AGE Bot. By Wachovia

And just what does this moronic jibberish mean?

[quote=Philo Kvetch]And just what does this moronic jibberish mean?[/quote]

It means A.G. Edwards, RIP.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Philo Kvetch]And just what does this

moronic jibberish mean?[/quote]

It means A.G. Edwards, RIP.

[quote=Philo Kvetch] [quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Philo Kvetch]And just what does this
moronic jibberish mean?[/quote]

It means A.G. Edwards, RIP.

[/quote]

Ah, so you speak moronic jibberish.

Thank you.[/quote]

At the conversational level, nothing to brag about. I picked it up here. 

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=Philo Kvetch] [quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Philo Kvetch]And just what does this
moronic jibberish mean?[/quote]

It means A.G. Edwards, RIP.

[/quote]

Ah, so you speak moronic jibberish.

Thank you.[/quote]

At the conversational level, nothing to brag about. I picked it up here. 

[/quote]

I didn't know that you could be funny.

Wow…I can honestly say that I never expected this to happen.  It will be VERY interesting to see how Wachovia does in retaining advisors from AGE.

Why not? Most AGE brokers have been expecting this for years.

wow. any AGE people out there?

There's a conference call at 11am with Wachovia's head dude and Bagby (AGE's head dude)...rumors are running rampant.

Wachovia claims it will be able to retain 97% of all brokers. they are going to offer 6yr retention packages.

They are going to close down 230 out of the 700 age offices

I'll sit tight and see how things shake out in the coming months & of course do allot of homework on LPL & RJF. One thing I won't do is sign a deal handcuffing me to WB for 6 years....if that's my only choice...indy...here I come.

[quote=aldo63]wow. any AGE people out there?[/quote]

I'm with AGE...I can tell you the people at my branch are in shock.  This is very disconcerting...I think most of us thought A.G. Edwards honestly was a different kind of firm...not in an arrogent/delusional way like EJ...but much more personalized then say a Merrill Lynch or MSDW. More midwestern.

Just hard top believe...I guess we should have saw it coming.  The recruiterws are definetly calling this morning.  Hopefully Wachovia does the right things and its' a place we want to stay...if not, I'll be looking at the Indy channel.

I think most of us are taking a wait and see attitude (and grieving).

I am willing to bet they will ease into this thing.  I am sure AGE made sure of it (not that I have a real clue, just my gut instinct).  I have heard WB has a pretty good platform.  I would be mroe concerned if I were a home-office employee.

I don’t think they will “ease” into Wachovia’s payout grid.  That will move quickly.

[quote=Broker Fee]

I’ll sit tight and see how things shake out in
the coming months & of course do allot of homework on LPL &
RJF. One thing I won’t do is sign a deal handcuffing me to WB for 6
years…if that’s my only choice…indy…here I come.

It seems to me to be a major ups for Wachovia (and a big ups for AGE as well).

The fact that they both use the Thompson/Beta system will make the integration of the firms much smoother than any other two firm's consolidations (from the broker POV).

WB's PF(Profit Formula) paradigm will appeal to all $1MM+ producers in that they get indie style payouts while staying within the Branch system. It is my feeling that this will become an industry norm over time, especially since the (now) number two player is running with it. Other firms will eventually compete by dropping the production limit ("we'll let you do PF at $500,000!") not to say that this is the be all and end all and that the firms don't have wide lattitude to charge back premium rates for realestate (for example).

If you're looking at the Indy paradigm, then WachoviaFinet seems to be your best home these days. Let's say you don't private brand your shop and instead call it Wachovia Finet. Think of all the advertising that will be coming your way as Wachovia continues to introduce itself into new markets (before they bought Golden West, WB had no real presence on the west coast, they're still a miniscule market participant in the North east (at least at the bank branch level) so there'll be more buying and more branding.)

"Hi! I'm Pete da Broker, and I own Pete's brokerage! I clear through LPL, you've heard of them right? They're the biggest bunch of Indies out there!" Uhh NO! Never heard of them.

Vs.

"Hi! I'm Whom, I'm President of Whom's Concerns a local Wachovia Finet branch. You're familiar with Wachovia aren't you?" Why, yes, I see your ads all over the place!

Not to mention, WB's integration of it's channels is phenomenal! Your client (with a CAP checking account) can walk into any WB bank (or brick and mortar branch) and make a deposit into his account at your branch! It sounds like a little, but it's really pretty huge (from a client POV).

So to all you AGE guys. Dudes, I been there I hired on to Shearson Lehman Brothers (just missed Shearson American Express) and got bought and sold like a sack of onions. I'm not a Koolaide kid, but I'll tell you this, worse things could have happened to you!

If they give you an opportunity to go indie in the Finet system, TAKE IT, if only to keep that option open to you. Lock it in because they'll probably shut it back down later so that they don't have guys taking the big upfront and then jumping to the Indy side before the firm made their money back.

There is something definitely to be said on coasting on a brand name's national advertising campaign    verus hanging your own name out there as top billing.

After you've been out a while, it won't matter to your clients, but there are many prospects who will chose the brand name over your own.

[quote=Dust Bunny]

There is something definitely to be said on coasting on a brand name's national advertising campaign    verus hanging your own name out there as top billing.

After you've been out a while, it won't matter to your clients, but there are many prospects who will chose the brand name over your own.

[/quote]

"Most of our clients are people who have their accounts at these large firms and are ready to graduate to the next level."

I am a recruiter working exclusively for MS nationwide. If interested, call me on my direct line at (713) 523-1828.

Well, let's see, I have my own brand name and I've been out for four years and I still have a major brand name that I'm "coasting" on...

Meanwhile, when I recruit new brokers to come work for me in my office, it REALLY helps that I have the big name for them to use when bringing over their book.

[quote=anabuhabkuss]

Why not? Most AGE brokers have been expecting this for years.

Any chance the FTC or DOJ moves to block this?  Or is the market to fragmented?

Curious to see about retenion package. My trail 12 is 310k. I know UBS

offered 60% of T12 at that level stock and cash. Somehing similar would

be nice. Do anyone remember what the retention scale was fro Legg/Smith

Barney Deal ?

[quote=brokerman] Curious to see about retenion package. My trail 12

is 310k. I know UBS

offered 60% of T12 at that level stock and cash. Somehing similar would

be nice. Do anyone remember what the retention scale was fro Legg/

Smith

Barney Deal ?[/quote]



I think the past deals done by Wachovia are more relevant. The deal

offered to the Pru advisors was skinny… very skinny, and I wouldn’t think

much would change with the acquisition of AGE.



At $310k, you are barely above the cutoff number. You would have

received a 10% retention package = $6,000 per year for 5 years.



Wachovia will most likely see the advisors at AGE as dedicated to the firm.

They won’t feel required to pay-up for something they practically own. It

wouldn’t shock me to see the cutoff point for retention packages higher

than the $300k limit for the Pru deal. That would mean lots of advisors

left singing the blues being told 'if you don’t like it… '



<a href=“http://registeredrep.com/mag/
<br / target=”_blank">finance_shedding_golden_handcuffs/">Prudential Secs. deal RR Mag article





Good luck.



C

Sorry, the link doesn’t work - the article from the Pru deal is as follows:



Wachovia’s pending acquisition of Prudential Securities is a good news/

bad news story for Pru brokers.



First the good: As the closing of the transaction approaches, the most

seasoned of Pru’s brokers may be in the catbird seat. With demand for

their services sky-high, they have the leverage they need to demand

significant retention bonuses. And if these Pru vets don’t like the

retention package (see related article on page 24), they’re likely to be able

to find the compensation they seek at another firm.



The downsides to the merger involves reps who aren’t top producers.

Junior brokers are likely to find their services in lower demand, both

within the merged company and out on the street. Meanwhile, the

mobility of the more experienced brokers might be hindered by restrictive

employment contracts and loan agreements with aggressive termination

penalties. A close examination of these agreements is required in order to

determine whether the restrictions are enforceable by Wachovia.



Further, brokers leaving Pru now might find the cost of doing so costly,

due to a benefit called MasterShare.



In abbreviated terms, MasterShare is a deferred compensation plan in

which brokers authorize Pru to deduct between 5 percent and 25 percent

of their pay. The money is gathered in an account and invested quarterly

in plan assets that are discounted by 25 percent.



But because MasterShare has a three-year vesting period, brokers who

leave the company with less than three years of tenure forfeit both their

deductions and Pru’s matching funds. For this reason, the plan is known

as a “golden handcuff.” Since broker contributions continue on a rolling,

year-to-year basis, a broker who quits Prudential’s employ usually leaves

three years of unvested, deducted commissions behind.



The merger with Wachovia raises many questions about how MasterShare

will be administered. Will all of Pru brokers’ account holdings immediately

vest upon the merger’s completion? What happens if a broker decides not

to stay on with Wachovia and goes to work for a competitor — either

before or after the acquisition closes? Will current Wachovia brokers be

invited to participate in this plan?



Even before the Wachovia announcement, Prudential brokers expressed

consternation over the structure of MasterShare. To brokers, the company

seems to be holding money hostage, and some have gone to court in an

effort to recover funds they feel rightfully belong to them.



Such legal challenges have not fared particularly well. Pru, for its part,

contends that participation in MasterShare is voluntary, and that the

employee-retention feature of the plan is a benefit the company pays for

in the form of matching funds.



But there is still plenty of disagreement over these issues, and courts and

arbitrators might yet come to see brokers’ points: that MasterShare is

rooted in money earned by the broker, and that money should not be

forfeited to Pru simply because a broker decides to take a position at

another firm.



There could be light at then end of the tunnel on this issue. I have agreed

to represent a number of Prudential broker-claimants, mainly because I

am optimistic that we can establish that MasterShare violates the legal

rights of Prudential brokers. The central issue is whether Pru strong-arms

brokers into agreements that violate the most basic business principle:

What you earn belongs to you. If we can prove this, we would establish a

broad basis for brokers who decide to leave Prudential — either because

of the Wachovia transaction or independent of it — to unchain their

“golden handcuffs” and get their rightful due. Thus, Prudential brokers

who have the opportunity to leave and receive a sizable sign-on or

upfront loan, might be able to eat their cake and have it too.



If the pending litigation with Prudential is successful, they might well

recover the money and assets forfeited by them when they left Prudential,

while still being free to enjoy the fruits of a new relationship.



To Wachovia brokers who might be introduced to a MasterShare-style

plan after the merger: Those handcuffs might appear to be solid gold, but

many Pru brokers will tell you they’re just gold plated.

Wrong article…



Here’s the right one… sorry about that. Need to step-up the functionality

of the forum, IMHO.



It read as follows:



As details of retention packages emerged in the wake of the Feb. 17

announcement that Wachovia and Prudential Financial would combine

brokerage operations, Pru advisors interviewed by Registered Rep.

expressed dismay and, occasionally, outrage at the size of the deal. Reps

are being offered from 10 percent to 30 percent of trailing 12-month

production, to be paid out over a period of several years.



However, industry insiders say there’s not much likelihood that the

package will be sweetened, because of the lousy market environment.

That has left some bitter feelings among brokers. “You bring us in, and

use our numbers to look good to go public and sell the firm, and get us

to bring our assets over here, and now we’re not getting anything,” says

one broker on the West Coast who had been at Pru for two years.



What could result is a significant number of the 4,000 Prudential

producers leaving to go to other firms before the Wachovia-Prudential

deal is completed and market conditions improve. Already, UBS

PaineWebber has picked off several branch managers in both the

Northeast and Midwest, and it’s expected that brokers could follow, to

UBS or other firms. The broker exodus could begin soon — Prudential’s

deferred compensation plan, called MasterShare, vests April 10, and some

high-end producers say they’re waiting for that before jumping ship.



“The regional vice-president was answering questions for an hour, and

the roof was caving in on him from all directions,” says one Pru advisor.

“The consensus I’m getting is the same — everybody is extremely

disappointed and very upset, and PaineWebber is canvassing our office

heavily.”



Retention bonuses at the lower end, for an advisor with production of

$300,000 in trailing 12-month commissions, would receive a 10 percent

bonus, spread out over five years (which translates to $6,000 a year).

Those with less than $300,000 don’t get anything.



Clearly, Wachovia wants to keep the top producers. Producers with a $1.2

million trailing production will get a 30 percent payout, and Pru brokers

say there are rumors that the deals for these top producers may be

sweetened.



Recruiters point out that despite the retention bonus, which vests at a

rate of 20 percent annually over five years, many Pru reps don’t have

great options in this market, and getting a bonus for doing nothing isn’t

so painful. “A number of people keep saying, ‘It’s just the first offer,’ and

they’re waiting for it to be made better,” says New York-based recruiter

Mark Elzweig. “I don’t see why it would be, though.”



Other recruiters and compensation experts advise Pru brokers to be

happy with what they get, because they are unlikely to increase their

income this year anywhere. “Why would you want to take an already

extremely bad situation and make it worse?” wonders one industry

consultant. “The likelihood of one doing better this year than last year is

not good, and last year was terrible.”



Still, the Pru brokers are hoping for something better, perhaps getting the

money over fewer years. Meanwhile, the structure of the new company is

becoming clearer. The new regional management team, as laid out by the

two firms in an internal memo, is comprised largely of Prudential

managers, many of whom report to eastern division director Scott

Umstead, of Pru. The western division reports to Terry Chase, who was

from Wachovia. Of the 13 regional directors, nine come from Prudential.

Three Pru managing directors were let go, however.

[quote=Bobby Hull]

"Most of our clients are people who have their accounts at these large firms and are ready to graduate to the next level."

[/quote]

What do you mean by this???

Do you mean most of your clients are people who have their accounts at a prestigious wirehouse and are going to graduate to an Indy?????

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Well, let's see, I have my own brand name and I've been out for four years and I still have a major brand name that I'm "coasting" on...

Meanwhile, when I recruit new brokers to come work for me in my office, it REALLY helps that I have the big name for them to use when bringing over their book.

[/quote]

Are you a wirehouse BOM?

If the R. package to me 6 years in doing 310K (I know I am not a superstar)

is only 10% I will be very disapointed obviously. One of the coolest things

about AGE is the 401k Profit sharing plan. What is Wachovia 401k plan like ?



When do they calculate your trailing 12 to determine the retention package ?

I assume it is when the deal closes so I have 6 months to increase my

trailing 12 to try and get a bigger retention package. right ?



Bagby and Luderman on the conference call today said the Retention

package would be competitive. Makes me think we are going to get treated

better than Pru did.

[quote=BullBroker]

[quote=Bobby Hull]

"Most of our clients are people who have their accounts at these large firms and are ready to graduate to the next level."

[/quote]

What do you mean by this???

Do you mean most of your clients are people who have their accounts at a prestigious wirehouse and are going to graduate to an Indy?????

Questions for WB Brokers:



How is the technology there?



What are your sales titles and production requirements for getting them?

[quote=BullBroker]

[quote=Bobby Hull]

"Most of our clients are people who have their accounts at these large firms and are ready to graduate to the next level."

[/quote]

What do you mean by this???

Do you mean most of your clients are people who have their accounts at a prestigious wirehouse and are going to graduate to an Indy?????

[quote=mikebutler222] [quote=Philo Kvetch] [quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Philo Kvetch]And just what does this moronic jibberish mean?[/

QUOTE]

It means A.G. Edwards, RIP.

[/quote] Ah, so you speak moronic jibberish. Thank you.[/quote]

At the conversational level, nothing to brag about. I picked it up here.

I think Wachovia reps are going to hate Wachovia for hand holding the new guys in.

Wachovia brokers get cuts off the first 10k of their business. they also get capped on annuity business. they also get ticket charges. AGE has none of this baloney. AGE brokers are not staying around. Wachovia has a different feel/culture than what AGE brokers love about AGE. Payout is different. If Wachovia continues to pay AGE brokers what they were used to in their former life, They risk losing their own people.

This merger is a botched deal. I can't fathom how they think they're retaining 97% of their workforce.

[quote=anabuhabkuss]

I think Wachovia reps are going to hate Wachovia for hand holding the new guys in.

Wachovia brokers get cuts off the first 10k of their business. they also get capped on annuity business. they also get ticket charges. AGE has none of this baloney. AGE brokers are not staying around. Wachovia has a different feel/culture than what AGE brokers love about AGE. Payout is different. If Wachovia continues to pay AGE brokers what they were used to in their former life, They risk losing their own people.

This merger is a botched deal. I can't fathom how they think they're retaining 97% of their workforce.

[/quote]

What does "capped on annuity business" mean?

[quote=BullBroker]

[quote=Bobby Hull]

"Most of our clients are people who have their accounts at these large firms and are ready to graduate to the next level."

[/quote]

What do you mean by this???

Do you mean most of your clients are people who have their accounts at a prestigious wirehouse and are going to graduate to an Indy?????

[/quote]

I don't know. It's just something I say. Noone has ever asked me what I mean, but I'm sure I could think of something to say if the did.

[quote=Captain]Wrong article....

Here's the right one... sorry about that. Need to step-up the functionality
of the forum, IMHO.

It read as follows:

As details of retention packages emerged in the wake of the Feb. 17
announcement that Wachovia and Prudential Financial would combine
brokerage operations, Pru advisors interviewed by Registered Rep.
expressed dismay and, occasionally, outrage at the size of the deal. Reps
are being offered from 10 percent to 30 percent of trailing 12-month
production, to be paid out over a period of several years.

However, industry insiders say there's not much likelihood that the
package will be sweetened, because of the lousy market environment.
That has left some bitter feelings among brokers. “You bring us in, and
use our numbers to look good to go public and sell the firm, and get us
to bring our assets over here, and now we're not getting anything,” says
one broker on the West Coast who had been at Pru for two years.

What could result is a significant number of the 4,000 Prudential
producers leaving to go to other firms before the Wachovia-Prudential
deal is completed and market conditions improve. Already, UBS
PaineWebber has picked off several branch managers in both the
Northeast and Midwest, and it's expected that brokers could follow, to
UBS or other firms. The broker exodus could begin soon — Prudential's
deferred compensation plan, called MasterShare, vests April 10, and some
high-end producers say they're waiting for that before jumping ship.

“The regional vice-president was answering questions for an hour, and
the roof was caving in on him from all directions,” says one Pru advisor.
“The consensus I'm getting is the same — everybody is extremely
disappointed and very upset, and PaineWebber is canvassing our office
heavily.”

Retention bonuses at the lower end, for an advisor with production of
$300,000 in trailing 12-month commissions, would receive a 10 percent
bonus, spread out over five years (which translates to $6,000 a year).
Those with less than $300,000 don't get anything.

Clearly, Wachovia wants to keep the top producers. Producers with a $1.2
million trailing production will get a 30 percent payout, and Pru brokers
say there are rumors that the deals for these top producers may be
sweetened.

Recruiters point out that despite the retention bonus, which vests at a
rate of 20 percent annually over five years, many Pru reps don't have
great options in this market, and getting a bonus for doing nothing isn't
so painful. “A number of people keep saying, ‘It's just the first offer,’ and
they're waiting for it to be made better,” says New York-based recruiter
Mark Elzweig. “I don't see why it would be, though.”

Other recruiters and compensation experts advise Pru brokers to be
happy with what they get, because they are unlikely to increase their
income this year anywhere. “Why would you want to take an already
extremely bad situation and make it worse?” wonders one industry
consultant. “The likelihood of one doing better this year than last year is
not good, and last year was terrible.”

Still, the Pru brokers are hoping for something better, perhaps getting the
money over fewer years. Meanwhile, the structure of the new company is
becoming clearer. The new regional management team, as laid out by the
two firms in an internal memo, is comprised largely of Prudential
managers, many of whom report to eastern division director Scott
Umstead, of Pru. The western division reports to Terry Chase, who was
from Wachovia. Of the 13 regional directors, nine come from Prudential.
Three Pru managing directors were let go, however.[/quote]

Read the article at onwallstreet.com regarding the payout pool of 1 Billion available for rep retaining packages.  It says that this deal will have 5 times the money over the Pru deal.  So if the Pru deal was 10-30%... do the math.

[quote=Reggin]

[quote=Captain]Wrong article....

Here's the right one... sorry about that. Need to step-up the functionality
of the forum, IMHO.

.........

Read the article at onwallstreet.com regarding the payout pool of 1 Billion available for rep retaining packages.  It says that this deal will have 5 times the money over the Pru deal.  So if the Pru deal was 10-30%... do the math.

[/quote]

I agree...retention will be way over the Pru deal.  With the competing packages being offered Wachovia can't afford to treat AGE brokers like red-headed step children compared to existing Wachovia reps they way they did Pru if they want this deal to remain 24% accretive.

AGE has a much better rep too....considering Pru were a bunch of criminals maybe it was intentional.  Oops!  Did I say that!?!

[quote=anabuhabkuss]

I think Wachovia reps are going to hate Wachovia for hand holding the new guys in.

Wachovia brokers get cuts off the first 10k of their business. they also get capped on annuity business. they also get ticket charges. AGE has none of this baloney. AGE brokers are not staying around. Wachovia has a different feel/culture than what AGE brokers love about AGE. Payout is different. If Wachovia continues to pay AGE brokers what they were used to in their former life, They risk losing their own people.

This merger is a botched deal. I can't fathom how they think they're retaining 97% of their workforce.

[/quote]

It has been one day since this news has been released and you are already calling it a "botched deal." Don't you think that these problems you speak of were thought of prior to spending 6.8 billion dollars. It seems to me they would have done their homework prior to creating this deal, not to mention that at the top of both of these companies are former F.A's who may have some insight on these subjects.

[quote=pratoman][quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Well, let's see, I have my own brand name and I've been out for four years and I still have a major brand name that I'm "coasting" on...

Meanwhile, when I recruit new brokers to come work for me in my office, it REALLY helps that I have the big name for them to use when bringing over their book.

[/quote]

Are you a wirehouse BOM?

[/quote]

No, and yes. I own my own office and I use Wachovia Finet as my backoffice (which is like having a wirehouse in your back pocket!). I hire brokers from other firms to come and work with me on a splitnumber basis (the percentages vary by production). They are very successful at bringing in existing and new clients by taking advantage of the Wachovia Finet name.

I laugh when I hear these indy guys crowing about getting 90% payouts. Last month I got nearly 150% payout on MY production because I get a piece of everybodies production in my office!

Boys and girls THAT is the ONLY reason to go Indy!

[quote=Bobby Hull]

I don't know. It's just something I say. Noone has ever asked me what I mean, but I'm sure I could think of something to say if the did.

[/quote]

BTW, Bobby, this was funny. Racial jokes etc... not funny.

Rely on your wit, not your repetoir. Nobody wants to be around when the chimp starts flinging poop.

[quote=Whomitmayconcer][quote=pratoman][quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Well, let's see, I have my own brand name and I've been out for four years and I still have a major brand name that I'm "coasting" on...

Meanwhile, when I recruit new brokers to come work for me in my office, it REALLY helps that I have the big name for them to use when bringing over their book.

[/quote]

Are you a wirehouse BOM?

[/quote]

No, and yes. I own my own office and I use Wachovia Finet as my backoffice (which is like having a wirehouse in your back pocket!). I hire brokers from other firms to come and work with me on a splitnumber basis (the percentages vary by production). They are very successful at bringing in existing and new clients by taking advantage of the Wachovia Finet name.

I laugh when I hear these indy guys crowing about getting 90% payouts. Last month I got nearly 150% payout on MY production because I get a piece of everybodies production in my office!

Boys and girls THAT is the ONLY reason to go Indy!

[/quote]

Where did you get the idea that it can't be done at indy firms?

Where did you get the idea that i had that idea?

I didn't say that it was the reason to join a specific firm, I said it is the only reason to go indy.

The only reason being that you can then use the differential in pay to give employees a wirehouse level income and keep the rest.

It could be done at indy firms, it couldn't be done at a wirehouse. Now it can, however (at least to some degree) at Wachovia with their PF program. This (IMHO) is why the AGE takeover is so significant to the wirehouse world. When the number two player has a program like this, it will force the rest of the field to create something that is competitive with it. I predict you'll see more and more of these programs, or you'll see more and more teams with a $1mm producer at the top moving to the shire at W BAGEnd.

Where did I get the idea that you had that idea do you ask?



From the next to last paragraph of your previous post.

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[/quote]

I'm sure Wachovia knows this.  I bet they have a plan in place to form "teams" in addition to doing everything possible to stop a mass exodus.  I highly doubt they'll P-Off these 200-300k brokers or assets.   They knew what they were buying.

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[/quote]  Oops...sorry bout that

Actually, 400M isn't exactly a "star".  Average at AGE is around $375, 400 doesn't even get a trip.

400M would get a little sales bonus, granted it shouldn't.  550M is second recognition level, 800M is above that and top recognition (top 50) averages about 1.5MM or so.  I know this as we do about 1MM at AGE.

And I agree WB has taken this into account. 

[quote=Rugby][quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[/quote]

Or maybe they WANT them to leave, figuring they'll keep half the assets, and thus make the numbers look better for those who stay and inherit the books.

I'm sure Wachovia knows this.  I bet they have a plan in place to form "teams" in addition to doing everything possible to stop a mass exodus.  I highly doubt they'll P-Off these 200-300k brokers or assets.   They knew what they were buying.

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know...If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[/quote]

Sounds like you've discovered something that Wachovia must have overlooked. How smart you must be!

No Bobby Hull....I don't think I discovered something WB overlooked.

Even a Dip S... like you could see what the numbers are.

I'll try and be nicer if you get you head out of your A--

[quote=Quicksdraw]

No Bobby Hull....I don't think I discovered something WB overlooked.

Even a Dip S... like you could see what the numbers are.

I'll try and be nicer if you get you head out of your A--

[/quote]

I don't think so, either.

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know…If your a 400K+ producer

at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well…WB might just

lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are

under the 300k mark. So, who knows…Maybe the new Wachovia Sec.

won’t be # 2 or 3 or 4

All will become clear when the broker retention package is put on the table (obviously). My input is that if there is no substantial cash (or deferred cash) offer to brokers at or near $300k, there will, in fact, be mass exodus. The world is full of $300k and below indies who seem pretty contented. Call them whatever names make you feel better about yourselves. The $300k AGE broker will not stand for an immediate pay cut, instant product quotas, etc. Everyone in the business knows that AGE is home to the @$310k median average producer. It seems unlikely that Wachovia would be making this deal knowing that they’re getting @3000 brokers that they don’t want. We’ll see, though. Good luck all!

[quote=Quicksdraw]

For those who know…If your a 400K+ producer at AGE your a star.

If the cut off for retention packs is 300K for T12, well...WB might just lose about 3500 brokers. Thats because thats how many AGE brokers are under the 300k mark. So, who knows......Maybe the new Wachovia Sec. won't be # 2 or 3 or 4

[quote=Broker010]All will become clear when the broker retention package is put on the table (obviously). My input is that if there is no substantial cash (or deferred cash) offer to brokers at or near $300k, there will, in fact, be mass exodus. The world is full of $300k and below indies who seem pretty contented. Call them whatever names make you feel better about yourselves. The $300k AGE broker will not stand for an immediate pay cut, instant product quotas, etc. Everyone in the business knows that AGE is home to the @$310k median average producer. It seems unlikely that Wachovia would be making this deal knowing that they're getting @3000 brokers that they don't want. We'll see, though. Good luck all! [/quote]

Wishful thinking on your part.  I agree, the folks under 300K don't have many options.  Sure they could go indie, but most won't.  You might be the exception, but most will just be happy to have a place to work and not have to exert a ton of effort moving their client base somewhere else that is even more uncertain.

I'm meeting with a Ray Jay independent next week to assess the opportunity @ RJ. I'm also going to pay a visit to St.Petersburg the following week. LpL is also on my to do list. 

In my office, I can tell you at least half the rep's have meetings set up with other B/D's.  Every last broker has received calls from recruiters and the recruiters are swarming like sharks with blood in the water.

The major error that WS has already made is that they should have had the retention bonus deals in the field starting this week instead of delaying the rollout for 2-3 weeks.  I guarantee you they will loose many more rep's than they planned for...but maybe this was what they wanted since they have to have assets to get the remaining brokers production up from an avg. 544k to the WS avg. of 688k.

Either way...this sucks.

Morgan Keegan. That is where I will end up I believe.

[quote=Broker Fee]

I'm meeting with a Ray Jay independent next week to assess the opportunity @ RJ. I'm also going to pay a visit to St.Petersburg the following week. LpL is also on my to do list. 

In my office, I can tell you at least half the rep's have meetings set up with other B/D's.  Every last broker has received calls from recruiters and the recruiters are swarming like sharks with blood in the water.

The major error that WS has already made is that they should have had the retention bonus deals in the field starting this week instead of delaying the rollout for 2-3 weeks.  I guarantee you they will loose many more rep's than they planned for...but maybe this was what they wanted since they have to have assets to get the remaining brokers production up from an avg. 544k to the WS avg. of 688k.

Either way...this sucks.

[/quote]

That 544K average is not right.  It's in the mid 300's.  During the PRU deal they retained 97% of the 300K+ producers.  So this delay appears to be strategic.  They would rather have people leave initially, while the existing infrastructure is in place.  In a year it will be too easy for someone to slip away.

Ferris, I think you mis-read my message. There was nothing wishful about it. I don't know if you're with AGE or not, but, based on my relationship with fellow brokers there, what I wrote is simply truth. AGE is busting with $300k and below producers and Wachovia knows this. If you will re-read, I never opined about the probibility of an offer to @$300k producers. I simply stated my oppinion about what will happen if there isn't one. These posts seem to gravitate towards one-upping each other. I don't care about one-upping any of you, I'm just hunting for insight I may have missed. I'd love to argue and back-bight (I'm actually very good at that) but it isn't productive to the situation. Have a nice day!

AGE targets different markets than WS does.  AGE is more small-mid sized urban areas, whereas WS is mainly in larger urban areas.  One of the reasons WS bought AGE was instant market exposure to these middle America areas.  Out of 1500 or so offices combined, they only share 230 market areas (15%) so by combining they essentially increase their footprint by 85% (in total).

[quote=Omirp222]AGE targets different markets than WS does.  AGE is more small-mid sized urban areas, whereas WS is mainly in larger urban areas.  One of the reasons WS bought AGE was instant market exposure to these middle America areas.  Out of 1500 or so offices combined, they only share 230 market areas (15%) so by combining they essentially increase their footprint by 85% (in total).[/quote]

Good point.

And most of those rural areas have 300K producers.  In those areas it would be way too easy for them to go indie, especially if there is no overlap of WS brokers there.  Maybe they will offer an enhanced payout structure for those folks to stay.  So an enhanced payout across the board and cash above a certain level.

I'll be curious to see how they treat areas where there is overlap, if they do anything different at all.

I keep hearing that @$300k producers don’t have many options. I’d like to discuss this with any of you who are willing. Granted, if you’re in year 10+ of production and are still doing $300, you’re probably topped-out, but most of the $300 people I know are still rather new (after year 5, but inside year 10) and are steadily growing their production. Our options may be limited to non-wirehouse opportunities, but so what. The guys I know wouldn’t work at a wirehouse if you put a gun to their head. There are, however myriad opportunities at regional/indies. There are many platforms/structures, etc. available from RayJay, to Delta Equity, to Edwards Jones, to any number of others. To say that “we” don’t have many options is, as I see it, ludicrous. Maybe some are just lazy and willing to take whatever Wachovia offers, but most of us are just young and working our way up, loving the way AGE let us pursue our own pace with our own business plan. I encourage all who read this to keep this mindset and don’t subject your clients to the crap that the big firms force their brokers to push. Things like this seem to have a way of working out for the best if we push forward through them. Good Luck!

Ferris, Back at ya. Good point. I agree with others that the biggest frustration is the lack of info coming from mangement at this point. Have a great day!

Doesn't Wachovia have an indy channel?  Would it be feasible for those who are in the rural and non urban areas to join that route? 

What kind of changes are you guys anticipating from WB to your current business model...excluding compensation issues?  

WB does have an independent platform and I can refer you to a couple of WB advisors who like it if you want.

FD: I am not with WB in any capacity and am merely trying to present options of all types for consideration to those who have interest.

[email protected]

I think you do have options.  Anyone at the 300K level can easily go independent and make way more.  Unfortunately with that comes a lot of hard work and a bigger risk.  That's something an older and more established broker won't want to do.  I'm glad to hear that you are young and an up and comer, but I really think that you are the minority at AGE.  There are many dinosaur brokers in the system that have mid level production and no desire to make too much change.  Promise them a slightly better payout, do some road shows that promise a similar corporate culture and they will stay.  I'm sure you will be fine.

Dust, Wachovia does have an indie channel. It is my understanding that they only accept high producers, though. By comparison, RayJay’s most desirable indie platform only takes $500k+ producers, so I don’t expect an indie opportunity from Wachovia.

Ferris, You may well be 100% right. Do you have any insight as to the AGE legacy management at the new firm? Some have said Bagby (for better or worse) will run the show, others have said he’s being primed for the bumm’s rush. If some of the AGE culture can permeate the new Co., maybe those broker of whom you speak will be okay. 

This is a website for one of WB's independent broker teams:

http://www.hudockmoyer.com

I believe Barb was with MER(rill) prior to going indy via WB.

Perhaps some of the info on her/their website will be of interest to AGE advisors considering this option (if it's on the table which I would guess it would be as WB most likely wants to retain as many good brokers as it can). This option was NOT on the table when WB merged with PRUSec and quite a few large PRUducers jumped ship because of it. I think WB learned from its mistakes and won't make that (not enough options) mistake again.

There is a WB indy plateform it’s called Wachovia Financial Network…buy my take on it is…if I’m going to go independent, why do want to stay with a bank as my parent company?  This is  probably irrational reasoning but I think it’s better to just break all ties and go in a completely different direction.

From an emotional perspective, I agree that if we’re going to have to transition our book to a new platform anyway, it’s probably desirable to find the best outside opportunity rather than go indie with Finet just because it’s there. The good news here for all us perspective new indies is that I’ve never met an indie who didn’t absolutely love it. Granted, there is more risk and more work but also more flexibility, freedom and $$$!

Agreed.

I would have been happy to stay with AGE until retirement days...but that is now the past. A

Actually, I'm looking forward to the Indie channel. Yes it will be allot more hardwork in the short term & I will loose some aum but I'm confident that I will be able to pull out 70-80% of my fee based clients which will put my production over 500k. Minus my expenses...I should be able to take a few trips (I'll miss those trips...south africa was great).

Great perspective. Don’t miss those AGE trips too much. Remember, they took @60% of your commissions in return for those trips (among other things). If you’re doing over $500k at as an indie, you’ll be able to travel anywhere you want every year. One thing I’ve found out already is that if we promise our clients now that our relationship won’t change, be it with Wachovia or elsewhere, our clients will A) be very relieved and B) be a dead lock to go with us when we go. It’s already working for me.

You're right...logically.

But we all had a comfort level at AGE which kept us comfortable with our 40% payouts...we rationalized that hey after I receive my Feb bonues add in the 7.5% 401k match plus the great environment...this is not a bad place.  All of that will now change and so has my complacency.

Last week, many of my "A" clients called to see if "I was going to be ok" during the takeover...it's a good feeling knowing that they are concerned about "you".  Relationships is what it's all about.

Exactly right on all counts. I would have happily stayed with AGE for 20 more years. Unfortunately, AGE is going bye-bye. That being the case, we need to do what’s best not only for us, but our clients and, make no mistake, they are OUR clients. Even the ones who did have some loyalty to the AGE brand, it’s going away and they feel a little betrayed, too. I anticipate taking more clients with me than in any other imaginable scenario. Especially with the lack of info available to everyone now, we are the clients’ touchstone and we are really able to cement the “us” relationship.

[quote=Broker010]Ferris, You may well be 100% right. Do you have any insight as to the AGE legacy management at the new firm? Some have said Bagby (for better or worse) will run the show, others have said he's being primed for the bumm's rush. If some of the AGE culture can permeate the new Co., maybe those broker of whom you speak will be okay.  [/quote]

If this were a buyout, then they wouldn't be retaining any of our people, let alone moving HQ to St. Louis.  I think they will retain the best of both cultures, including AGE research and compliance depts.  Their research and compliance sucks.  As near as I can tell this is a true merger and I'm sure they were real close to retaining the AGE name.  WS is much larger and has a much bigger name recognition and deeper pockets so the name change makes sense.  Now they need the men in the trenches to show clients that its the same philosophy but a different name on the door.

[quote=Broker010]One thing I've found out already is that if we promise our clients now that our relationship won't change, be it with Wachovia or elsewhere, our clients will A) be very relieved and B) be a dead lock to go with us when we go. It's already working for me. [/quote]

I've already primed the pump on this one.  I'm telling them that things look good at this point, but if things ever change for the worse we'll jump together.  The response I've gotten is overwhelming.  It's refreshing to see the loyalty they have.

[quote=Ferris Bueller]

[quote=Broker010]Ferris, You may well be 100% right. Do you have any insight as to the AGE legacy management at the new firm? Some have said Bagby (for better or worse) will run the show, others have said he's being primed for the bumm's rush. If some of the AGE culture can permeate the new Co., maybe those broker of whom you speak will be okay.  [/quote]

If this were a buyout, then they wouldn't be retaining any of our people, let alone moving HQ to St. Louis.  I think they will retain the best of both cultures, including AGE research and compliance depts.  Their research and compliance sucks.  As near as I can tell this is a true merger and I'm sure they were real close to retaining the AGE name.  WS is much larger and has a much bigger name recognition and deeper pockets so the name change makes sense.  Now they need the men in the trenches to show clients that its the same philosophy but a different name on the door.

[/quote]

If you've been to St.Louis lately, then you would know that half of the MEGA training facility is empty.  2.5 million square feet of half emptiness.  Some bean counter figured out that the most cost efficient means was to consolidate in St.Louy rather than Richmond. Call me a skeptic but that's my take. 

Merger??? have you looked at the post consolidation organization chart.  Practically all of the Edwards senior people are co-managing their areas with WB people. So who do you really think is calling the shots? Sounds more like a takeover to me.

I suspect that the AGE culture and most of the management will be replaced over time in the not-too-distant future. That’s what I’m planning for, at least. Another huge question is local logistics. How many AGE branch offices will be closed/consolidated? Will AGE branch mangers be retained or replaced? We have two half-full offices within 10 miles of each other in SW Florida. I can’t imagine that will remain the same.

[quote=Broker Fee][quote=Ferris Bueller]

[quote=Broker010]Ferris, You may well be 100% right. Do you have any insight as to the AGE legacy management at the new firm? Some have said Bagby (for better or worse) will run the show, others have said he's being primed for the bumm's rush. If some of the AGE culture can permeate the new Co., maybe those broker of whom you speak will be okay.  [/quote]

If this were a buyout, then they wouldn't be retaining any of our people, let alone moving HQ to St. Louis.  I think they will retain the best of both cultures, including AGE research and compliance depts.  Their research and compliance sucks.  As near as I can tell this is a true merger and I'm sure they were real close to retaining the AGE name.  WS is much larger and has a much bigger name recognition and deeper pockets so the name change makes sense.  Now they need the men in the trenches to show clients that its the same philosophy but a different name on the door.

[/quote]

If you've been to St.Louis lately, then you would know that half of the MEGA training facility is empty.  2.5 million square feet of half emptiness.  Some bean counter figured out that the most cost efficient means was to consolidate in St.Louy rather than Richmond. Call me a skeptic but that's my take. 

Merger??? have you looked at the post consolidation organization chart.  Practically all of the Edwards senior people are co-managing their areas with WB people. So who do you really think is calling the shots? Sounds more like a takeover to me.

[quote=Broker010]I suspect that the AGE culture and most of the management will be replaced over time in the not-too-distant future. That's what I'm planning for, at least. Another huge question is local logistics. How many AGE branch offices will be closed/consolidated? Will AGE branch mangers be retained or replaced? We have two half-full offices within 10 miles of each other in SW Florida. I can't imagine that will remain the same. [/quote]

Hey Broker...we're in the same region.

I heard some analyst last week predict 250 offices would be closed but who knows, I agree there will be fallouts. Have you ever did an office seach on AGE-Net? Just take a look at financial consultants staffing the large offices in our region...I find that most of them are not at capacity. Especially in our region

Hey, Fee. I’m in Cape Coral, to be exact. We have another large, half-empty branch in Ft. Myers. In fact, we moved 2 years ago into an office twice the size of our old one, during the “grow your branch at all cost” push. Shortly after moving, the marching orders were changed to, “remember that “grow your branch” idea, well, forget about that for now”, so we’re stuck with twice the overhead and half the production. Can’t imagine Wachovia will continue with that strategy.

I did a head count in my branch (sarasota area)...25 offices & guess how many are empty?....Answer = 12. There's a WS branch office nearby, I've been told that they have 20-22 brokers...& they have additional office space they can lease on their floor. Guess which office will be closing?

Remember the last national conference & how bagby & peter miller vowed to keep us as an independent national firm, then they went on about how we would be in the market to acquire a bank or mortgage company because we needed to grow our services? 

Well they did it...only difference is they didn't tell use we were the ones that would be bought.

The part that kills me is that when we switched to Beta, it was just a coincidence that Wachovia used Beta, When we hired Carmichael to start advertising, it was just to attract clients, not suitors; all the while we’re “committed” to staying independent, then, when the deal is finally done, they don’t have a package to present to the brokers, nor any real info to share with clients. I guess they were so excited to be doing M&A that they forgot to actually make any plans. On the bright side, the AGE culture was dying anyway. At least now we’ll be able to change wholesale instead of being consumed bit-by-bit like the frog in the pot of heating water.

I say the ag brokers are in a whole lot of trouble. The bank owns you now boys, and that means you’re screwed from the get go.

[quote=ezmoney]I say the ag brokers are in a whole lot of trouble. The bank owns you now boys, and that means you're screwed from the get go.[/quote]

if the bank wants to write me a 700K check, then I'm their b!tch.  sounds like you are jealous.

EZ, Hardly. AGE has no contracts with any of its brokers. We are free to compete and take our clients anywhere we wish without any consequences. No one owns me or my clients except me. Don’t know where you’re a broker, but I promise we are less encumbered than you.

I seem to recall that EZ is some burned out ex-Bank of America broker. After peddling tons of fixed annuities to 90yr old ladies the bank cut his payout and he ended up on this board crying like B!tch about how horrible the bank environment is. All you have to do is say the word “bank” and I guarantee you he will chime in everytime…

I’m just finishing up in the new AGE training program, class 08A. Don’t really know how this will effect me but I’m thinking the non compete with teeth is worthless. I got the training and now have options. I wonder what WB was thinking about doing with us newbies if we even were worth a thought at all.

The successful AGE producers are going to LOVE working for a big bank...it'll be a bureaucratic nightmare that they will regret and will definitely go indy.

Gaddock, Being a trainee in this business is a big challenge no matter what firm you’re with. I have no insight as to how this will affect the trainee contract but my guess is that you may want to stick with the new firm simply because the last thing one needs that early in the game is a legal battle or hefty re-comp. payment. Perhaps you should spin this as a positive, since you’re so new to the system you don’t really have a culture to miss. You’ll be expected to produce no matter where you are, so try to concentrate on that for now. Just my two cents’ worth. Good luck, Gaddock.

AGE brokers who will gladly sell their business for the 6 yr retention. You is insane....EZ is right and Ferris is IGNANT of what is going to happen over the next 36 months. If you stay past 6 months you are forfeiting your career. Count on this.

WAC will slowly infect you like virus and begin to brand you away from those precious clients you worked hard to build and retain. First you will be forced to open Wachovia bank accounts or I should say "encouraged" to take advantage of all of the new banking and lending products that Wachovia has to offer to your clients. Then when your clients have consolidated their banking and lending with Wachovia and connected all of the investment accounts to auto bill pay and direct deposit of income and divs to Wachovia, you will find that it will be twice as hard to move those clients to another firm. You will lose a third to 50% of those clients once they are tentacled to WAC with those other relationships.

If you are going to move you should move in the next 3-6 months.

Good luck staying independent. I did it and it was the best move ever made..... 

Broker010,

Thanks for the thoughts. I have a great relationship with my manager. He said he would see I was taken care of one way or the other. I'm just going to keep working as hard as I can and cross my fingers. Even though I have not been there long I was PROUD to be an AGE broker. I dont know how I feel about W beyond recently moving my personal account for poor service.

If you day trade like you spell ...I pitty da fool who be yo client!!!!

Gad, having a great manger is something I can relate to. It’s the future of that relationship that would scare me the most. Keep your chin up. Those feelings of pride you have should continue. Work hard and NEVER screw your clients and you’ll do fine.

[quote=Gaddock]

Broker010,

Thanks for the thoughts. I have a great relationship with my manager. He said he would see I was taken care of one way or the other. I'm just going to keep working as hard as I can and cross my fingers. Even though I have not been there long I was PROUD to be an AGE broker. I dont know how I feel about W beyond recently moving my personal account for poor service.

[/quote]

I'm in the same boat as you.  Not sure if we have to sign a new contract or not but I didn't notice a transfer clause in it.  I'd make sure to consult a lawyer before I did anything since state laws vary widely on employment contracts.  I do know that WS requires trainees to sign a mobility clause which allows WS to place a broker anywhere after training, not sure if our new contact would include that(I can't sign that, I have a family and I don't want to move).  It's one pronouced difference in culture as WS is more company wide managed as opposed to AGE's branch management focus.

This just sucks no matter how I look at it.  I honestly can't find good in any of this LOL.

[quote=daytradah]

AGE brokers who will gladly sell their business for the 6 yr retention. You is insane....EZ is right and Ferris is IGNANT of what is going to happen over the next 36 months. If you stay past 6 months you are forfeiting your career. Count on this.

WAC will slowly infect you like virus and begin to brand you away from those precious clients you worked hard to build and retain. First you will be forced to open Wachovia bank accounts or I should say "encouraged" to take advantage of all of the new banking and lending products that Wachovia has to offer to your clients. Then when your clients have consolidated their banking and lending with Wachovia and connected all of the investment accounts to auto bill pay and direct deposit of income and divs to Wachovia, you will find that it will be twice as hard to move those clients to another firm. You will lose a third to 50% of those clients once they are tentacled to WAC with those other relationships.

If you are going to move you should move in the next 3-6 months.

Good luck staying independent. I did it and it was the best move ever made..... 

[/quote]

I don't think anyone can argue with this post, WS has a very detailed history (6 takeovers) which displays exactly what they do with new brokerages.  The come in, cut cut cut cut support jobs, cut commissions of brokers less than 300k production and move to their next victim. 

[quote=daytradah]

AGE brokers who will gladly sell their business for the 6 yr retention. You is insane....EZ is right and Ferris is IGNANT of what is going to happen over the next 36 months. If you stay past 6 months you are forfeiting your career. Count on this.

WAC will slowly infect you like virus and begin to brand you away from those precious clients you worked hard to build and retain. First you will be forced to open Wachovia bank accounts or I should say "encouraged" to take advantage of all of the new banking and lending products that Wachovia has to offer to your clients. Then when your clients have consolidated their banking and lending with Wachovia and connected all of the investment accounts to auto bill pay and direct deposit of income and divs to Wachovia, you will find that it will be twice as hard to move those clients to another firm. You will lose a third to 50% of those clients once they are tentacled to WAC with those other relationships.

If you are going to move you should move in the next 3-6 months.

Good luck staying independent. I did it and it was the best move ever made..... 

[/quote]

So what's your angle?  Why do you care so much?

Maybe you're a head hunter hoping for new business. Are you a failed AGE broker, trying to get back.   Perhaps you are one of the sub 300K Pru brokers that got walked for being a piker.  Sounds like you have an ax to grind and that we should discount everything you say.  You're an internet troll, trying to fan the flames.

Ag brokers no longer own their book, the bank does. Do you think Wac is going to honor that little agreement you had at AG after paying a premium for your assets. Come on!

EZ, Again, no one owns our books except us. No one has been paid a cent my Wachovia for anything at this point. Are you even in the business? You strike me as a used car salesman who alway “meant” to get into the borkerage business. Your ignorance of this deal is striking.

[quote=ezmoney]Ag brokers no longer own their book, the bank does. Do you think Wac is going to honor that little agreement you had at AG after paying a premium for your assets. Come on![/quote]

If AGE didn't own the brokers' books before, Wach doesn't own them now. AGE can't sell something that it doesn't own in the first place.

[quote=ezmoney]Ag brokers no longer own their book, the bank does. Do you think Wac is going to honor that little agreement you had at AG after paying a premium for your assets. Come on![/quote]

They don’t own the book yet, but they will as soon as AGE brokers sign that little agreement that comes with the retention bonus.

Watch and see, your branch manager will drop the contract by, and either stand there and wait for you to sign it or they will follow up in just a few hours.  They’ll also remind you that you must sign it to get the retention bonus, and that it is “waiting” to be delivered to you.  The whole idea is to exert subtle pressure for you to sing the agreement without carefully reviewing it or contemplating it’s implications.

Joe, great insight. If an AGE broker signs a contract, he is then contractually obligated. Thanks for clarifying.

In point of fact, AGE DOES own your book. You are forbidden to act against the firms interests (including encouraging the firms clients  to another firm while you are an employee of the firm you are an employee of! Hint hint!) . They can toss you out on your rear and keep your book. They can redistribute your clients to other brokers in your branch (or in any other branch they so choose). They can shut down any account at any time.

Are they likely to do any of these things, no. Why? Simply because it is not in their best interest to do so. When/if it is (like when you resign) be sure they will.  As they say in the book Dune by Frank Herbert "He who controls a thing, owns that thing!"

BTW, the WSFinet paradigm is "It's your book, period." What I mean to get across to you with that is... If you think indy is the way to go, then go indy through the WSFN channel (assuming they let you) and then, if you absolutely hate it two, three years down the pipe, hire a different BD. You stay where you are and WSFN is the one moving out of your office. Even if you're going to go back to a Brix and mortar someplace, at least they'll KNOW that the assets are coming, because there is no office where you were.

I haven't heard of anyone going back after indy, but it seems to me that you'ld be able to get a better price for your book coming from Indy in that it's pretty much a lock that your clients are coming. Maybe some of the headhunters here can talk to that idea.

Here’s some insight that I think AGE brokers have that others tend to miss: Our CLIENTS own our books. We’re talking about THEIR money, not OURS. Who “owns” the clients? NO ONE. The AGE broker, however owns the RELATIONSHIP. That’s the real value.

FerrisBlowhard:

Easy on the personal crap. I know this biz like your hairy palm knows your netherloins. Not fanning any flames just stating facts. You sound like a shill for WAC. Back up off dis.

Boy, some of you are such tuffguys! I’m getting all shivery!!!

[quote=daytradah]

FerrisBlowhard:

Easy on the personal crap. I know this biz like your hairy palm knows your netherloins. Not fanning any flames just stating facts. You sound like a shill for WAC. Back up off dis.

[/quote]

Tradah, that was actually pretty funny.

[quote=Omirp222][quote=Gaddock]

Broker010,

Thanks for the thoughts. I have a great relationship with my manager. He said he would see I was taken care of one way or the other. I'm just going to keep working as hard as I can and cross my fingers. Even though I have not been there long I was PROUD to be an AGE broker. I dont know how I feel about W beyond recently moving my personal account for poor service.

[/quote]

Not sure if we have to sign a new contract or not but I didn't notice a transfer clause in it.  

This just sucks no matter how I look at it.  I honestly can't find good in any of this LOL.

[/quote]

Hello Omirp222,<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

There sure is one in the contract I signed. Clear as day, look at number 15. The choice is already made for me or us if you signed the same. I'm going to stick it out and make the best of it. Not much choice so I'll have to adjust my gray matter to a positive. I tried to say Wachovia when I was making some cold calls today … was hard to get my head around it. All in all I got the same number of hang ups as usual J but also the same number of good calls.

[quote=daytradah]

FerrisBlowhard:

Easy on the personal crap. I know this biz like your hairy palm knows your netherloins. Not fanning any flames just stating facts. You sound like a shill for WAC. Back up off dis.

[/quote]

You sound very ghetto.  I'll bet you're a 13 year old wigger that wears a sideways NY Yankee's hat, flat brim, and baggy pants.  You know exactly nothing about this business because everything you've posted is complete and utter Bull$hit.

[quote=daytradah]

The successful AGE producers are going to LOVE working for a big bank...it'll be a bureaucratic nightmare that they will regret and will definitely go indy.

[/quote]

I thought you were posting facts?  No conjecture or speculation above. Get real you troll.

Bob Bagby is the one who sold out his own AGE brokers and staff. It was Bob Bagby who continously told all FC's and staff that the company would remain independent when in fact he was working to sell everybody out back in Nov 2006. He didn't even have the courtesy to inform the grassroots brokers and staff that the Outside Board had retained Goldman Sachs to sell the company. Bob Bagby was the guy who mostly likely influenced the outside directors to sell the firm. It's not a merger, it's a sale. Bagby walks away with $15,000,000 in market value from his shares alone, + any stock options that he has. Proable total in excess of $25 million $$$. In reality, he didn't care about his employees who made the bread and butter for him and his family. He sold everyone out. There is no doubt that there will be major changes within the new company, and WB can never compare to the rich history that AGE has always had. The notion that we can solicit auto loans to the clients is ridiculous in itself. The Beta conversion and the recent move to an AGE Bank Deposit program appears to be another reason to match the WB image and product. WB clearly states that there will not be compensation on sweep accounts or Bank Deposit programs. Thats a big savings right there, and for all the AGE FC's that worked hard to convert the present clients to AGE Bank Deposit program will get screwed in compensation. WB clearly states that on the first $100,000 of production the payout is 20% thereafter it's 50%, but on what products? There is no doubt that the rich history of AG Edwards has been distroyed, and I could only wish that Ben Edwards was back, or that his son Tad Edwards, would emerge to revive the company in it's present state. I am quite sure that 70-90% of the brokers would quit WB and go with Tad Edwards if that was possible. All AGE FC's should fear the worse with reduced payouts, reduced bonus's, reduced income, reduced 401K P/S programs. WB is the one that's paying the 6.3 billion so they will dictate what goes on eventually not any of the co-managers that Bagby implies. Guys like Peter Miller, and Gene Dietchrich and the rest of the group up in the Ivory Tower back in St. Louie will only continue to stroke the present FC's and staff over this deal that it was the right move. They had nothing to do with the deal and after one day they endorse it without any consideration to the FC and staff that put their hearts and souls to build a top notice organization. The WB deal will never be the same as the OLD AGE was we know of it on Wall Street. While current AGE FC's are required to bend over and get screwed, the big guys like Bob Bagby will be laughing all the way to the bank with their millions of bucks that was created by the FC's building the value over a long time. The retention packages in my estimate will be minimal and many FC's will not be offered anything, especially in light of past WB deals made.  The idea of retaining multi-million dollar producers in quite ridiculous as there are not that many out of 6700 + FC's. The bulk of the AGE FC's are under $350,000 to $400,000 producers who have worked hard over many years to build a business and created food for their family. Some posters may complain and consider a $300,000 to $400,000 producer poor, but that's the AGE system.  Many FC's have given up higher incomes in doing and providing whats right the client, putting the client first. Now Bagby and WB wants the FC's to be "auto loan" officers writing auto loans. As far as I am concerned, Bob Bagby should be out in the gargage washing those cars he expects his FC's to write loans on. The new WB will never be the same as the old AGE. Any AGE employee past or present can realize that. I suspect big changes are coming and will come slowly, but they are coming, and those changes will not come at the advantage of the AGE FC, but will come to the advantage of the big salaried big shots that will reside on the 15th floor of the Ivory Tower and smile while they are cashing their big payroll checks, bonus, and stock options while the guy in the trenches who has always worked hard with the original Ben Edwards attitude and philosphy sucks wind.

It will be very interesting to see how many FC's take the crap that is served to them and stick around, or the number of FC's who really see the light at the end of the tunnel and are proud enough to walk away with pride, that of the old A.G. Edwards & Son's as they really knew it.

Just an opinion from a person close to the Edwards family. This whole process was misleading to current FC's and Staff and disgrace to the A.G. Edwards family.

A class action suit on behalf of all employee's should be considered especially over the disceptive remarks and actions that the CEO Bob Bagby repeatedly made to his entire organization.

I believe that your post rings with allot of truth…unfortunately.

Downunder, your clients value YOUR relationship not the relationship with a firm. The fact that AGE will no longer exist only strengthens this bond with your clients. $300k+ producers can make great money by going indy, and ALL of our clients will go with us. If Wach expects to keep us with no retention offer and guaranteed paycut, we cannot accept it. Keep the culture alive by not changing your client relationships. My 2 cents…

I agree with you Downunder. It’s really a shame Bagby sold everyone out. 

Broker010,

You are not going to make a lot more money going Indy (not necessarily anyway). And all of your clients are NOT going to go with you just because you went indy. And you're going indy against a really strong name (especially in Fla! what are there, about 4 WB branches per block in occupied Fl?).

Well, maybe MAYBE YOU are going to make more money but the vast majority of most will not. Being indy is not as easy as it looks (especially when you're looking hrough rose colored glasses). It eats start up capital for breakfast lunch dinner and snacks. You need office space, signage, computers, phones, advertising, accounting, postage, overnightage (heavy overnightage for your acat efforts) and then there are the ACAT fees, are you going to pay them or is your client going to be charged $100 per account for the honor of doing business with you? one hundred accounts is $10,000 dollars in the first month when you're not doing any business because you are trying to run a business and bring in clients! Letterhead, got any? No? you'll need some and envelopes too. Are you going to have cable in your office; how about a receptionist (don't forget, she'll need a computer and phone system too) what about paying for your own health care by yourself (even though you get to COBRA) and then there are those pesky taxes. You'll probably net net the same or less than you're making today when you figure in your capitalized costs.

It can be a tremendous business experience if it is something that you have the burning desire to do. But to say, wholesale, " $300k+ producers can make great money by going indy, and ALL of our clients will go with us." is incorrect and irresponsible. 

OTOH, if you can partner with a few others in your branch and create a $1MM indy branch... now you have something.

Whomitmay,Thanks for the concern. I never said I'd make "a lot more money" going indy; in fact I never said I'd make ANY more money. I said I'd make "great money". Here in BFE SW FL, $120k is great money for a 36 year old building his own business. I've run my own business from the time I graduated from college in '92 until I took my job at AGE in '99 (which allowed me to run this business as my own business). I completely understand the risks and rewards. What I will not accept is suddenly being an employee subject to the whims of a corporation. And yes, I will take all of my clients. I've already confirmed this with all of my A and B clients (I don't care to take the C's). They are fearful of the takeover and relieved that I will keep our relationship the same. Hopefully you won't scare any others reading this from doing the right thing with your posts. Many of us in this business are entrepreneurs just like you, believe it or not.

I think you WILL make a lot more money as an independent, and IF you took good care of your clients and created loyalty, you'll take the majority with you.  Here in BFE-MidWest, $120K is pretty good money also and I made more than that in my first full year of independence.  Better yet, the transition money is getting much better at indy firms with averages now in the 8-10% range all the way up to over 40% of trailing 12.

I don't blame any of you for taking a long, hard look at your new employer and taking an excellent opportunity to sail your own ship.  Whomit, you of all people should know that running your own firm pays a lot better than being an employee.  I'm personally netting almost 70% of my gross after everything (including assistant and assistant benefits) except income taxes.  My after-tax net is considerably higher than when I was an employee because of various tax-preferences realized as a self-employed.

AGE-ers, if you want your freedom, now's the time to take it.

I’d sell you all out for $25MM, too. You know you’d sell your Mama out for that much, too! IT’S CALLED BUSINESS!! Sign on the line or get the heck out. Either way, crying about it isn’t going to get you anywhere.

Indy, Thanks for the words of encouragement! I hope all the AGE brokers out there read them and take them to heart. I will wait to see what (if anything) Wachovia offers, but I and many of my pears will not simply eat a s%*t sandwich if that’s all they’re serving.

I have enjoyed reading many of these posts.  Some of the ideas that have appeared are informative.  There is not much real information out there, other than the corporate BS that is coming out of St. Louis, about how the acquisition will affect us or our clients.  I guess we do not have much other option than to wait and see what the management of WB and AGE have to offer.  I do not see how my client is going to gain anything.  At AGE, I always felt that I was part of something better.  Wachovia is really First Union.  Somehow I cannot be convinced that I will be part of anything meaningful at WB.

I do appreciate the comments of downunder about getting sold out by Bagby.  I only wish I knew the Edwards family close enough to listen to their comments.  I know that their net worths are increasing, but somehow I believe that they, too, feel that they have been sold out.  Ben F. did a great job growing the firm during his tenure.  Maybe I should just look on the bright side.  I know that the cash out portion of the deal will force me to reduce my position and diversify my portfolio.  And anyway, capital gains taxes are only 15% this year.