Deals as of October 2008

or Register to post new content in the forum

53 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.
Oct 23, 2008 9:07 pm

I'm sure a lot of us have been talking to other firms in regards to moving our practices.  I started this thread to share the types of deals that other brokerage firms are offering as up front bonuses for us to move.  If you've been offered some upfront by a wirehouse lately, could you list the amount offered (80% cash upfront, etc.), your TTM and firm that offered it, that would be GREAT! 



Thanks.

Oct 23, 2008 11:04 pm

My TTM is very, very large.  Recently, offered me elventy kabillion dollars to come over and supervise and give some credibility to their rapidly contracting brokerage operation in my town.  I very politely said, "No, thank you."  Hope that helps!

Oct 24, 2008 7:40 am

Given the market, VIX, recession, etc. a firm would be really reaching to overpay in this market. TT doesn't mean a whole lot at this point. That being said, I'll post if and when I hear anything.

Oct 24, 2008 9:33 am

Put yourself at the desk of any manager in the country.  Somehow you've been made aware that Bob Broker is in play.

 
Why would you give him anything to bring his blow-up book of clients?  As I was trying to say last night to our resident brainiac, Morphius, things are different now.
 
Trailing twelve is meaningless and won't become a valid benchmark for several years.
 
Virtually everybody with a book of any size is going to be embroiled in arbitration actions for years to come.  In the immediate future will come the wave of actions being taken by those who feel that they were cheated by the market--that their advisor did not get them off the track before the bear train ran them down (ya gotta love that line).  A sin of ommission.
 
In the more distant future will come the demands for arbitration filed by those who were told to, "Hold on it will come back" but it hasn't shown any signs of doing so.  A sin of commission.
 
There will also be the thousands--perhaps tens of thousands--who never thought about using the legal system to get their money back but become persuaded to do it by children or friends or ads that they see on TV and in magazines.
 
What has happened is a full employment opportunity--a chance to get rich--for lawyers who are always looking for reasons to file suits.
 
If I were exposed--and anybody with clients is exposed--I'd be worried about my broker dealer standing behind me, paying for the attorney without asking me to chip in and the incredible loss of time to prepare for and give depositions and other formalities.
 
E&O insurance is a relatively new idea and the idea that it would be a shield against a melt down was not part of the equation.  If you're thinking that you don't have any exposure becasue you've got E&O I believe you should think again--and then wonder (read worry) that the E&O carrier simply bankrupts and voids their policies.
 
This is so huge that it's difficult for those of us who have spent our lives worrying about this day cannot wrap our brains around it.  Those of you who have never given a second thought to how all the pieces fit together are completely in the dark.
Oct 24, 2008 9:53 am

Yet as you admitted in another thread, you and your wife are still in equities.  So where was your crystal ball when you decided to stay long?

Oct 24, 2008 10:02 am
Reggin:

Yet as you admitted in another thread, you and your wife are still in equities.  So where was your crystal ball when you decided to stay long?

 
I also said yesterday that if I had a financial "advisor" I'd sue the shit out of him or her.  I can't do that because I don't, and I would hardly be a sympathetic plaintiff.
 
The reality is that my "Zany" options trading in our margin accounts has allowed us to limit our losses.  Of course we'll have a huge tax bill this year.  I could have been like my mother and not incur any capital gains this year.
Oct 24, 2008 10:15 am
Provocative Put:
Reggin:

Yet as you admitted in another thread, you and your wife are still in equities.  So where was your crystal ball when you decided to stay long?

 
I also said yesterday that if I had a financial "advisor" I'd sue the shit out of him or her.  I can't do that because I don't, and I would hardly be a sympathetic plaintiff.
 
The reality is that my "Zany" options trading in our margin accounts has allowed us to limit our losses.  Of course we'll have a huge tax bill this year.  I could have been like my mother and not incur any capital gains this year.
 
That's because your mother has an idiot for a son that would rather spend his time telling others how smart he is, rather than using his "magical crystal ball" to help her.  All that training and knowledge you have and she is still getting killed.
 
Fool.
Oct 24, 2008 11:13 am
Reggin:
Provocative Put:
Reggin:

Yet as you admitted in another thread, you and your wife are still in equities.  So where was your crystal ball when you decided to stay long?

 
I also said yesterday that if I had a financial "advisor" I'd sue the shit out of him or her.  I can't do that because I don't, and I would hardly be a sympathetic plaintiff.
 
The reality is that my "Zany" options trading in our margin accounts has allowed us to limit our losses.  Of course we'll have a huge tax bill this year.  I could have been like my mother and not incur any capital gains this year.
 
That's because your mother has an idiot for a son that would rather spend his time telling others how smart he is, rather than using his "magical crystal ball" to help her.  All that training and knowledge you have and she is still getting killed.
 
Fool.
 
One of her sons is a retired Senior Vice President from Wall Street.  The other was the President of a bank who took the millions he was paid when it sold and started another bank--after waiting the required non-compete time.
 
Neither of us are fools, not by a longshot.
 
What we are are sons. Sons who do not need her money and sons who hear her say that she is emotionally involved with holding investments that have been transferred from generation to generation.
 
That is not the case with most of your clients.  You do not have the mother-child relationship, and most of them don't feel emotional ties to their investments.
 
They are going to fault you because they are seeking to fault somebody and you are their "advisor."
 
As it turns out, "Hold on, it will come back" was  the worst advice you could have given--and when you're paid to offer advice and the advice you give is horribly wrong you're going to be sitting ducks for what amounts to malpractice complaints.
 
It will be a damn shame for guys like Indyone--but Karma for most of those who read what is being written on this forum.  The mere fact that you argue with me about reality proves how guilty you are of not knowing what you're doing.
Oct 24, 2008 11:59 am
Ferris Bueller:

So as a retired Senior Vice President from Wall
Street, that came here several months ago to warn us all about the
impending doom you...

 
... failed to move your own personal accounts out of stocks.
... failed to convince your elderly parent to move out of stocks.
 
No wonder you went into training!





80% of my "serious money" has been in cash equivalents because there was so much exposure to equities in my mother's account.



As explained yesterday my brother and I convinced her to sell a large
number of her GE shares, but most of her holdings have been in the
family for generations and she feels as though she is betraying her
ancestors by even thinking of selling them.



That you don't know anybody like that does not mean that their "goals" are wrong.

Oct 24, 2008 12:01 pm

Also, I didn't go "into training."  I was "Branch Administration" -- training worked for me.

Oct 24, 2008 12:06 pm
Provocative Put:

80% of my "serious money" has been in cash equivalents because there was so much exposure to equities in my mother's account.


Your asset allocation decisions are based on what is in your Mother's account?!

Nice.  Do you still live in her basement, too?

Oct 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Morphius:
Provocative Put:

80% of my "serious money" has been in cash equivalents because there was so much exposure to equities in my mother's account.


Your asset allocation decisions are based on what is in your Mother's account?!

Nice.  Do you still live in her basement, too?

 
If one of your "advisory" clients tells you that they are the heir of several million dollars worth of equities that for emotional reasons must remain exactly as they are structured would you suggest that the client take that into consideration in their personal asset allocations?
 
I would.  That you would not paints you as a fool.
Oct 24, 2008 12:18 pm
Ferris Bueller:
 
The time you spent here warning us about the impending crash was time wasted.  You should have been spending it with her.  You should have tried harder.  You failed her.


How many millionaire women in their 80s do you have as clients?
 
Is "I want to hold the shares until I die because that's what my mother, her father, and his father all did before me" not an investment objective, not a goal?
Oct 24, 2008 12:24 pm
Ferris Bueller:

An arbitration panel would not care. 
Emotion is not relevant to a properly allocated account.  Any
broker sitting in that arbitration chair using their client's emotion
as an excuse would lose.   You failed your mom and you know
it.





You're wrong, in spades if you think that an arbitration panel would
not consider an investor's emotions to be a relevant portion of their
investment strategy.



The mere fact that you say that portrays you as the epitome of what is wrong with your type--you're sociopathic liars.



Every day you confirm it more and more.  A penny stock whore.  Nothing more.

Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm
Provocative Put:

If one of your "advisory" clients tells you that they are the heir of several million dollars worth of equities that for emotional reasons must remain exactly as they are structured would you suggest that the client take that into consideration in their personal asset allocations?

 
I would.  That you would not paints you as a fool.


You want to count your chickens before they're hatched, you go right ahead. Unlike you, I work with a number of clients who plan their retirement around anticipated inheritances.  Works fine if the inheritance comes through the way they expect.  When it doesn't it can be a disaster.

Unlike you, I don't counsel my clients to base their plan on a hoped for inheritance, so I sure wouldn't suggest an AA based on a hope either.

But then again, I was never in "branch administration" like you.

Oct 24, 2008 12:36 pm
Ferris Bueller:

"Put trader, if you knew this was coming,
why didn't you warn me?  Didnt you used to do this for a
living?  Why did you warn complete strangers on an internet
forum?  Now I have huge losses and you could have helped."  -
Put's mom





Nope, in fact I just talked to her about it.  We talk every day, and the stock market is mentioned on most recent days.



What she says is, "My grandfather held the portfolio through the great
depression as was his father's wishes.  My mother held it through
the war, as was her father's wishes.  I am holding it through
this, as was my mother's wishes.  You and your brother can sell it
if you want to, I won't put my wishes into your brain."



She then adds, "But you know what my wishes are."



I'm not eager to sell, but I'd sure as hell like to be able to if I wanted to or flip short against the box, or write calls.



She won't write calls any more because she was displeased when we bought back calls at a loss back in the early '80s.



Since you're not a professional you don't know this.  But the role
of a financial advisor is not to force your idea on the client.



What are you doing with your mother's stocks?

Oct 24, 2008 12:41 pm
Morphius:
Provocative Put:

If one of your "advisory" clients tells you that
they are the heir of several million dollars worth of equities that for
emotional reasons must remain exactly as they are structured would you
suggest that the client take that into consideration in their personal
asset allocations?

 
I would.  That you would not paints you as a fool.


You
want to count your chickens before they're hatched, you go right ahead.
Unlike you, I work with a number of clients who plan their retirement
around anticipated inheritances.  Works fine if the inheritance
comes through the way they expect.  When it doesn't it can be a
disaster.

Unlike you, I don't counsel my clients to base their
plan on a hoped for inheritance, so I sure wouldn't suggest an AA based
on a hope either.

But then again, I was never in "branch administration" like you.





When a portfolio has never been liquidated for generations why should the next generation expect that they will not inherit it?



When the inheritance is measured in millions of equities and the next
generation has millions as well does it make sense for the next
generation to be in equities too?



I say no.  And I am right--your willingness to paint 
yourself as a fool in a childish effort to argue with common sense is
not shining a good light on yourself.

Oct 24, 2008 12:43 pm

Can I put a "Protective Put Blocker" on somehow? Maybe we should rename him "White Noise".

Oct 24, 2008 12:43 pm
Provocative Put:

I was "Branch Administration"


Explains a lot.

If you were any good at helping clients you would have been making far too much money to ever leave for the glorious world of "branch administration."   Way too big a pay cut, and way too much hassle.

Or are you one of those geniuses who accepted the silly notion that being able to have something as commonplace and mundane as "senior vice president" on your business card made it all worthwhile?! 

Bet it at least impressed Mom, if no one else! 

Oct 24, 2008 12:49 pm
Provocative Put:

When a portfolio has never been liquidated for generations why should the next generation expect that they will not inherit it?



When the inheritance is measured in millions of equities and the next
generation has millions as well does it make sense for the next
generation to be in equities too?


You actually raise a good point, Puts.

You mom should be using a Generation Skipping Trust.  Sounds like the perfect situation for that.  Obviously neither you or your brother need the money.

What did she say when you suggested THAT to her?