ML- Paybacks are a B1TCH!

or Register to post new content in the forum

119 RepliesJump to last post

 

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.
Jun 14, 2006 11:44 am

All due respect xmsbroker, but how should WealthManager go about landing any of the jobs talked about above without signing this contract (which I am sure requires him to to sign a non-compete agreement, also). I don't claim to know everything about any of these companies, but I do know that most of them (if not all) require you to sign these agreements. If you are saying he should attempt to come to some agreement with ML allowing him to not sign these contracts, then I completely agree, but what if they say no? He will esentially have no choice but to sign or find a new profession.


Also, no one answered WMs question, leaving me curious. Do these B/Ds actually pursue their money if they let you go? It was stated above that it would be hard to back that up in court, but is this normal practice or is this agreement (as I would imagine it to be) in place more for people who switch B/Ds or quit in the middle of their training?

Jun 14, 2006 1:00 pm

In 3.5 years MS has never attempted to enforce the repayment clause in their contract. I repeat, never. Ask xmsbroker. The only time these clauses are enforced are if you leave for another broker/dealer.



Also they will most assuredly not pursue the training costs if you are terminated.

Jun 14, 2006 1:00 pm
wlooney:

Also, no one answered WMs question, leaving me curious. Do these B/Ds actually pursue their money if they let you go? It was stated above that it would be hard to back that up in court, but is this normal practice or is this agreement (as I would imagine it to be) in place more for people who switch B/Ds or quit in the middle of their training?



assume any BD is gonna' come looking for you if you use the investment of their time, patience, expertise and money to simply "take" and then "leave" for another firm-


if you quit to go wait tables for a year or 3, you're PROBABLY ok-


Jun 14, 2006 1:09 pm

This is what I have seen firsthand in my office - They will ONLY come
after you for repayment if you go to a rival firm as an FA.  You
can quit or get fired within the outlined time frame and not have to
worry about it.



I would love to see them come after me for 38k...I have negative net worth...good luck getting 38k out of me..

Jun 14, 2006 1:38 pm
WealthManager:
TexasRep:

$115k on the degree and your TRUE due diligence began:


Joined: May 16 2006


The join date does not tell much of the story.  I'm 33-year old career changer.




sorry- but i'm still a bit astonished at your naiveté-




Jun 14, 2006 3:31 pm
wlooney:

All due respect xmsbroker, but how should WealthManager go about landing any of the jobs talked about above without signing this contract (which I am sure requires him to to sign a non-compete agreement, also). I don't claim to know everything about any of these companies, but I do know that most of them (if not all) require you to sign these agreements. If you are saying he should attempt to come to some agreement with ML allowing him to not sign these contracts, then I completely agree, but what if they say no? He will esentially have no choice but to sign or find a new profession.


Also, no one answered WMs question, leaving me curious. Do these B/Ds actually pursue their money if they let you go? It was stated above that it would be hard to back that up in court, but is this normal practice or is this agreement (as I would imagine it to be) in place more for people who switch B/Ds or quit in the middle of their training?



Yes, he should negotiate changing the terms.  If that doesnt work, he shouldnt jump in w/ this many question marks about whether its right for him

Jun 14, 2006 3:39 pm
fired?:

In 3.5 years MS has never attempted to enforce the repayment clause in their contract. I repeat, never. Ask xmsbroker. The only time these clauses are enforced are if you leave for another broker/dealer.

Also they will most assuredly not pursue the training costs if you are terminated.


While I agree w/ the terminated part, I dont know if thats completely true.  I simply didnt know many people who broke the contract so I dont have a lot of examples to draw from...  If you left for a high paying job like WM is talking about, its completely possible they would pursue it or at least have their lawyers send threatening letters with the hope you will settle out of court for less.  I have heard of that, though not from anyone I know personally.

Jun 14, 2006 11:03 pm

A few things:


1.  Pareto's Law would state that 20% of the brokers make 80% of the money, not 20% of the brokers make all the money.  If you're not making ANY money for ML, you won't be working for ML. 


2.  I haven't seen the no compete agreement yet (still in the hiring process) but was a pre-law student.  In the contract, there will be a section with different ways you can violate the no compete agreement.  If it specifically states "If we terminate you, you must repay us the training costs" then you should request an addendum before signing.  If it does not state this, consider ML firing you breaching a contract.  At that point, all suits over 38M are off.  There is no way in hell that ML would waste their time and money going after you for 38M when they terminated your employment.


3.  7 Billion AUM?  Are you kidding me?  Under the ML grid, that's like 2.45MM in management fee commission alone.  I just read an article a month ago in Barron's about the top 100 FA's in the country, if this is true, this guy is an All-Star because that probably places him top 10.  Maybe he was a fund manager?

Jun 14, 2006 11:47 pm
entrylevelFA:

2.  I haven't seen the no compete agreement yet (still in the hiring process) but was a pre-law student.  In the contract, there will be a section with different ways you can violate the no compete agreement.  If it specifically states "If we terminate you, you must repay us the training costs" then you should request an addendum before signing.  If it does not state this, consider ML firing you breaching a contract.  At that point, all suits over 38M are off.  There is no way in hell that ML would waste their time and money going after you for 38M when they terminated your employment.



i'm not pre-law, but i have signed a few franchise-type contracts that no pre-law / post-law person in their right mind would ever sign-- basically it was "if you pick your nose in public, we terminate you and take all of the assets" --- totally enforceable? doubtful. Will they allow you to insert an addendum? hilarious.


if you wanted to be in their system, you signed their contract-- to mix metaphors: they hold all the cards and you roll the dice-- if it comes up snake-eyes, run for cover, protect your assets as best you can (can i sell you an annuity?) and hope the big bad wolf at the door eventually goes away--


no one wants to enrich lawyers, so if it isn't blatant (ie: they fire you or you quit to go wash cars) chances are 99.99% that they won't bother you-






Jun 15, 2006 9:11 am
TexasRep:

i'm not pre-law, but i have signed a few franchise-type contracts that no pre-law / post-law person in their right mind would ever sign-- basically it was "if you pick your nose in public, we terminate you and take all of the assets" --- totally enforceable? doubtful. Will they allow you to insert an addendum? hilarious.


if you wanted to be in their system, you signed their contract-- to mix metaphors: they hold all the cards and you roll the dice-- if it comes up snake-eyes, run for cover, protect your assets as best you can (can i sell you an annuity?) and hope the big bad wolf at the door eventually goes away--


no one wants to enrich lawyers, so if it isn't blatant (ie: they fire you or you quit to go wash cars) chances are 99.99% that they won't bother you-



Why should somebody conclude that a person who doesn't know that the first letter of a sentence should be capitalized has an opinion worth listening to?

Jun 15, 2006 9:25 am
Big Easy Flood:
TexasRep:

i'm not pre-law, but i have signed a few franchise-type contracts that no pre-law / post-law person in their right mind would ever sign-- basically it was "if you pick your nose in public, we terminate you and take all of the assets" --- totally enforceable? doubtful. Will they allow you to insert an addendum? hilarious.


if you wanted to be in their system, you signed their contract-- to mix metaphors: they hold all the cards and you roll the dice-- if it comes up snake-eyes, run for cover, protect your assets as best you can (can i sell you an annuity?) and hope the big bad wolf at the door eventually goes away--


no one wants to enrich lawyers, so if it isn't blatant (ie: they fire you or you quit to go wash cars) chances are 99.99% that they won't bother you-



Why should somebody conclude that a person who doesn't know that the first letter of a sentence should be capitalized has an opinion worth listening to?



why would anyone read on after concluding this?


Jun 15, 2006 9:58 am
TexasRep:
Big Easy Flood:
TexasRep:

i'm not pre-law, but i have signed a few franchise-type contracts that no pre-law / post-law person in their right mind would ever sign-- basically it was "if you pick your nose in public, we terminate you and take all of the assets" --- totally enforceable? doubtful. Will they allow you to insert an addendum? hilarious.


if you wanted to be in their system, you signed their contract-- to mix metaphors: they hold all the cards and you roll the dice-- if it comes up snake-eyes, run for cover, protect your assets as best you can (can i sell you an annuity?) and hope the big bad wolf at the door eventually goes away--


no one wants to enrich lawyers, so if it isn't blatant (ie: they fire you or you quit to go wash cars) chances are 99.99% that they won't bother you-



Why should somebody conclude that a person who doesn't know that the first letter of a sentence should be capitalized has an opinion worth listening to?



why would anyone read on after concluding this?



That is non-responsive.  Do you believe that you appear to be articulate and well informed when you, seemingly, do not know the basics of grammar?


When you grow up one of your biggest goals should be to develop the impression of being a grown-up.  Grown-ups do not think it's cool to appear so lazy that you cannot even bother to capitalize when you're writing.


I know, because I'm a grown-up.  You're not.

Jun 15, 2006 10:14 am

"I know, because I'm a grown-up.  You're not."


And....... youre a prick........ See???? I began the sentence with a capital.....

Jun 15, 2006 10:21 am
Big Easy Flood:
TexasRep:
Big Easy Flood:

That is non-responsive. 



actually is isn't-- anyone as informed and grown up as you should certainly understand that it was - by definition- a very direct response.


in fact your old man prattlings afterwords were non-responsive to my "why would anyone read-on after concluding this?"


my take is that you are just trying to help me- thank you, sir.


[quote=Big Easy Flood][quote=TexasRep][quote=Big Easy Flood]


That is non-responsive.  Do you believe that you appear to be articulate and well informed when you, seemingly, do not know the basics of grammar?


[/quote]


the old geezers apparently think i'm a chump-- but i am prepared to handle this indignity the best that i can-


[quote=Big Easy Flood]


When you grow up one of your biggest goals should be to develop the impression of being a grown-up.  Grown-ups do not think it's cool to appear so lazy that you cannot even bother to capitalize when you're writing.



that does it then----  i staRt toDay!
gee- this is harder than it looks.



][quote=Big Easy Flood]


I know, because I'm a grown-up.  You're not.



yeah, we all knew that-- we can smell you from here.


now go trim those hairs coming out of your ears, and get back to work.




Jun 15, 2006 10:34 am

Would somebody who thinks that writing without punctuation or capitalization is anything other than an exhibition of ignorance and/or laziness pleae step up and explain why my opinion is wrong.


Am I wrong for thinking like I do, or for saying what I think?

Jun 15, 2006 10:49 am
Big Easy Flood:

Would somebody who thinks that writing without punctuation or capitalization is anything other than an exhibition of ignorance and/or laziness pleae step up and explain why my opinion is wrong.


Am I wrong for thinking like I do, or for saying what I think?



It's a freakin message board, save the grammar nazi bit for your dissertation.  It's a waste of time to be that anal about punctuation/capitalization.

Jun 15, 2006 11:17 am
xmsbroker:
Big Easy Flood:

Would somebody who thinks that writing without punctuation or capitalization is anything other than an exhibition of ignorance and/or laziness pleae step up and explain why my opinion is wrong.


Am I wrong for thinking like I do, or for saying what I think?



It's a freakin message board, save the grammar nazi bit for your dissertation.  It's a waste of time to be that anal about punctuation/capitalization.



I think typos, and an occasional misspelling, are very common in message boarding.


However, not capitalizing is a choice, it's not a mistake or a typo.  And the choice is based on laziness, or stupidity.


Neither of them is attractive unless you too are lazy and/or stupid.

Jun 15, 2006 12:25 pm
Big Easy Flood:
xmsbroker:
Big Easy Flood:

Would somebody who thinks that writing without punctuation or capitalization is anything other than an exhibition of ignorance and/or laziness pleae step up and explain why my opinion is wrong.


Am I wrong for thinking like I do, or for saying what I think?



It's a freakin message board, save the grammar nazi bit for your dissertation.  It's a waste of time to be that anal about punctuation/capitalization.



I think typos, and an occasional misspelling, are very common in message boarding.


However, not capitalizing is a choice, it's not a mistake or a typo.  And the choice is based on laziness, or stupidity.


Neither of them is attractive unless you too are lazy and/or stupid.



so now i don't appear attractive to you? what next? you'll quit reading my stuff? and then you'll start reading someone else's stuff? you old geezers are all alike, looking for the trophy caPitAlizer to notch into your keyboards--


tell you what- go find someone else to read or better yet go feed your pigeons or finish your crossword-


unattractive! i've got nose hair more attractive than you! (albiet, not as much)






Jun 15, 2006 12:42 pm

Being lazy and/or stupid is attractive in somebody like Paris Hilton, but it is unattractive in a potential employee.


When an adult reads something that is written in lower case letters it screams--absolutely screams--that the author is lazy.


We don't conclude that you're stupid, we conclude that you're lazy.


And lazy is not an attractive quality in an employee.


Sorry to be the bearer of harsh realities, but that's the way it is.

Jun 15, 2006 1:00 pm
Big Easy Flood:

Being lazy and/or stupid is attractive in somebody like Paris Hilton, but it is unattractive in a potential employee.


When an adult reads something that is written in lower case letters it screams--absolutely screams--that the author is lazy.


We don't conclude that you're stupid, we conclude that you're lazy.


And lazy is not an attractive quality in an employee.


Sorry to be the bearer of harsh realities, but that's the way it is.



the next time i sign up for a message board, i'll read more closely in the fine print where it MUST say:


1. ALL RESPONSES WILL BE CHECKED FOR GRAMMER BY CRUSTY OLD MEN WITH A VIAGRA HANGOVER AND NO WHERE TO GO WITH IT.


2. CONSIDER YOUR RESPONSES, APPLICATIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT BY OLD GEEZERS WITH A 3 DAY OLD WIFEBEATER THAT NEEDS CHANGING.  


i definitly missed that part when i signed up for this one--