Morgan Stanley

or Register to post new content in the forum

19 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.
Jul 28, 2005 11:15 am

CNBC is carrying word that Morgan Stanley is cutting it's sales force by 10% and will hire 1,400 fewer brokers in the coming year than they had planned to hire.


Come on boys and girls, step up and argue with my point of view that the retail investor is moving away from salespeople and more and more to the Internet, no-load fund families, and fee based planners.


Where is this old war horse wrong?


Jul 28, 2005 11:20 am

I think we should PUT this "old war horse" out to pasture.

Jul 28, 2005 11:25 am

Do not respond to Put posts.

Jul 28, 2005 12:09 pm
Knead To Know:

CNBC is carrying word that Morgan Stanley is cutting it's sales force by 10% and will hire 1,400 fewer brokers in the coming year than they had planned to hire.


Come on boys and girls, step up and argue with my point of view that the retail investor is moving away from salespeople and more and more to the Internet, no-load fund families, and fee based planners.


Where is this old war horse wrong?



I had a fourth interview with Morgan Stanley on Monday.  I have done all the tests, talked to brokers in the office, talked to both the sales manager and the branch manager in person and the regional manager by phone.  I left on Monday with "We'll be in touch by the end of the week" echoing in my mind.  I was on top of the world.


After I read what you had to say I phoned to follow up on the interview.  Normally I would have waited to next week to hear something, but that made me nervous.


I was told that as the local manager understands it he is to hire no new brokers and that he was sorry but that his hands were tied.  He suggested that I talk to other firms in the area.


Does anybody know a firm that is hiring?  Could it be that the Morgan Stanley decision is a bellweather for the entire industry?


I am 42 years old with two kids in college.  I got laid off four months ago after fifteen years of scientific equipment sales and need a another chance to prove myself.


On Monday night my wife and I went out to dinner.  Nothing expensive, just a minor celebration of what seemed to be a new chapter in our lives.


Now I am in shock and don't know how to face her.

Jul 28, 2005 12:48 pm

One more thing.  If I had been offfered a position on Monday and had accepted it at the time would I have been allowed to start even though there is a hiring freeze?


CNBC is now reporting that Morgan Stanley will hire, but only experienced brokers.


How does one get the kind of experience that Morgan Stanley would want?  Why would fifteen years of successful sales not qualify?

Jul 28, 2005 1:00 pm

Most, if not all, other firms are probably hiring, although that may vary on a local branch by branch basis.  This is just an isolated situation w/ MS, driven by its new management.


Start making your calls.  Your age (maturity) & sales experience are attributes, & should be just as attractive to other firms as they were to MS.  Sorry that you'll have to go through the whole process once again.

Jul 28, 2005 1:13 pm
Duke#1:

Most, if not all, other firms are probably hiring, although that may vary on a local branch by branch basis.  This is just an isolated situation w/ MS, driven by its new management.


Start making your calls.  Your age (maturity) & sales experience are attributes, & should be just as attractive to other firms as they were to MS.  Sorry that you'll have to go through the whole process once again.



I need to be able to talk to my wife.  She is very often depressed about my career search so I have to have some things to tell her.


Why do you think Morgan Stanley would decide to not hire but other firms would hire?  From an outsider point of view that seems to not make sense.


If Morgan Stanley does not need brokers why would Smith Barney need brokers?


She is going to ask me that and I have no idea what to say.

Jul 28, 2005 2:34 pm

Hopeful, the best summary of "why" may me on this (RR Mag) site:


http://registeredrep.com/news/ms-broker-cutback/ AND


http://registeredrep.com/news/morgan-trainee-program/

Jul 28, 2005 2:51 pm

Check out RJ.  They have fantastic management and great training.

Jul 28, 2005 3:13 pm
Duke#1:

Hopeful, the best summary of "why" may me on this (RR Mag) site:


http://registeredrep.com/news/ms-broker-cutback/ AND


http://registeredrep.com/news/morgan-trainee-program/



Thank you for the links, but now I am even more confused.


Those links say that most firms train between 500 and 1,000 new brokers per year.  That is about one to two per branch.


I heard once that most new hires do not work out, so I suppose a branch might actually hire more than that.  Would that be a fair thing to think?


How can I find a job as a stockbroker who charges a fee instead of a commission?

Jul 28, 2005 4:14 pm

Put would have told you to go to EDJ or AEFA.  They will take anyone on.  The only caveat to that is to get in the door, bust your @$$ to gather $5+ million in assets/year for a couple of years and then start looking to go to the majors.

Jul 28, 2005 4:17 pm
MS Hopeful:
Duke#1:

Most, if not all, other firms are probably hiring, although that may
vary on a local branch by branch basis.  This is just an isolated
situation w/ MS, driven by its new management.


Start making your calls.  Your age (maturity) & sales
experience are attributes, & should be just as attractive to other
firms as they were to MS.  Sorry that you'll have to go through
the whole process once again.


I need to be able to talk to my wife.  She is very often
depressed about my career search so I have to have some things to tell
her.


Why do you think Morgan Stanley would decide to not hire but other
firms would hire?  From an outsider point of view that seems to
not make sense.


If Morgan Stanley does not need brokers why would Smith Barney need brokers?


She is going to ask me that and I have no idea what to say.





From the outside this business often does not seem to make sense. 
That's part of what makes it so fun and interesting some times.



Morgan has decided to mimic Merrill and some of the others by only
pursuing the high-end clients and high-end advisors.  So, now
they're taking this posture.  It's a fad amongst some firms on
Wall Street and it will end someday.



In the meantime, check out AG Edwards, or maybe even Edward D
Jones.  Generally quality firms with good training programs and a
middle-market retail focus.



Good luck!

Jul 28, 2005 6:17 pm

The brokerage side of the industry is run by total and complete
idiots.  Seriously.  They are *&^%$# idiots.  The
brains are over on the banking side as far as managment talent is
concerned.



Morgan Stanley, if those numbers are correct, trains a LOT of
rookies.  I mean a lot.  That gets expensive.  It also
takes resources that could be devoted elsewhere while they are trying
to get back on track.



These idiots running the brokerage side will toss out $250k producers
because they don't produce enough.  Yet, even at a 35% payout, I'm
sure they are more than covering the cost of their office space and are
making a financial contribution to the bottom line.



The investment industry is extremely profitable.  But where does all that money go?  Management takes it.



Most firms, I am sure, are still looking for rookies.  Don't let
MS's troubles cloud your view.  There are other fish in the sea.

Jul 28, 2005 7:51 pm

MS Hopeful:

CNBC is now reporting that Morgan Stanley will hire, but only experienced brokers.


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


Sorry, but I can't imagine any experienced brokers going over to Morgan Stanley right now, given the turmoil and uncertainty. 

Jul 28, 2005 8:11 pm

Wow.. Man keep your head up. At least you got the information before you started and then they wanted you to get out.


A couple of my friends just experienced some BS with the big firms. They stated that firms are going to some team format that focuses on the big clients.


From what I hear there is a lot of money with the small investor. So a firm like Edward Jones is good.

Jul 28, 2005 8:42 pm

"How does one get the kind of experience that Morgan Stanley would want?  Why would fifteen years of successful sales not qualify?"


Normally, that would grant you a job with 95% of the firms out there, depending on individual branch, hiring goals, budget allotted for newbies, etc. MS's situation is unique in that they are trying to right a ship that was starting to sink... 15 years of sales exp does not equal 15 years in brokergae sales with a proven record of producing, thats why MSA would not consider you ... Try another wire, such as Merrill ,Wachovia, or Smith Barney- be open about what happened with MS and with your sales experience you should be smiling in no time

Jul 28, 2005 11:40 pm

MS Hopeful, MS is STILL HIRING trainees, but instead of the 2005 level
of 2,400 trainees, it will take 1,000 (still way more than ML and SSB).
It will focus on bringing top brokers to align itself with ML and SSB
(approx. 14% and 22% of pretax profits respectively) and bring its
pretax from a low 8%.



In MS defense, it costs a lot to pay a salary for 1 year for trainees,
many of whom will produce less than 15K in that year and will leave the
business. Add to that their office space, support, benefits, exams...



MS is simply trying to remain competitive, and bring up the average
production per broker, currently at 711K at ML, 550K at SSB, and 462 at
MS (all approx numbers).



The reason for MS relatively lower number (still way ahead of AGE, ADJ,
AEFA, and the likes) is that total production gets DILUTED by new
brokers, in their first years (LARGEST training class on the street),
that produce less than 50-75K.



As for your quest, I would suggest looking at SSB, ML, AGE, and UBS.
They are all good companies, would appreciate your long sales
experience, and will invest in you while you build your business.
Married and at 42 you can use a salary.



Best luck.

Jul 29, 2005 12:24 am
inquisitive:

The brokerage side of the industry is run by total and complete
idiots.  Seriously.  They are *&^%$# idiots.  The
brains are over on the banking side as far as managment talent is
concerned.



So true.....



Morgan Stanley, if those numbers are correct, trains a LOT of
rookies.  I mean a lot.  That gets expensive.  It also
takes resources that could be devoted elsewhere while they are trying
to get back on track.

Like maybe better branch support
staff, and helping those 250-450k producers effectively growth their
businesses.....but management would manage to fark that up too....



These idiots running the brokerage side will toss out $250k producers
because they don't produce enough.  Yet, even at a 35% payout, I'm
sure they are more than covering the cost of their office space and are
making a financial contribution to the bottom line.



The investment industry is extremely profitable.  But where does all that money go?  Management takes it.

Of course, how do you think they pay all those Senior VP's of Administration?  The waste is deplorable......





Most firms, I am sure, are still looking for rookies.  Don't let
MS's troubles cloud your view.  There are other fish in the sea.

Jul 29, 2005 5:21 pm

Morgan Stanley has suspended its training program, as a few branch managers have told me. Try Merrill, Wachovia, or UBS, they are actively hiring and training rookies.