Additional Cuts at Morgan Stanley

I have my ear to the ground on this and I think you’re just hearing people flap their gums. If there are more cuts it will be Gorman’s call and wouldn’t happen until he’s in place. MS isn’t even done swallowing the effects of the last cut.

i am hearing $300,000 is the next hurdle.      <!–
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–>

[quote=qwerty]i am hearing $300,000 is the next hurdle.      <!-- var SymRealOnLoad; var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–> [/quote]

I'm hearing that a cut to $300k would only cut another 15% off (the last cut for above LOS 8 was $225K) of MS's 8100 reps, so they'll cut to $500k instead and cut the rep force to 4500.

The same rumor says the "we survived" party will be held on the moon and everyone will get a new Enzo as a party favor.

Anybody know if the fired MS brokers, were able to take their clients to the new firm without a hassle?

i.e. non compete issues and EFL loans that were still outstanding?

"Anybody know if the fired MS brokers, were able to take their clients to the new firm without a hassle?"

Grid,

Do you think that MS would just let clients, their accounts, and the revenue derived from such relationships just walk out the door? Do you think they would let their former brokers raid the ongoing revenue stream by not restricting them from doing business? NO, this is a cutthroat business, and MS is doing EVERYTHING in their power to keep the business and make life hell for the brokers they tossed out like trash.

Look for them to make another major cut to below 275/300 in late Sept or Oct. Fiscal year end is Nov and they most likley won’t do it in Nov allthought they did cut in Nov in 2002.

Cutting below $500m would take you a lot lower than 4500 reps.  I’ll finish around $325-$350 and my rank should be around 3000.  Check the numbers again.

THe reason that MWD did not give a heads up to their brokers that were below the cut line is so they did not have a chance to move their books to another BD quickly.  This enabled the firm to capitalize on this.

One article I read said that some of the firm's execs and upper management directed the BMs to approach it like this: 

"you are not a fit for our company, but after you leave, your clients will be."

[quote=Spook5365]Cutting below $500m would take you a lot lower than 4500 reps.  I'll finish around $325-$350 and my rank should be around 3000.  Check the numbers again.[/quote]

I was just joking about the empty and rather silly speculation running wild here on this board. The part about the survivor's party being on the moon and the Ferrari Enzos as party favors was a joke too.

You don't have to be the sharpest knife in the drawer to know some people here are talking out of their hats. On the last cut it took three weeks from announcement to the actual cut to process. And that cut took away people that by any fair estimation were doing grossly substandard production.

 Now we have people here saying they'll do another cut in 4-6 weeks, which means they'll start the planning for it now, just 2 weeks after the alst cut happened AND they'll do it when they have a retail boss months away from taking control.  What's worse is they're projection cut lines that would cut the company by 25% or more. That's just silly.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]

"you are not a fit for our company, but after you leave, your clients will be."

[/quote]

More like "Your production at your LOS is well, well below industry norms. You'll be leaving, your clients will be staying.". Harsh, but true.

MSDog:  I obviously knew you were joking on the Enzos (nice idea though) but thought the first part of post was serious.  You're right, the first cut can't even be defined yet in terms of results, so how could another be righ on top of it already?

I would anticipate that it will be well-received as far as bottom-line results go.  Especially given the fact that the brokers were not given ample time to move and bring over clients prior to their departure.  If they don’t do them by the end of the fiscal year in November, they will do them (assuming they are planning a new round) sometime early, fiscal year 06.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]

THe reason that MWD did not give a heads up
to their brokers that were below the cut line is so they did not have a
chance to move their books to another BD quickly.  This
enabled the firm to capitalize on this.

One article I read said that some of the firm's execs and upper management directed the BMs to approach it like this: 

"you are not a fit for our company, but after you leave, your clients will be."

I'll be honest-I called many that were below the line that MWD set.  I would say that nearly half of them felt they were safe and wouldn't even consider looking at other opportunities. 

To each his own.

I concur.  Never believe the compnay cares about you.  One day they love you, the next day they don’t.  I have seen the biggest A-holes get accolades.  Why?  B/c they do alot of gross.  If they stopped tomorrow, no one would be interested in them. Don’t fool yourself.  Take care of you first.  Don’t assume your clients care about you or that your company cares about you.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]

I’ll be honest-I called many that were below
the line that MWD set.  I would say that nearly half of them felt
they were safe and wouldn’t even consider looking at other
opportunities. 

To each his own.

[quote=frumhere]I concur.  Never believe the compnay cares about
you.  One day they love you, the next day they don’t.  I have
seen the biggest A-holes get accolades.  Why?  B/c they do
alot of gross.  If they stopped tomorrow, no one would be
interested in them. Don’t fool yourself.  Take care of you
first.  Don’t assume your clients care about you or that your
company cares about you.[/quote]



Somewhere a couple years ago I read a story about a decent producer (I
don’t remember…maybe $500k?) who was in the process of transitioning
to fee-based–as the firm requested–when his production dropped (as
would be expected) and he was fired.



Well, if you do good by your clients, they will care about you.



I was wondering:  what if someone at Morgan Stanley had cancer or
some other health problem and their production dropped as a result
(expectable), would they be fired, too?

yes... at any firm, not just at MS..

WOW!

If that is true it really speaks the truth about wire houses. It looks like you only ask for trouble if you work for them!

Check out the YHOO board for Morgan Stanley (MWD:NYSE) once in a while. I have been posting information of interest to you all over there from time to time.

a 500k producer currently is ranked 1900 of the mwd brokers.

a 300k producer is ranked around 3000.

250 was @ 4500 (in july)

210 was @ 5100 (in july)

also there are probably 2000-3000 brokers that are under 5 years that are not doing 300k and will never reach 300k.

they are still employed and 225k brokers were cut?

[quote=frumhere]I concur.  Never believe the compnay cares about you.  One day they love you, the next day they don’t.  I have seen the biggest A-holes get accolades.  Why?  B/c they do alot of gross.  If they stopped tomorrow, no one would be interested in them. Don’t fool yourself.  Take care of you first.  Don’t assume your clients care about you or that your company cares about you.[/quote]

Somewhere a couple years ago I read a story about a decent producer (I don’t remember…maybe $500k?) who was in the process of transitioning to fee-based–as the firm requested–when his production dropped (as would be expected) and he was fired.

Well, if you do good by your clients, they will care about you.

I was wondering:  what if someone at Morgan Stanley had cancer or some other health problem and their production dropped as a result (expectable), would they be fired, too?

That happened.  MWD did not take illness into consideration.

[quote=ringo]

a 500k producer currently is ranked 1900 of the mwd brokers.

a 300k producer is ranked around 3000.

250 was @ 4500 (in july)

210 was @ 5100 (in july)

[/quote]

Ringo, keep in mind that these numbers are skewed.  There are vertical teams in place where the Jr. Brokers do minimal production, as well as a license CSAs, CACs, and Rookies that are mixed into those rankings as well.

[quote=iconsult100][quote=ringo]

a 500k producer currently is ranked 1900 of the mwd brokers.

a 300k producer is ranked around 3000.

250 was @ 4500 (in july)

210 was @ 5100 (in july)

[/quote]

Ringo, keep in mind that these numbers are skewed.  There are vertical teams in place where the Jr. Brokers do minimal production, as well as a license CSAs, CACs, and Rookies that are mixed into those rankings as well.

[/quote]

I couldn't tell you what a CSA or CAC is, but his numbers aren't skewed unless you begin to translate them into precentages, ie; "a 500K producer is in the top 25%". You might also want to consider production in "length of Service" (LOS) breakdowns, as that's what MS did with their cuts.

[quote=ringo]

also there are probably 2000-3000 brokers that are under 5 years that are not doing 300k and will never reach 300k.

they are still employed and 225k brokers were cut?

[/quote]

They did it by LOS. At LOS 8 and above the cut line was $225k. It was lower for newer people.

MSdog,  Call-Center FAs (CAC) are counted as brokers, but are paid salaries and do not actively look to generate revenue.  Essentially, they watch over the small clients.

Senior FAs sometimes partner with Jr. FAs and simply pay them a flat salary and the majority of the group's production goes to the Senior FA.

CAC's and Jr. FA's, and rookies are still Financial Advisors and are ranked, but their production is minimal.  So if an FA thinks they won't be fired because there are 4,000 people below them, they may be mistaken because 2,000 of those people may fit into these categories and therefor are not likely to be cut.

I don't know if it really matters, or not, but I have been told "No more cuts - Period.  We are going with the team that's on the field."

Now, this could just be a typical corporate answer, who knows.

[quote=iconsult100]

I don't know if it really matters, or not, but I have been told "No more cuts - Period.  We are going with the team that's on the field."

Now, this could just be a typical corporate answer, who knows.

[/quote]

Don't be stupid.  Don't trust them.....they'll tell you what they think you want to hear.....and then screw you when it suits their needs.....

I was told that I had nothing to worry about three weeks before I was fired. You know the statement buyer beware,        &nbsp ;         &nbsp ;             at Morgan Stanley it's broker beware.

[quote=frumhere]I concur.  Never believe the compnay cares about you.  One day they love you, the next day they don’t.  I have seen the biggest A-holes get accolades.  Why?  B/c they do alot of gross.  If they stopped tomorrow, no one would be interested in them. Don’t fool yourself.  Take care of you first.  Don’t assume your clients care about you or that your company cares about you.[/quote]

Somewhere a couple years ago I read a story about a decent producer (I don’t remember…maybe $500k?) who was in the process of transitioning to fee-based–as the firm requested–when his production dropped (as would be expected) and he was fired.

Well, if you do good by your clients, they will care about you.

I was wondering:  what if someone at Morgan Stanley had cancer or some other health problem and their production dropped as a result (expectable), would they be fired, too?

No… Not at ML anyway, I know this first hand. They have bent over backwards to help.

[quote=iconsult100]

MSdog,  Call-Center FAs (CAC) are counted as brokers, but are paid salaries and do not actively look to generate revenue.  Essentially, they watch over the small clients.

Senior FAs sometimes partner with Jr. FAs and simply pay them a flat salary and the majority of the group's production goes to the Senior FA.

CAC's and Jr. FA's, and rookies are still Financial Advisors and are ranked, but their production is minimal.  So if an FA thinks they won't be fired because there are 4,000 people below them, they may be mistaken because 2,000 of those people may fit into these categories and therefor are not likely to be cut.

[/quote]

I don't think MS employs call center brokers and jr reps working fully in a partnership only have a partnership rep number. You're right that saying "I'm safe because X number are below me" isn't wise because you have to take LOS into account. BUT, saying "I'm 4500" is just fine and you ARE safe unless the firm decides to cut down to 4500 or fewer reps. Hardly likely.

Just got a note saying “NO SIMILAR” cuts this year.  Either they mean, now that we cut those people, let cut the next tier up OR that there will be no more cuts.   

"We are moving forward and have no current plans for additional, similar reductions – in fact, for 2006 our plan is to grow our Financial Advisor force. "<?:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” /><o:p></o:p>

grow=recruit

similar=more cuts, but different then last time.

I think you’re right about the first one, at least until they revamp the training program. On the second one you have to be more cynical than l am to assume there will be cuts. It isn’t impossible, but just how would there be " more cuts, but different then last time"? Would they cut top producers instead of the bottom?

People, please use your heads. I dont know how many of you guys are rookies are in managment but our National Director just sent an email that there will be no more cuts. Why? Because rookies who have 2 year salary contracts will leave. We are not hiring anymore trainees (cut from 2400 to 1000) and there will be a fall out. 5 trainees just left my office this week alone. Many are sitting on a fence and already interviewing out of this business. We are losing brokers in droves. Not just Rookies but Club members.

[quote=MSdog]"We are moving forward and have no current plans for additional, similar reductions – in fact, for 2006 our plan is to grow our Financial Advisor force. "<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />[/quote]

I saw that as well.  But they never says how they plan to accomplish this or what they are planning to spend.  Also, they never have addressed the issue of FA retention.

[quote=frumhere]

grow=recruit

similar=more cuts, but different then last time.

[/quote]

Yeah, they'll be different than last time.... they'll fire them on a Friday instead of a Thursday.   And the limits will be higher.

They won't have cuts THIS year.... They'll wait til Gorman shows up in 2006. 

We have recieved a wire stating that there will not be another round of
cuts, and that the firm wants to increase broker ranks. Speculation
about another round of cuts was hurting focus. I think that MS brokers
have gotten the message that this will be a firm where production
counts. Come to work to produce and be successful. Find another firm if
you if you arn’t serious about being a top professional. I spent 9
years at AGE (good firm) where you could do $250k gross and never
worry, but we always knew deep down that the real pros were the MLs of
the world. I think the changes are good, and that first tier firms
should be places where brokers come to do business, and be serious
about it. We work in an industry that is bussiness in its purest form,
and I don’t understand brokers expecting a welfare mind set and
lamenting the demise of the free ride for slackers. Excuses for poor
performance are nothing more than denial on the part of thoes who
can’t, or won’t do the work that must be done.

[quote=Elvis]

People, please use your heads. I dont know how many of you guys are rookies are in managment but our National Director just sent an email that there will be no more cuts. Why? Because rookies who have 2 year salary contracts will leave. We are not hiring anymore trainees (cut from 2400 to 1000) and there will be a fall out. 5 trainees just left my office this week alone. Many are sitting on a fence and already interviewing out of this business. We are losing brokers in droves. Not just Rookies but Club members.

[/quote]

Why would salaried rookies leave? Who cares if rookies not making it leave? Of your five rookies that left, were any doing any business? I doubt it. You keep waiting for that "Fall cut", if I were you, I'd be doing some gross so that I didn't have to worry about it.