Move my money to Goldman Sachs?

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.
Feb 17, 2008 11:44 pm
Have you guys read this brief article on RegRep homepage? What!?!I like the magazine, read it monthly, save lot's of articles for future reference, but what the hell do they mean by this???
How many clients have CALLED YOU and asked why they shouldn't move their accounts to GS?

Answer 1: Because you don't have $5 million+ investable.
Answer 2: If they wanted you, they'd call.
Answer 3: Maybe you should.

I doubt many FA's had 2 clients + ask that question... For those working at "writedonw" firms (Citi SB, ML, MS, UBS, etc) any thoughts???


Retail Financial Advisors’ Refrain: Let’s Kill The Traders


Brokers are bitter—and for good reason. Since the sub-prime slaughter
began this summer, many of those at Merrill Lynch, Smith Barney, Morgan
Stanley and the other wirehouse firms, have seen their net worth, tied
up largely in deferred stock, cut by a third or more. They’ve had to
endure panicky phone calls from clients (“Tell me why I shouldn’t move
my money to Goldman Sachs”), and while they were calculating acceptable
risk/return for those clients, their own firms were letting it ride on
packages of loans to people with either horrendous, or non-existent,
credit histories. Much of the vitriol is aimed at the traders: “The
traders do this every few years or so, and we [the retail brokerage
unit] bail them out,” grouses one wirehouse financial advisor we know

Feb 18, 2008 9:32 am

I think they were just using GS as an example.  I don't think it meant specifically JUST GS.  I may have interpreted it wrong, but I was reading it as "why shouldn't I move my money to an upper-eschelon investment bank (versus the wirehouse they are at) that didn't get wrapped up in the mortgage meltdown..."

 
Also, I think the writer is referring to the wealthier set, not the retiree with $1.5mm in his rollover IRA.
 
Again, just the way I read it.
Feb 18, 2008 11:28 am

If you work with AssetMark's fee-based asset management platform, you can just say "okay, sign here."

 
www.AssetMark.com
Feb 18, 2008 9:19 pm

Maybe my clients aren't "sophisticated" enough, but writedowns are the last thing on their mind (unless they own stock in one of the companies in question). Sedona, I am with you---I think RR is off on this one.

Feb 18, 2008 11:23 pm

It doesn't just go in the direction of the white shoe i-banks not involved in write downs but also the discounters who just don't play in non-transactional areas. (An IRA affiliated with TD Ameritrade or Schwab, for example.) E*Trade apparently lost billions in client assets to full service firms and other discounters due to the perceived instability associated with their mortgage activity. Also, last time I spoke to an employee in 2005, GS had a minimum of 2MM per customer or "household." Could be more now.

Feb 19, 2008 10:04 am

you have to admit, Goldman hit the nail on the head with the subprime/housing issue. most other firms were the actual fuel of the bubble--by buying up these garbage CDOs

Feb 19, 2008 10:00 pm
Broker24:

I think they were just using GS as an example.  I don't think it meant specifically JUST GS.  I may have interpreted it wrong, but I was reading it as "why shouldn't I move my money to an upper-eschelon investment bank (versus the wirehouse they are at) that didn't get wrapped up in the mortgage meltdown..."

 
Also, I think the writer is referring to the wealthier set, not the retiree with $1.5mm in his rollover IRA.
 
Again, just the way I read it.



Please, name one "upper-eschelon investment bank" without writedows AND a retail brokerage force. JPM is out - no retail to speak of.

Feb 19, 2008 10:01 pm
josephjones107:

you have to admit, Goldman hit the nail on the head with the subprime/housing issue. most other firms were the actual fuel of the bubble--by buying up these garbage CDOs



I agree they did a good job of HEDGING their LONG CDO positions creating a NET NEGATIVE exposure.

Really great was JPM with NO/Minimal exposure.

Feb 19, 2008 10:04 pm
skippy:

If you work with AssetMark's fee-based asset management platform, you can just say "okay, sign here."

 
www.AssetMark.com



So a client of yours calls you and you ask him to sign something???