What happened to SKRAINKA?

Kate is actually the Chief Market Strategist for Canada.  Alan is still alive and kicking in STL.   And I agree.  Kate is wonderful and we are behind on fee based. 

You are one of a small handful of EDJ reps who realize that.  Kudos to you for recognizing that.  Perhaps one day…

SS-

A friend of mine told me that a GP/RL is now telling all of his IR's that it won't be too long before they will have fee based. The message is to get the 65/66 soon. 5 years from now I would guess they might have it. But first they need everyone to get land lines and get off the stupid satelite technology!

It's about time. Now what do you think brought this change of heart. My guess is that many vets have left and they realize that the growth is stagnant unless they change.

Too fu@k'n late. They only lost their best reps in the last 4 years. How would you like your money managed with this timing. .

Not good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ez - not too late.  Best reps are replaced by other best reps.  That's just the way the industry works.  Every issue of this magazine talks about some big broker leaving some firm.  We've lost some of our big guys, but we still have a lot. 

I've heard rumors as early as next spring we'll have something fee based.  No specifics yet.  In fact I was at a meeting over the summer with our GP over compliance who said Weddle told her that if they can figure out how to make it make sense for the clients from a cost perspective we'll get it done.  Weddle moves faster than Bachman or Hill ever did.  Stay tuned.

I can only venture a guess that it is simply pressure from us IRs that forced the change.  Of course when you talk to brokers who left and they say fee based is one reason they jumped, hopefully someone listens.  I love my company but sometimes I hear echoes of the seven last words of a dying church - "We've never done it that way before."

Have a nice weekend.  I'm off tomorrow to meet with a client's father who's gonna clear a million from a land sale.  If I don't get it now, I'll get it when he passes away. 

Edward Jones Fee Based Business = Wrapping the revenue sharing American

Funds. That is all it will be.



If your compliance chief is trying to figure out how fee based business

makes sense from a cost perspective, I would either have some major

concerns with his/her ability or maybe my first statement will be true

afterall.



SpaceMan- which American Fund will you be pushing to this client you are

meeting tomorrow?

[quote=The Truth]Edward Jones Fee Based Business = Wrapping the revenue sharing American
Funds. That is all it will be.

If your compliance chief is trying to figure out how fee based business
makes sense from a cost perspective, I would either have some major
concerns with his/her ability or maybe my first statement will be true
afterall.

SpaceMan- which American Fund will you be pushing to this client you are
meeting tomorrow?[/quote]

Give it a rest truth, you definitely have something going on with American Funds??!??!?

Actually American Funds hadn't even entered my mind, but thanks for the suggestion.  Which of their 5 star funds would you start with for an 85 yr old?  I was thinking more like a CRT coupled with an ILIT.  Maybe some muni's that he can pass on to his daughter if he doesn't want to do the insurance underwriting.  Definitely going to discuss a credit shelter trust for them if he doesn't do anything else with me. 

Truth - You're a moron if you think the reason we do American Funds is the revenue sharing.  If I was looking at revenue sharing at all I'd be selling any other fund family than American because they pay the least.  In fact one of the things we got blasted for at one time was RL's getting up at meetings and telling new IRs to stay away from American Funds BECAUSE they don't do as much revenue sharing. 

You guys that hate Jones for whatever reason really need to get a life. 

Maybe I should have said Hartford. I was just mentioning American since

what 90% off all you hacks sell them to every Tom, Dick and Harry that

comes in the door. Read the most recent study on fund investors who used

an intermediary like Jones or invested directly at the fund? Kind of brings

thinks all in perspective, especially the debate your compliance chief is

having on whether or not fee based business makes sense for your clients.

What a joke. Isn’t the better argument how does fee based business at Jones

hinder the revenue sharing that your firm desperately needs to fund the 70%

draw your 300 or so fearless leaders are taking from you?

Truth- Don't really know why you are bashing American Funds.  I'm not with EDJ and I do a ton of them.  Their probably my best performing buy/hold accounts.  Up almost 10% ytd and something like 30-40% over the past three years.  The low annual costs are a plus, but the performance is really what's important. The Growth Fund of America is one I've been avoiding though (better alternatives IMO).

My concern with the AF's is their size.  They are now the largest MF company and at some point the inflows just have to affect the performance.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]You are one of a small handful of EDJ reps who realize that.  Kudos to you for recognizing that.  Perhaps one day…[/quote]

I believe your wrong on this Recruit, fee based is what all the IR’s want to discuss whenever there is someone higher up around to listen. 

"Their probably my best performing buy/hold accounts."

That should've been "They're...."

So much for the grammar police.....

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

ez - not too late.  Best reps are replaced by other best reps.  That's just the way the industry works.  Every issue of this magazine talks about some big broker leaving some firm.  We've lost some of our big guys, but we still have a lot. 

[/quote]

So Jones loses a "veteran" IR and replaces him/her with what? Most likely someone new to the biz.  At best a bank broker who bought dream of no boss.  Almost never a top producer from a wirehouse or other regional firm.  In my experience that's never no almost never.

[quote=exdrone][quote=Spaceman Spiff]

ez - not too late.  Best reps are replaced by other best reps.  That's just the way the industry works.  Every issue of this magazine talks about some big broker leaving some firm.  We've lost some of our big guys, but we still have a lot. 

[/quote]

So Jones loses a "veteran" IR and replaces him/her with what? Most likely someone new to the biz.  At best a bank broker who bought dream of no boss.  Almost never a top producer from a wirehouse or other regional firm.  In my experience that's never no almost never.

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=exdrone][quote=Spaceman Spiff]

ez - not too late.  Best reps are replaced by other best reps.  That's just the way the industry works.  Every issue of this magazine talks about some big broker leaving some firm.  We've lost some of our big guys, but we still have a lot. 

[/quote]

So Jones loses a "veteran" IR and replaces him/her with what? Most likely someone new to the biz.  At best a bank broker who bought dream of no boss.  Almost never a top producer from a wirehouse or other regional firm.  In my experience that's never no almost never.

[/quote]

How about a beer delivery guy or maybe a fella who used to sell joint replacements for a living.....
[/quote]

You mean the guy who I buy my weed from?

Didn’t know they were looking for that kind of sales background.

dude: Didn't know they were looking for that kind of sales background.

-----------------------------------

[quote=Maxstud] [quote=BrokerRecruit]You are one of a small handful of EDJ reps who realize that.  Kudos to you for recognizing that.  Perhaps one day...[/quote]

I believe your wrong on this Recruit, fee based is what all the IR's want to discuss whenever there is someone higher up around to listen. 
[/quote]

Maybe I've spoken to the wrong reps, but when I have brought it up in the past, many of the IRs have indicated that fee-based business is not right for clients and the traditional Jones model works better for them.  I'm not saying that most IRs hate it, but from my experience, even some of the larger producers are against it.  I will say that it does appear that the pro-fee-based camp within Jones is growing, though.  If they do decide to offer it at some point, I would be curious as to how it would compare to other firms on the street as far as fees and account minimums are concerned.  It would definitely be a step in the right direction for the company.

the upfront sales charge addicts don’t want to give up their habit huh. There’s nothing like mixing up your business. A little a shares, a little fee based, little fixed income, little annuities. It works well.

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

ez - not too late.  Best reps are replaced by other best reps.  That's just the way the industry works.  Every issue of this magazine talks about some big broker leaving some firm.  We've lost some of our big guys, but we still have a lot. 

I've heard rumors as early as next spring we'll have something fee based.  No specifics yet.  In fact I was at a meeting over the summer with our GP over compliance who said Weddle told her that if they can figure out how to make it make sense for the clients from a cost perspective we'll get it done.  Weddle moves faster than Bachman or Hill ever did.  Stay tuned.

I can only venture a guess that it is simply pressure from us IRs that forced the change.  Of course when you talk to brokers who left and they say fee based is one reason they jumped, hopefully someone listens.  I love my company but sometimes I hear echoes of the seven last words of a dying church - "We've never done it that way before."

Have a nice weekend.  I'm off tomorrow to meet with a client's father who's gonna clear a million from a land sale.  If I don't get it now, I'll get it when he passes away. 

[/quote]

If you where with a real firm you could propose a 1031 and save the client a ton on taxes! Some day you will figure it out in the mean time your clients loose!   

BR, many of the Jones IRs will tell you that fee based is not right for their clients because that is the message that Jones has been feeding them for several years.  Its not the IRs fault, if your work there and respect the company you will tend to buy into their line of thinking.  No one controls the message as well as Jones.   

[quote=vagabond]BR, many of the Jones IRs will tell you that fee based is not right for their clients because that is the message that Jones has been feeding them for several years.  Its not the IRs fault, if your work there and respect the company you will tend to buy into their line of thinking.  No one controls the message as well as Jones.    [/quote]

I couldn't agree more.  Well-positioned propaganda (for lack of a better term) can have a huge impact in matters like these.

Its been some time since I last posted and I must say that I have not missed it, since I have been reading this forcum for 2-3 years and it NEVER changes.  Jones this and Jones that.  As for American Funds, I agree that size may matter, BUT it is difficult to argue against their performance.  Are they the best in every ever category?  No, but close.  As for selling to every Tom, Dick and Harry.  I will argue that over 75% of the people with a rollover in the next 15 years will be an average person with a hoousehold income under $100k.  You will NEVER hurt a client selling CIB, Cap. World, New Persp. and Inc. Fund.  Never.  WIll you always do the best?   Nope.  DOnt care too.  Clients leave b/c they stop liking you!!  And from some of the ignorance on this forum, its no wonder.  As for fee based, I agree that we should at least offer a platform of some sorts.  I’ll defer to Weddle on this one.  As always, if you’re not happy, either  stop bitching or make a change.  Either way, you’ll still be bitching in 5 years about something.

Greenbacks - either your fingers or too fast or your brain is too slow, but one of them needs to catch up with the other one.   

According to IRS rules the 1031 exchange has to be like property for like property.  Hard to do that when the client doesn't really want to own any more property and he's trying to sell off what he has. 

Instead of hurling insults maybe you can give the rest of us some insights on how to sell a property you've owned for 50 years, not pay taxes, and then pass the proceeds on to your kids.  I'll retract my "your brain is too slow" comment if you would enlighten me, please. 

1031 exchange funds is what Greenbacks is reffering to (I think) Spaceman Spiff.  You should look them up.

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

Instead of hurling insults maybe you can give the rest of us some insights on how to sell a property you've owned for 50 years, not pay taxes, and then pass the proceeds on to your kids. 

[/quote]

You might be able to purchase a private annuity through an irrevocable trust (sometimes called Private Annuity Trusts).  There's still a RMD type event but it greatly reduces the taxes payable by the owner and can pass to the heirs with a large number of tax benefits.  There's a company called NPAT (National Private Annuity Trust) that offers a turn-key program, and has a ton of info available on this.  I think their site is www.npatplan.com... yup, just clicked it and it is.

Not really appropriate for all clients, but definitely works from time to time.