Ameriprise P1 to P2 transfer problem

or Register to post new content in the forum

25 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.
Sep 18, 2009 10:48 pm

Hello - I am a P1 advisor who recently tried to transition to P2, and was told no - just wondering if anyone else here has run into this roadblock and would be interested in talking about next steps...

 
Thanks!
Sep 19, 2009 1:36 am

They changed the requirements last year. I don't have the numbers in fron of me but I think it was anyone appointed after June 2006 has to have at least 78 service periods and min of $20 million book of business. They should give you a reason if they say no. Its pretty easy to find the info necessary to qualify for P2.

Sep 19, 2009 8:09 am

what is a service period?

Sep 19, 2009 9:40 am

Pay period. 2 weeks.

Sep 19, 2009 5:28 pm

Wow - thanks for the quick replies!  I've actually met the minimum of the "90 and 210k GDC" - and even was appointed prior to 2006, so am "grandfathered" into the old minimums.  The reason that I was given is some awesome BS:  that my "results" are not as closely correlated to my business plan, and does not show adequate growth.  Anyone have knowledge of how to fight back?

Sep 21, 2009 1:24 pm

quit, take your book and go indy. =)

Sep 21, 2009 1:26 pm

But on a serious note, AMP is a joke. i drank the cool aid before as well.... but there is life outside of ameriprise, the VUL's, the RAVA-daba-du.

Sep 21, 2009 8:51 pm

An Ameriprise guy, manager/recruiter, was telling me how friendly their platform was to various derivatives like options. Went on to tell me about margin requirements in house, beyond reg T and how competitive they were. In truth they were pretty good. Not anything like a warehouse but far better than most indies I've spoken with.

 
Just one problem;
 
Compliance ... you are not allowed to solicit any option position beyond a covered cal he he he. A waste of his time and mine.
Sep 23, 2009 8:56 am

That's funny...we had a similar situation here. So I'll give my commentary as I have previous P2 experience and was asked before my thoughts.

 
Unless you have $250K in rolling 12 month Total GDC, it is not profitable in the current environment to go on the franchise side. Now if you have a few AFA's underneath you, that can boost your production level but under the franchise scorecard system which is based on Total GDC and BOB value, its got to be a min of 250K and 35BOB with 55 Financial Plans(for the bonus payout).
Just my 2 cents
Sep 23, 2009 8:52 pm

Sounds like you really know exactly how it works, and I would agree with you on that number, with the exception of how the P1 world is changing - in the new "Point of Arrival" (in 2011), folks writing less than $100k get a 25% payout!  Looking at the options that exist, independent seems like a no-brainer - unfortunately, I drank the kool-aid in the beginning, and still have stuff in the surrenders...what's your opinion on the AFA thing?  Anyone out there have a good contract they'd like to share please?  Thanks again...

Sep 24, 2009 12:53 pm
bigpoppa:

Sounds like you really know exactly how it works, and I would agree with you on that number, with the exception of how the P1 world is changing - in the new "Point of Arrival" (in 2011), folks writing less than $100k get a 25% payout!  Looking at the options that exist, independent seems like a no-brainer - unfortunately, I drank the kool-aid in the beginning, and still have stuff in the surrenders...what's your opinion on the AFA thing?  Anyone out there have a good contract they'd like to share please?  Thanks again...

 
It is the state of the business where we no longer will be hiring novice advisors and so if you're a "producer" then it shouldn't be an issue to stay above the 100K mark. When you compare our production averages to other firms, we don't really come close. It is the evolution of the business where firms need high producers and they will be rewarded.
As far as going to the Indy side as an AFA, you have to have the right partnership and the right compensation. If you have a high producing advisor (above 85% payout) than its possible to create a salary and bonus arrangement that could be like a 50%-60% payout but you have to produce in most cases above $125K in total production.
Oct 12, 2009 10:11 am

I feel your pain.  Recently denied a franchise opportinity as well.  Heres what I've been told/shown by an inside source.  It's currently a terrible environment in corporate and they are looking to squeez out/keep every revunue dollar on the books (not surprising since it's getting close to year end).  By letting P1's go P2 they are losing valuable revenue dollars that may effect their bonus or job.  In the past, you only had to meet the requiremnts (210 and 90) and get approval from p1 and p2 leaders to go.  A few months ago they added a new layer called the Governance commitee that has the final word.  Recently, the big bosses had a conference around this and directed the commitee to not even consider anyone who isn't around 250k in production.

 
Where do we go from here:
1.  It is my oppinion as well as my inside sources that theses requirements are likely to loosen up down the road.  If that is the case, then hang in there and see what happens.  Don't forgett that these decisions are made by people who quite frequently leave their posts especialy if those decisions are going to prove to be detrimental to the health of the company and new bosses come in and make up new rules.  How long do you expect Fraud to be around?  His history certainly suggests that it wont be more than a few years.
2.  Go Indy.  This seems to be a bit more tricky theses days.  Most Broker Dealers have relatively high mins these days so unless you are at the 250ish range, they don't want you.  However an opportunity does exist in joining an indy producer.  This obviously carries significant risk to you practice. 
3.  Go AFA.  Again, more tricky than in the past.  You would have to find a p2 advisor willing to pony up a large sum for your clients as well as pay you when you get there with no guaranty that you will ever own your clients.  Not sure if a legal contract can be put together to circumvent this issue.  I did the calculation for what the p2 advisor would have to pay AMP to get my clients based on AMP's formula and it turned out to be around $100k. That pretty much means that the p2 advisor would have to be a significant producer to be able to afford that. 
 
Hope this helps a bit. 
Oct 12, 2009 10:39 am
Primetime:

3.  Go AFA.  Again, more tricky than in the past.  You would have to find a p2 advisor willing to pony up a large sum for your clients as well as pay you when you get there with no guaranty that you will ever own your clients.  Not sure if a legal contract can be put together to circumvent this issue.  I did the calculation for what the p2 advisor would have to pay AMP to get my clients based on AMP's formula and it turned out to be around $100k. That pretty much means that the p2 advisor would have to be a significant producer to be able to afford that. 

 
Hope this helps a bit. 
 
There is no way someone would do that unless the advisor was assured that one day down the road they would be taking over that practice.  A few of my friends within the business have done that, but an agreement was put in place to pay back the P2 advisor, or take a much lower payout for the 1st couple years until they recoup the cost of purchasing the clients.  I did this a year and a half ago (P1 to AFA), although at the time the cost to the P2 advisor was only .25% of assets under management, where now I believe its 1.25%. 
Oct 23, 2009 12:09 pm

Platform changes were supposedly coming this month.  Anyone hear anything?

Nov 9, 2009 2:21 pm
etj4588:

Platform changes were supposedly coming this month.  Anyone hear anything?

 
Just saw it today.  Its criminal what the P1 system is doing w/transfer eligibility for those who want to go to P2.  For those with less than 10 years in the business, not only do have to have at least $200,000 rolling 26 period GDC and $20 million under management, BUT you now have to take a 15% reduction on your payout for the first two years as a P2 "to account for the higher investment of resources and support in the employee channel."  This is all effective December 2nd. 
 
I went to P2 an AFA last year and we were responsible for paying .25% of my assets under management at the time in order to make the transition.  They are now raising that amount to 2% for anyone transitioning after Dec. 2nd.  This makes it absolutely impossible for any P2 franchise to bring on an in-house AFA from the P1 side. 
Nov 9, 2009 3:04 pm
3rdyrp2:
etj4588:

Platform changes were supposedly coming this month.  Anyone hear anything?

 
Just saw it today.  Its criminal what the P1 system is doing w/transfer eligibility for those who want to go to P2.  For those with less than 10 years in the business, not only do have to have at least $200,000 rolling 26 period GDC and $20 million under management, BUT you now have to take a 15% reduction on your payout for the first two years as a P2 "to account for the higher investment of resources and support in the employee channel."  This is all effective December 2nd. 
 
I went to P2 an AFA last year and we were responsible for paying .25% of my assets under management at the time in order to make the transition.  They are now raising that amount to 2% for anyone transitioning after Dec. 2nd.  This makes it absolutely impossible for any P2 franchise to bring on an in-house AFA from the P1 side. 
 
It's to keep us old HRBFA guys in P1.
Nov 10, 2009 11:24 am

I Agree it is terrible what they are doing to the p1 side.  The worst part about it is that deadline of Dec 2 is a lie.  The true date was sometime this summer.  Behind the scenes they started to reject all advisors from transfering that qualified to transfer.  I heard some folks are looking into legal action against the company.  Hate to resort to something like that, seems like going Indy is the way to go.  Good luck to everyone who was adversly effected by this.

Nov 10, 2009 10:42 pm

If the posts are true, and I assume they are, this is terrible news for the good P1 Advisors looking for a bit more flexibility and independence.  An old colleague of mine used to always say, "the tightest grip is with an open palm."

 
As far as the changing figure requirements, I would definitely ask for clarification and the exact reason why.  Confirm their figures with your own if possible.  As the old saying goes, "figures lie and liars figure."
Nov 11, 2009 2:09 am

This is crazy. When I left p1, to go to p2 you needed 150k rolling. this was before plans became a requirement.

Nov 11, 2009 8:33 pm

We don't even have P1 advisors in the area I am at. They all left or transfered to AFA's under a P2 or became P2 themselves. We thought AMP was phasing the P1s out until HRBFAs came along. Does anybody know if the HRBs can be P2s.