is a feeling that ,as a result of RDR, costs for investors may increase. Let's assume a typical annual management charge of 1.5pc. In future, total platform, fund manager and adviser fees may rise above this. By the way, those unpopular hedge funds charge 1.5pc as a management fee and the investor in conventional long funds may now pay more than that. What does this all mean for UK equity funds? They are becoming polarised with the bigger getting bigger and more money ending up in risk-averse products such as trackers. This has to be bad for capital-raisings for companies as there are fewer decision-makers. Capital transactions will depend in future on a small number of fund managers saying yes or no. As for the UK's smaller companies, they will find it even tougher - not a great outcome as the UK's overall economy reaches escape velocity. Tom Stevenson is away