“Do I think it’s a threat to a traditional platform [cost] structure? Yes. Do I think that the definition of platform needs to be redefined? The answer is yes,” Ms Mckeage told SMSF Adviser. “I think that the market is just changing [and] evolving.”

Ms Mckeage said just as financial advisers have had to justify their value through the FOFA reforms, it was inevitable that platforms would at some point have to do the same.

“I think there is a downward pressure on platform fees,” she said, “but if we unbundle manufacturing and then we unbundle the value of administration tax and reporting, everything along that value chain needs to be justified as a standalone value proposition.”

Those suggesting mFund won’t be successful are “trying to talk it down”, according to Ms Mckeage, who said she would not be voting against the “sheer power of the stock exchange”.

“I think there’s less risk in thinking that it will work and getting on board with it than [in] trying to fight it and thinking it won’t work, because if it doesn’t there’s always contingencies, but if you try to fight it and you think it won’t and it [does], that could be a massive defeat.”

This follows comments by Bell Direct’s chief executive Arnie Selvarajah, who said a significant proportion of the criticism concerning mFund is coming from those who are “threatened” by it.

Speaking to SMSF Adviser, Mr Selvarajah said the wealth marketplace is dominated by “four or five big players” that are trying to slow progress and innovation to secure their own income.

“I think you’ll find a lot of the criticism is coming from those people who are more threatened by mFund,” Mr Selvarajah said.