Can we please dispense with this garbage about "advisers who haven't studied" and "advisers who don't have degrees".

ALL advisers who qualify for the experience pathway have studied. Apart from anything else they have at least 10 years of CPD. Even if they aren't members of associations they will have done compulsory CPD under their licensee's obligations for further training. They will also have studied to pass the FASEA exam. It doesn't matter if that study was via "FASEA approved" courses or not. In many cases it will actually have been via a superior method. Those advisers who have not done sufficient study to pass the FASEA exam are not eligible for the experience pathway, because they are no longer advisers.

And many advisers who will use the experience pathway DO have degrees. They just don't have the narrow range of "FASEA approved" degrees.

Those course providers who chose to make easy money from FASEA's conflicted and incompetent standards regime have been gifted revenue on a platter. It is ridiculous for them to be complaining their gift will be slightly smaller now. It's also interesting to note that most of the quality universities never went down the "FASEA approved" road in the first place, perhaps seeing shonky FASEA for what it really was, and choosing to retain their reputations rather than making a quick buck.