Are dark forces seeking to undermine the self managed super fund (SMSF) sector? When Nick Sherry was the Minister for Superannuation, he initiated the Super System Review – known as the Cooper review. Was he motivated to do so by ideology or whispers in his ear from the large industry players?

We will learn something of the future of SMSF's when former ASIC Chair Jeremy Cooper releases the first part of phase three of his review today.

A statistical summary of SMSF's was released last Thursday and the most alarming statistic from the insto's point of view is that funds holding $500,000 or more out-performed APRA regulated funds (only slightly – but it has been over the past three years).

SMSF's seem to be more expensive to run than 'industry standards' if they hold balances of less than $200,000. However, the definition of 'industry standards' is open to debate.

Insto's have become alarmed by the growth of SMSF's as statistics show that funds have been flowing out of retail and industry funds and in to SMSF's.

I read one pundit recently making the pronouncement that SMSF's are "as good as dead" and was left wondering why SMSF's seem to cop so much bad press.

I asked one of Australia's leading superannuation analyst, Tony Negline, for enlightenment: "That stuff about SMSF's being dead is just people trying to give the sector bad press," Tony told me. "Some people might have hoped the Cooper Review's statistical report had a smoking gun – but the report shows a sector in pretty good shape".

I asked Tony, who authored 'A How to Book of Self Managed Super Funds' published earlier this year, why SMSF's have become so popular and whether or not financial planners were adapting their businesses away from communications revenue activities to servicing SMSF's.

He said: "Financial planners are doing more SMSF work because their clients are asking them to, it's that simple. The client wants the flexibility, and the financial planner also benefits from the flexibility of the SMSF, so both planner and client benefit. The benefits clients are looking for include control as well as estate planning.

"SMSFs have higher balances and want a more personalised service than larger funds, which suffer from a tyranny of size. Some larger funds are arguing against SMSFs because they are the competitive threat and once super money goes into a SMSF very little returns to the fund managers and none to industry funds.

"One of the best things about SMSFs is that they keep the big guys honest – a bit like the independent retailers – and we've all seen the damage done when the big guys squeeze them out of existence."

Tony pointed me to some recent ATO stats showing that SMSF's growth is slowing only marginally, kind of disproving the theory that they are dead.

Let's see what Cooper reports today, but do be careful when you read the analysis in the press and beware of press releases bearing hidden agendas.