Retention
I don’t understand why so many fa’s are waiting for retention. It’s money u have to payback with interest. Am I wrong? I mean what is the benefit?
I'll take a stab..I have done it once and will never do it again even if they were to throw it at me (due to burdon of taxes and interest weighing you down for years). My guess is most FA's are broke and its an opportunity to have some $$ and feel like you actually have as much money as your "B" clients have.I don’t understand why so many fa’s are waiting for retention. It’s money u have to payback with interest. Am I wrong? I mean what is the benefit?
I will respond to both posts.
1. You are wrong, you do not have to pay it back as long as you stay. Say you got a $600m retention bonus on a five year plan and take the upfront. Each month $10m is paid to you plus interest, then $10m plus the interest is deducted from you post tax. This spreads out the tax burden over 5 years in my example instead of having an additional $600m in income hit you all at once. So you have $600m in the bank and pay taxes over time. 2. fritz, your post is simply stupid.[quote=Primo]
I will respond to both posts.
1. You are wrong, you do not have to pay it back as long as you stay. Say you got a $600m retention bonus on a five year plan and take the upfront. Each month $10m is paid to you plus interest, then $10m plus the interest is deducted from you post tax. This spreads out the tax burden over 5 years in my example instead of having an additional $600m in income hit you all at once. So you have $600m in the bank and pay taxes over time. 2. fritz, your post is simply stupid.[/quote] Which part? I know how the taxes and loan work, i'm in the middle of it now. Obviously if you keep the money in a CD or dont blow it on cars, big house etc you come out with more than they gave you regardless of taxes/interest. As to most of the FA's needing the money, that is accuarate as can be from my 10 years at MS. 90% of the guys came in on deal's, had now money then have proceeded to lose it in the market nearly every instance. I am not talking a small sample of 1-2 guys, more like 75 +. Soon as the deal ends they are looking to leave again because they are dead broke. If you have been in the biz can you say this is not common? Most brokers I see have less money than any of their top clients, do you dispute that?If you lost the money or blew it, that is the fault of the broker, nothing to do with the bonus. As far as the taxes being a drag, that is simply bad planning. I will agree most brokers have less money than their top clients, what is your point?
[quote=duster10]
Fritz: This might be the dumbest thing I have ever heard.... "I'll take a stab..I have done it once and will never do it again even if they were to throw it at me (due to burdon of taxes and interest weighing you down for years)." If you really believe this, then I will make you a deal, you give me $1, and I will give you 35 cents back. That is basically what you are giving up by not taking a retention bonus (assuming you do not WANT to leave). [/quote] I know, did not mean for it to come out that way...think I said in the next post that unless you blow the money you are better off.. But do think in switching firms it is not all is cracked up to be in many cases with the burdon of the deal hanging over your head..Agree retention is different.than why am I pay principle and interest everymonth? Am I missing something here?
They give you all the money upfront. They pay you principal and interest which you immediately pay back each month for the length of the retention period. This is done for two reasons. First, to draw the tax consequence over time. Second, if you quit or get fired before the end of the retention period, you have an interest bearing loan to pay back.than why am I pay principle and interest everymonth? Am I missing something here?
In an effort to get back on topic, it just simply amazes me that WS has not given any information in regards to a potential retention package. You would think there would at leasst be some sort of time-frame. I suppose they are using the MER package as a litmus test, which makes good business sense, but at what point does management give some guidance??? Please spare me any comments about how I should be focussed on my clients, becasue I am, I only worry about retention on the weekends.
[quote=duster10]In an effort to get back on topic, it just simply amazes me that WS has not given any information in regards to a potential retention package. You would think there would at leasst be some sort of time-frame. I suppose they are using the MER package as a litmus test, which makes good business sense, but at what point does management give some guidance??? Please spare me any comments about how I should be focussed on my clients, becasue I am, I only worry about retention on the weekends.[/quote]
I don’t worry about your retention on the weekend…I’m too busy networking with your clients, and asking them if they’re tired of their firm constantly changing names.
Thanks for the input Hyman, but to say that I am concerned about people “taking” my clients is the overstatement of the century. I am not worried about the name change, because I have been WS all along, and now we will become Wells, so to use that as a crutch for underperformance is pathetic. In fact, I have gathered the same amount of assets this year as I have any other year, although the last 2 months have been somewhat slower if I am being honest.
I truly love these guys who claim to be "networking" with my clients. If in fact you are networking with them, then you are doing a piss poor job and you are wasting your efforts, becuase I have not had ACAT one go out YTD (on any account in my top 150). Please enlighten me as to your networking tactics;)This is one weird post.
It ranks up there with the post I saw a few months ago from the FINANCIAL ADVISOR asking people on this board if it is smarter to buy or lease a vehicle. Gee, I don't know. Go find a copy of Money magazine. But do you REALLY advise clients on financial matters? It's no wonder this is such a strange industry. We have strange, uneducated people running money, that cannot figure out even the most basic financial decisions on their own. It's like a CPA going onto "CPA Life" forums and asking of they should itemize or take the standard deduction.Obviously you were smart enough to sell all of your clients equities in nov 2007 and have been sitting in cash since than right?. I’ll bet you couldn’t explain the benefit of retention either.
you sound pretty frustrated. don't worry the market will eventually and dont need to take out your incompetence and frustration on others.
What part do you not understand..My point was the reason brokers worry about their retention is they need the money? Do you not agree..based things I have seen a lump sum check of 200K, 300K, 500K or whatever is the way FA's increase their net worth overnight. Guess if you do 35K a month in gross, at 35% grid, you take home about 7K a month, if you are not living on the street it takes awhile to save 500K. FB do you get this or are you still living with your parents?Based on his answer, I’m not convinced that Fritz actually manages people’s money.
"FREE MONEY" what does that mean, you are signing a contract and stuck for 8 years. That is not free money. But for a loser like you it is the closest thing to a nice chunk of change you'll ever see so guess for you, its hard to see that far out.
Free Money??? The brokerage firms and banks don't give out free money. Maybe your parents have written you a few checks, you can call that free money, I guess. Once you move to another firm and take on a forgivable loan or sign a retention deal you become an "indentured servant" to them. The worst part about it is that they can change anything at any time and even the big swinging d*cks can't do anything about it. I feel sorry for the MER brokers who signed it. Just wait until the BAC deal finalizes and everyone gets blindsided by the new grid eventually. (Who knows when, but it its coming)
< ="-" =“text/; =utf-8”>< name=“ProgId” =“Word.”>< name=“Generator” =“Microsoft Word 12”>< name=“Originator” =“Microsoft Word 12”><>
"Free Money" is a catch phrase utilized by folks who have signed agreements for "Big Upfront Money...Just to Keep Doing the Same Job from the Same Desk", only to discover that the "Free" part included a set of handcuffs. Coincidentally, these same folks keep appearing here constantly talking about how they are always fielding great offers from the competition but allegedly turn them down out of some sense of "integrity" rather than admitting that it is fear and inertia that really controls their actions.
i agree with fritz…upfront cash is usually spent on luxury items or lost in the market. then rep is locked in to a longterm contract with the firm. on top of that the rep has to pay tax each month on the $ they spent.
on a few occasions some reps make good decisions with upfront deals but they are the exception. i took a check in last market downturn and it carried me for a while. i ended up leaving early and settling for pennies on the dollar. the lesson learned was keep $ aside to pay for taxes[quote=Ferris Bueller][quote=Vin Diesel]i agree with fritz…upfront cash is usually spent on luxury items or lost in the market. then rep is locked in to a longterm contract with the firm. on top of that the rep has to pay tax each month on the $ they spent.
on a few occasions some reps make good decisions with upfront deals but they are the exception. i took a check in last market downturn and it carried me for a while. i ended up leaving early and settling for pennies on the dollar. the lesson learned was keep $ aside to pay for taxes[/quote] What the rep does with the money shouldn't make it a good or bad deal. If they foolishly spent it or lost it via investments, then they are to blame. I kept mine in short term cd's, just in case I decide to leave.[/quote] its not thats its a bad deal, but its not something for nothing - as some advisors believe. question is; is it worth it...If what I am being told by my recruiter & firm that is trying to hire me, there is a dead-period that happens the last two weeks of the year where Advisors can’t move licenses. So, I am guessing that WS retention package will come out some time at or after the 15th of Dec.
Not sure how it works but, I wonder if some of the deals that are on the table for FAs will be available in January.
I could be off but, wanted to bring it to the attention of the board.
Some people in the firm think the deal will be modeled after the ML/BAC deal. One thing that does support that view is the extended silence. The longer this goes without any commentary from management the more you have to believe they are going to screw guys doing less than 1MM in production
unlike Merrill brokers I dont we have that many 1 million producers at Age/WB. My best guess is about 5 percent of the firm doing that level of production.
10% of ISG does 1mm+, I have no idea what PCG does. I am hearing anybody above 500K shoul b e taken care of, meaning at least 40% retention. No fact behind this, just what I hear, and the same littel birdies are saying week after turkey day.
Go to FA rankings... Guy in my office is on track to do around 1.2 he is currently ranked #868 in the firm Im guessing the number is probably 10-12%unlike Merrill brokers I dont we have that many 1 million producers at Age/WB. My best guess is about 5 percent of the firm doing that level of production.
Again, I have a tough time seeing how they can float out something that is drastically less than what they did 18 mo’s ago for the WS/AGE you run a very real risk of guys walking if it is too far outside that deal. The deals are MUCH bigger now than they were 18 months ago.
Buki…our FA ranking only apply to ISG. A 900K guys ranked 100th, out of the 1400 ISG Reps. For what it is worth, I do about 600, and I am ranked 300th. I am assuming that the FIRM ranking you guys (PCG) use is based on about 12,000 reps, or does that only apply to AGE??? None-the-less, the ISG never got a retention when we bought AGE, but we absolutley expect something from Wells Fargo. I would think that 40% for the 500K guys, and 50% for the 750K guys would get it done, with something additional on the back end.
yawn, yawn, yawn.
[quote=skbroker]unlike Merrill brokers I dont we have that many 1 million producers at Age/WB. My best guess is about 5 percent of the firm doing that level of production. [/quote]
Believe me there are more then that. One large office had 12 out of 50 including a few multi million. I think a few West coast offices had similar %.
that maybe the case a year ago but you got to assume that there less million dollar producers in this enviroment.
OMG WTF
Let me break this down.
You do 500k in production @ Merrill
You leave.
You get a 500k check from Smith Barney. That check is a loan at 3 %.
You are required to pay back the loan.
Luckily the firm also gives you a bonus each month, with a 3% inflation kicker that PERFECTLY coincides with what your monthly loan balance is.
The bonus pays off the loan, you keep the funds upfront.
Any questions?
You still have to pay TAXOMG WTF
Let me break this down.
You do 500k in production @ Merrill
You leave.
You get a 500k check from Smith Barney. That check is a loan at 3 %.
You are required to pay back the loan.
Luckily the firm also gives you a bonus each month, with a 3% inflation kicker that PERFECTLY coincides with what your monthly loan balance is.
The bonus pays off the loan, you keep the funds upfront.
Any questions?
I heard Kurt Sylvia down in West Palm left today…BIG producer. Left for UBS.
BukiRob,
I have a little old lady client who is just like you. She hates to pay taxes. I tell her that we have a solution for that. Don't make any money! She has taken this so far as to not sell stocks with huge gains because of the taxes. In the last three months she has achieved her goal. No more naughty taxes on those stocks...because she has no more gains. Why are you in this business? If you stay at home and eat mac and cheese all day you will have a much lower tax liability. And that's really the most important part.[quote=skillopie] BukiRob,
I have a little old lady client who is just like you. She hates to pay taxes. I tell her that we have a solution for that. Don’t make any money!
She has taken this so far as to not sell stocks with huge gains because of the taxes. In the last three months she has achieved her goal. No more naughty taxes on those stocks…because she has no more gains.
Why are you in this business? If you stay at home and eat mac and cheese all day you will have a much lower tax liability. And that’s really the most important part.[/quote]
Wow, you are completely missing the point. How many people do you know who have moved? How many have you talked to about the monthly tax hurdle? There are SEVERAL in my office that have moved from other firms to our office downtown. In many cases the tax hurdle is several thousand a month that comes out of your NET pay. That means that most of that upfront money ends up being what you use to subsidize your living expenses. There is a reason they give you so much money up front at its not cause your such a nice guy…
I did not listen to dannys call today, but it seems that danny and Carroll will be heading to Cali on the Monday following Turkey day to deliver the numbers on retention. The thought is that we will see something in the middle on Dec. I am sure that the top producer in the firm leaving will rattle a few cages, but only time will tell.
[quote=duster10] I heard Kurt Sylvia down in West Palm left today…BIG producer. Left for UBS.
Guy doesn't show up on the October production report. No Kurt's in West Palm either. Check your facts next time.[/quote]
http://www.kurtsylvia.wbsec.com/section3.cfm
<SPAN =Pageer id=ctl00_lblPageer>KURT F. SYLVIA
As of 11/21/2008
Currently employed by and registered with the following FINRA Firms: WACHOVIA SECURITIES, LLC
I looked him up too, he showed up in Lotus Notes. I think he did check his facts.
Is that Kurt fellow the top producer? I was only familiar with the Legacy AGE guys, and not that well at that. I would assume a top producer at WS would be doing between 5-10 million (nice narrow range) but I could be way off.
If a true heavy hitter did, in indisputable fact, leave, would it change any of your actual behavior?.. Didn’t think so.
http://www.kurtsylvia.wbsec.com/agents.cfm
Quite the team the dude has.Ferris,
You mean the one I wouldn’t ACCEPT if I was still there. Just like I declined the WB check that came with 6 year handcuffs. Keep on waiting…everything’s fine there. LOL!
Isn’t there a YHWY/Ferris pissing contest thread from a year ago? By the way, it’s been a year since we got the check so now it’s only a five year handcuff.
Don’t worry, GG, the new deal will re-cuff, tighter.
P.S. I tried to PM this stupid feud to rest. We’ll see if it takes.
Ferris,
Fair enough. I will leave you WB folks with one final thought, having seen the business from the “other side”, my eyes have been opened. I wish you all the best with whatever your decisions might be.
My two cents -
I'm a 20 year legacy AGE who left one week before the takeover. Joined the RJ hybrid platform nearly two years ago. There is no panacea in either platform. Each has its own particular strengths and weaknesses. There are things I really like and truly dislike about both. ( I started my career as a full indie for three years ) Those considering the indy or quasi-indie, especially in this market should think long and hard. I have a gorgeous office complex in a great part of town -but my net payout has been as low as 8.2% and as high as 43% . What doesn't change is the the 5-figure office expense nut I have to crack every month. Recruiting - in this market -forget it, we simply can"t compete. Though its only been two years - I'm seriously considering offers from the major regionals.Thanks very much for your candor and honesty WsXag — it’s always difficult figuring out what one
option or another would pay. And should you go ahead jump and then find out different, well it’s too late. Imagine people that just jumped to
C or Mer for that matter! I spoke with a very honest independent broker that had been independent for about 10 years. He shared that his payout
was in the area of 55% to 60% net at best. In this market, who knows.
I’ve found no matter how aggravated you are at something, jumping gives
you some monopoly money for a while until you blow it in the market or
have to pay 55% in taxes on it over several years. And within 5 months you’ll be aggravated at something new at the new place but you’ll then be stuck for 7 years or more. Building assets is
what counts and jumping around is no help in that department.
I think the new WS payout has got to be somewhat competitive with the independent channel, unless you work out of your basement that is. If you can wind up with around 44% at a big wirehouse - well, that’s not all that bad in my book. Add to that retention every time some deal is made, a few trips, and, despite the market, life isn’t all that bad.
Would love to know how you arrive at 44% payout? After ticket charges and zero payouts getting to 40% is tough under the new plan
[quote=BukiRob2] [quote=skillopie] BukiRob,
I have a little old lady client who is just like you. She hates to pay taxes. I tell her that we have a solution for that. Don't make any money!
She has taken this so far as to not sell stocks with huge gains because of the taxes. In the last three months she has achieved her goal. No more naughty taxes on those stocks...because she has no more gains.
Why are you in this business? If you stay at home and eat mac and cheese all day you will have a much lower tax liability. And that's really the most important part.[/quote]
Wow, you are completely missing the point. How many people do you know who have moved? How many have you talked to about the monthly tax hurdle? There are SEVERAL in my office that have moved from other firms to our office downtown. In many cases the tax hurdle is several thousand a month that comes out of your NET pay. That means that most of that upfront money ends up being what you use to subsidize your living expenses. There is a reason they give you so much money up front at its not cause your such a nice guy....
[/quote] BukiRob, Not entirely true. While people who move do have a monthly tax hurdle, MOST of the upfront money is yours free and clear. Let's do the math: Highest tax bracket: 35% My state tax plus local tax rate: 4% Medicare tax: 1% Total taxes: 40% If someone receives an upfront check, chances are he has an earned income would bring him above the social security wage base ($97,500) for tax puroses. So, the worst case scenario is that you get to keep 60% of the upfront money free and clear. Said another way, let's say you received a check for $500k and you paid the tax upfront (which would be a bad idea b/c you would be assured to hit the highest bracket) instead of over several years, 200K (40%) would go to the IRS and $300k (60%) would stay in your pocket. Assuming you can move your book in a timely manner, no less than 60% of the upfront money should stay in your pocket.
I think he is/was the top producer. I think he was going to do 8 this year, and yes, it is quite the team.
On a side note, Ferris Beuller seems quick to pounce on anybody for bad information. He should become some sort of cyber-cop.
[quote=WSxAG] I have a gorgeous office complex in a great part of town -but my net payout has been as low as 8.2% and as high as 43% . What doesn’t change is the the 5-figure office expense nut I have to crack every month. [/quote]
Sounds like the real problem might be overspending on your office and - I’m guessing here since you talk about recruiting being off - staff. Independents that effectively control these two key expense areas generally do very well financially; those who don’t … generally don’t do so well.
If my numbers are correct; 40K is $2400 for the first 10k and $15000 for the remainder - that’s $17,400 / 40,000 or 43.5%. Then add about 1% - 3% deferred. I probably will not grow revenue 15% this year so I’d add 1% deferred. I don’t have an occasion to do small tickets so that policy hasn’t really affected me.
I don’t do much in stock business and if I do, I usually don’t discount. I’ll try to make it as low of a cost as possible for people but you need to keep bringing in assets to be able to play that game (not much trading that is). But that’s what we’re supposed to be doing anyway.
I’m thinking the other major firms are in the 35% to 37& area. And that 5% extra does make a difference. Some of the other places - well you need a team of accountants to figure out the payout and they trim many things before the production even has a chance to hit a grid. I’ve found WB has been pretty forthcoming and transparent in that area.
By the way, my thought is 2 - 3 weeks on the outside for the announcement.
Here’s how the deal often works – $500K at 6% forgiven interest per year means $500,000 / 72 months is $6944.00 per month principal written off… And let’s say $140,000 phantom interest forgiven over 6 years is $1944 per month. So that’s $8,888 per month taxable fake income in addition to what you earn! The first months of the year your social security goes through the roof because your paying on all the fake income and it really hurts. After social security trails off, well, it still hurts! In this market you could end up living off of that note money. Loss of revenue from a switch in this environment can be substantial. You’ll lose a bunch of accounts in a good market. In a terrible one, who knows! You may have to rebuild and not be up to speed for a while. Granted, after this terrible year, you may have to rebuild to some degree anyway. Back to the numbers…
So $8888 extra fake income means you have to net about $5000 to pay taxes before you even start the month. However it takes $9000 in gross income to net $5000 which then goes to pay tax on the aforementioned fake income. At a 40% payout that means about $23,000 production per month is required just to break even! Given the phantom interest, you’re lucky to keep even 40% of the money you originally receive, And if you blow 80% of that money in the market or on stuff or on living before you pay the taxes, like many are inclined to do, you’re screewwwed!
If you quit or get fired, for any reason whatsoever, they’ll most likely sue you for the money and usually win! Check the arbitration data base under key word “promissory” and find out for yourself.
If you get fired and it not "for cause" you do not owe the money back in most cases..PRU in 2002 tried for awhile get get people they fired for lack of production and had awful results. Other firms policy is not to go after money when they fire or lay off brokers. Quitting is whole different story.Here’s how the deal often works – $500K at 6% forgiven interest per year means $500,000 / 72 months is $6944.00 per month principal written off… And let’s say $140,000 phantom interest forgiven over 6 years is $1944 per month. So that’s $8,888 per month taxable fake income in addition to what you earn! The first months of the year your social security goes through the roof because your paying on all the fake income and it really hurts. After social security trails off, well, it still hurts! In this market you could end up living off of that note money. Loss of revenue from a switch in this environment can be substantial. You’ll lose a bunch of accounts in a good market. In a terrible one, who knows! You may have to rebuild and not be up to speed for a while. Granted, after this terrible year, you may have to rebuild to some degree anyway. Back to the numbers…
So $8888 extra fake income means you have to net about $5000 to pay taxes before you even start the month. However it takes $9000 in gross income to net $5000 which then goes to pay tax on the aforementioned fake income. At a 40% payout that means about $23,000 production per month is required just to break even! Given the phantom interest, you’re lucky to keep even 40% of the money you originally receive, And if you blow 80% of that money in the market or on stuff or on living before you pay the taxes, like many are inclined to do, you’re screewwwed!
If you quit or get fired, for any reason whatsoever, they’ll most likely sue you for the money and usually win! Check the arbitration data base under key word “promissory” and find out for yourself.
Wow - after managing a successful branch for AGE 10 years, with 20% net margins when I left, why didn’t I consider office and staff costs? Thank you so much for pointing that out to me. Don’t know how I missed that one.
Of course those costs were considered, but under the hybrid we're attempting to set up a traditional branch with benefits of being indie. So obviously we needed to have a bit more space in order to expand. What I didn't count on was the worst market in three generations and that I would ultimately be competing for recruits with our traditional and our independent side. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to continually be in contact with a candidate, only to find out that they are being courted by another platform of our own company. Our cost structure is such that a couple $300k FCs (that we would pay 50% from first dollar), brings my net payout after expenses into the mid-60% range. To attract the MER, SB, AGE/WB folks we needed to provide an office environment similar to what they are leaving. Right business plan - wrong business environment - but in May 2007, two months before the first market peak above 14,000 - who knew? Still, don"t regret leaving AGE before the WACH hit the fan. Just have to figure out the best strategy going forward. (by the way - had our best month since we started in Nov.)You seem oddly indignant at the suggestion that your exceptionally low net is the result your business decisions concerning your office space and rent, while at the same time you acknowledge that your office expense is out of proportion to your revenue stream.
The issue isn’t if you considered office and staff costs - or if you successfully ran an AGE branch for 10 years, or if the current market is an abysmal one. The issue is if your current strategy is yielding acceptable results for you.
This is NOT a problem with the indy business model per se. That’s why I was puzzled that you warned “those considering the indy or quasi-indie, especially in this market
should think long and hard.” And that’s why I pointed out that nets as low as you have experienced are almost always the result of spending problems … spending in anticipation of future revenues.
You are far from the only one feeling this pain. You don’t have to look far to read the many cases of companies from all industries having to lay off staff and otherwise restructure or downsize in order to survive in the actual environment we are living in. That doesn’t make them or you bad or dumb - it just means you made decisions based on certain assumptions that proved to be wrong.
I agree you need to determine the best strategy going forward. And if as you say you “can’t compete” on the recruiting front with your current strategy, perhaps it’s because those who really WANT a wirehouse environment choose an actual wirehouse. If so, perhaps it’s time for a revised strategy.
Good luck.
Yes - I’m sure given the vibrant commercial real estate market my landlord will be more than happy to renegotiate the terms of my lease.
Pardon my sarcasm, I've done all three platforms, indie - 3yrs, wirehouse 20 yrs, and two in the hybrid model. Been successful in all three. At the end of the day its about the environment you want to work in. Net Payout - unless you work alone in a closet with no staff and no benefits - is going to gravitate back toward the mid 40 range. My business plan was based on a number of assumptions - most of which I could control, and have. However, when promises and commitments from the Home Office are not kept - there is little or no recourse. So perhaps you're right, its not the indie model per se, but how one expects to grow their business. My clientele is of a high net worth demographic and expects a certain office setting to walk into - and refer their friends to. I don't believe in luck.Yeah, why even consider any change in strategy when you’re already managing to net between 8% and mid 40’s%?
If that constitutes “successful” results in your opinion, you’re welcome to it.
Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work.ws,
You are completely and utterly wrong. There are very few trade offs. Any one who thinks so is just stupid.40% payout? I don’t think so. You obviously mismanaged your business.
[quote=WSxAG]Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work. [/quote]You still seem to be missing my point, so I'll have to be blunt.
Your lousy results are caused by your poor business decisions, not by independence. If you should be warning people against anything, it should be against making the mistake you made of spending money in the hopes of generating revenue, and insisting on building a "gorgeous" office for people you hoped to recruit, while you now admit you can't recruit those people because you can't compete against the wirehouses you hoped to compete with.
You have embraced one strategy and it has proven to be a flawed one. But you accept no responsibility for your actions, and instead blame everything and everyone else around you, including those like myself who point out this obvious fact to you.
If it makes you feel better to blame independence itself or question anyone's allocation of time to this forum, go ahead and add it and me to your long list of reasons why you can't be blamed for such poor financial results. Or maybe you should go to Washington seeking a bailout.
Just don't dare looking in the mirror, or who knows what you might find.
Now I need to finish my coffee before heading in to my ordinary but highly profitable office to go to work.
I make so much money in recurring income I post as much as I want!
I believe we have found our next Kool-Aid candidates - they have graduated from EDJ to the indie side. In addition they are the only brokers whose business plan is flawless and are completely unaffected by the worst economy and market since the Great Depression. I don’t know why they are working at all. They are apparently so galactically brilliant that they should have been financially independent years ago. Tried to offer a counter-balance to overwhelming indie bias on these posts. As for looking in the mirror - the last riposte of the bitter and cynically minded. As for your advice - wasn’t looking any was simply pointing out some of the pitfalls of the “Hybrid” model, and company specific issues. I know dozens of FCs who have met similar challenges.
End of thread -[quote=WSxAG]Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work. [/quote]Indeed there are plenty of tradeoffs.
Show me where any experienced and reputable indy poster on this board has implied that you can expect a NET of 90%, or that everything is perfect.
You make your choices, and then you have to live with the results. When you are indy, you have more choices to make, and as such you can have a greater positive(or negative) impact on your bottom line.
I have a nice office that I spend good money to build out. I have extra office space that I'm hoping to fill with other advisors. But, right now it's empty and I'm paying for it....though I'm still plenty profitable. Nonetheless, it's dead weight and I'd like to change that.
But I'm not bitching and whining. That space isn't full because I haven't put enough effort into recruiting other advisors. People aren't just going to magically come to it because I've built the space. It doesn't work that way. This is no 'field of dreams'. It's up to me to make calls, network, send letters, have lunches and dinners, play golf with other advisors, etc. At some point I'll start finding some folks who want to enjoy the flexibility(and greater payout) of independence without the hassle and expense of becoming an OSJ and building out a physical office space.
What we're talking about here is no different than the folks we all know in this business who bitch and moan that their book isn't big enough and they don't have enough new clients coming in, but when you dig beneath the surface you find that they simply aren't doign enough to bring in new business.
In my experience the autonomy is pretty super...largely complete as long as you follow the compliance rules at your b/d. The payout is darn nice too.
Good luck to you.
[quote=WSxAG]I believe we have found our next Kool-Aid candidates - they have graduated from EDJ to the indie side. In addition they are the only brokers whose business plan is flawless and are completely unaffected by the worst economy and market since the Great Depression. I don’t know why they are working at all. They are apparently so galactically brilliant that they should have been financially independent years ago. Tried to offer a counter-balance to overwhelming indie bias on these posts. As for looking in the mirror - the last riposte of the bitter and cynically minded. As for your advice - wasn’t looking any was simply pointing out some of the pitfalls of the “Hybrid” model, and company specific issues. I know dozens of FCs who have met similar challenges.
End of thread -[/quote]Your attitude is so crappy right now that you'd be struggling no matter where you were. Your negativity is "platform agnostic".
No doubt it is challenging, but the successful advisors on ANY platform don't get caught up in the negativity. They make an objective realistic assessment of the situation, look for opportunities that have been created for themselves and their clients, and then they take action.
Ferris - sorry for the hijack. I honestly didn't read the topic before firing off a couple of posts. Bad form.
Thanks for bringing a bit of sanity and civility back to this post.
The point of my original post was the following; I have been a successful recruiter in the past. I work hard at it, and there are a lot of candidates. What I did not expect is that I would end up competing against my own firm for the same recruits. The glaring flaw in the RJ hybrid model is that as part of the RJA side of the biz, the RJFS (fully indie) directly competes with me for recruits. I have one candidate that has expressly told them the she is already talking with us - didn't matter they keep dripping on her, creating confusion. On the other side of the coin, the traditional side talks to the same recruits and has transition $$ to offer. We recently had a case where a group of FCs were recruited to the Hybrid platform, "Advisor Select", only to get snatched away at the last minute by the traditional side - with no communication between the platforms. (Led to the recriuter leaving the firm, by the way.) The autonomy is definitely a plus - the key reason I opted for this platform. I don't mind competeing for recruits with other firms- compare and contrast is always a good thing, but when its your own firm - gets a little sticky. No whining here. Knew full well what I was opting for, and have no regrets leaving the mess that has become of AGE/WACH/WFC. Just wish others would have held up their end of the bargain. Lets just say the courtship was better than the marriage, but here I am and now I have to make the best of it. On a seperate note - is it just me, or doe sthe market collapse every time Paulsen opens his mouth ?Fair point about the highjacking, although FTR we were simply responding to WSxAG who added the original highjack post. Hard to let such blanket criticism of an entire platform go unchallenged. Interesting to note in his latest contribution he now wants to hijack his hijack so he can blame Paulsen for the market's woes. Besides, Ferris, I know you love this talk and secretly fantasize about buying paper in bulk. You can't fool me!I don’t understand why the Indy folks always need to hijack the retention/WB/ML threads. We don’t go over to their threads to discuss payroll, bulk paper buying, employment laws, electric bills, and the paying of rent.
It was a simple question - a rumination perhaps. Wasn’t blaming anything or anyone for anything. Perhaps you should stop looking for the negative in EVERYTHING and perhaps just enjoy the varied viewpoints that exist in this forum. As for hi-jacking, I apparently didn’t receive my RR Forum protocol guidebook - no worries - simply confirms that most (not all) of this forum is an utter waste of time.
Yeah. Now it’s the Forum. Certainly there is no possibility that YOU could ever actually responsible for anything that happens.
Okay- it’s all yours. You are the MASTER of THE RR ADVISORLAND BB.
By the way - whether you're refering to the Greek God of Dreams or the delusional character in The Matrix films - it's Morpheus.[quote=WSxAG]Okay- it’s all yours. You are the MASTER of THE RR ADVISORLAND BB.
By the way - whether you're refering to the Greek God of Dreams or the delusional character in The Matrix films - it's Morpheus.[/quote]Wow. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. No doubt that seemed like an enormous discovery to you.
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/whats-firms/retention-0