Attrition at Wachovia

or Register to post new content in the forum

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Nov 27, 2008 12:09 pm

I'm a "career changer" (military to civilian) and I recently completed my first telephone interview with Wachovia Securities.  The HR person claimed that even though the national attrition rate for all new advisors was around 70% for all companies, Wachovia/AGE attrition was "significantly less" at around 30%.  Does this make sense to anyone else?  Can anyone confirm or deny this?

 
I'm also interviewing with Smith Barney and they say they are experiencing between 50% and 60% locally.  Though more realistic, still seems like both companies are blowing smoke considering all of the posts on this website.
 
Thanks in advance for your viewpoints.
Nov 27, 2008 12:19 pm

[quote=oldnewguy]I'm a "career changer" (military to civilian) and I recently completed my first telephone interview with Wachovia Securities.  The HR person claimed that even though the national attrition rate for all new advisors was around 70% for all companies, Wachovia/AGE attrition was "significantly less" at around 30%.  Does this make sense to anyone else?  Can anyone confirm or deny this?

 
I'm also interviewing with Smith Barney and they say they are experiencing between 50% and 60% locally.  Though more realistic, still seems like both companies are blowing smoke considering all of the posts on this website.
 
Thanks in advance for your viewpoints.
 
ONG, it depends on how they define attrition.  If they're talking about current rates of experienced advisors fleeing the AGE/WS system, that 30% seems about right, based on how many of our group left AGE last year, and what I've heard anecdotally from throughout the country.  If they're referencing new/new numbers, I'd say that they're lowballing you.  The last time they published tracking numbers from my original training class of 57, there were 19 of us left, and that was about 3 years ago.  You could probably deduct a few more out of that.
Nov 27, 2008 2:33 pm

You are probably bringing a strong work ethic to the table. The failures lack that quality. You'll be fine. 

Nov 27, 2008 8:48 pm

That number is probably correct but it's based on "all" reps - not those with under 3 years of exp..  Ask them what their attrition rate is of first year reps.


I interviewed with Wachovia as well but ended up choosing EDJ over then simply because of the unknown of what will happen to them under the new leadership.  They seemed to have a first rate training program and everyone was very professional.  Good luck!

Nov 27, 2008 9:28 pm

Did you make E8 in the your military career? If so, you won't have a problem doing anything and shouldn't worry about the numbers.

Nov 27, 2008 10:49 pm

Thank you for the vote of confidence and thank you for all of the replies (why aren't you all watching football with a turkey sandwich?).  I'm retiring a bit higher than E8 (in rank not in usefulness) and I have or will have a few of the appropriate letters behind my name (MBA, CFP, CFA) but I still can't believe the HR rep was basing the attrition rate on the perception of how I will do personally.

 
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but this is an integrity issue (small one but still an issue) and I want to make sure I choose wisely who I'm working with/for.