Long term investors are already rewarded. They get the returns.
The type of people who self sabotage don't get the long term growth. That is why it is called self sabotage!
On this particular article I'm torn. I don't like the idea of loyalty bonuses. I also think a primary duty of a good financial planner is to educate clients and reinforce these good behaviors. Most clients shouldn't be freaking out anyway.
However I also recognize that the client who calls in constantly every time the market moves 10% is eating up time and resources that the buy and hold "I get it" investor isn't. The same can be said for selling mutual funds in a panic. That is more trades the manager has to do, and it can raise costs and hurt performance for the other investors. So if this is a way of passing on savings to the good long term investors I am 100% in agreement.
What if Vanguard created new admiral+ shares of their mutual funds with even lower expenses but you could only get them by owning the fund for 5+ consecutive years. Would that surprise anyone? Vanguard is run at cost, and clients who don't freak out and want to trade or go to cash every 6 months are a whole lot lower cost to manage. Shouldn't those clients get lower costs? Why are they subsidizing other client's bad behaviors?