Raymond James Financial Services vs. Advisor?
For years I've be quietly in the background reading post, learning and feeling gratified that so many are willing to share. I now need that insight to make an important decision. <?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
I'm looking to move from a regional firm to a more responsive, flexible environment.
I'm many months into my due diligence on Raymond James and love what I've seen with both sides of the firm.
My practice is fee based $600K+/yr. I have lots of designations and am a mature business person.
Can anyone shed light on the pros and cons of the independent RJFS side vs. the employee RJ Associates side?
The local RJA office is very nice with high producers and excellent in place staff and support. It would be a much easier transition. There are several veteran $1mm+ producers. RJA offers a much better transition package and FAR less business detractions from servicing clients. Net to me w/ benefits is about 50%.
RJFS will be MUCH more upfront effort yet possibly derive greater control. I'm not getting clear read on what net % is realistic if I want a quality office including full time, licensed, top notch support. I'm seeing numbers from 50% to 65%. It the additional "POSSIBLE" payout worth the distraction/effort/risk?
All ideas REALLY appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
I am not with Raymond James but have been on the RJA and RJFS side in the past. I am now with another Indy firm. I can give you a contact on the RJFS side that is currently doing +/- $600k he came from Wachovia. I can also give you another name of a rep that has moved from RJA to RJFS to another indy. I could probably give you the positives and negatives of each.
Let me know if you would like the contact information and I will forward it to you in a private email. I don't think they would like the phone numbers on a public site.