Hats off to you COWBOY- Sorry Focker- the real truth was Fidelity was approached by someone at Jones who had this really good idea that since Jones had this wonderful sales force selling their funds, maybe they would like to  pay a little somthin' somthin' on the side? Fidelity said screw you and split with clients... American Funds met with Ted Jones in person and they ate that famous sandwhich out his brown bag lunch that Mrs. Jones would pack every day and the deal was sealed... because up until then Jones wouldn't sell American. Now -NEXT CHALLENGE- Who was the 'Architect of Revenue Sharing' and what did it get him?

Oh Oh Oh Oh teacher! I know teacher! I know! I’m raising my hand the highest…oh oh oh pick me! Was it little “Dougie Hill” from down the lane?

No, I think it might have been that wolf in sheep’s clothing–the power-hungry despot himself–John Bachmann.

Sooth has done his homework… I still don’t get why you guys get all worked up over .03%. If we offered wrap accts at 1% for all of our fund clients, you tell me which would make us more money. Never mind the fact, that the other major brokerages do both…

.03% seems like a small price to pay for your product being peddled by the “Best Sales Force in the World”.  You can’t blame American Funds.

I know for a fact is was Doug Hill who made the rev sharing deals.  Sloop used to collect the checks, I once saw him bragging with one in his hand from one of the "lucky 7".

[quote=babbling looney]

More to the point on diversity. 

The danger not only to the client but to the broker of having 70% of his/her book in one mutual fund family can't be overstated.  Remember Putnam??? anyone?  When a mutual fund family "blows up" and you have everyone in it, you are going to have many unhappy clients all at once.  Just because American Funds hasn't blown up on us, and I agree it has been very good for my clients, doesn't mean it won't.

This is one of the major advantages of being able to offer wrap accounts or fee accounts.  You can offer the best funds from many different fund families without being handcuffed to one family for breakpoints (as mandated by our current rules).

Muny: Now you’re talkin’. Appears you have been around long enough to know of the “legends” of Ted. He useta sell Puritan fund as a “route” broker covering small towns up and down the Miss. river. According to “legend”, how many miles did he have on his Mercedes diesel?

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=babbling looney]

More to the point on diversity. 

The danger not only to the client but to the broker of having 70% of his/her book in one mutual fund family can't be overstated.  Remember Putnam??? anyone?  When a mutual fund family "blows up" and you have everyone in it, you are going to have many unhappy clients all at once.  Just because American Funds hasn't blown up on us, and I agree it has been very good for my clients, doesn't mean it won't.

This is one of the major advantages of being able to offer wrap accounts or fee accounts.  You can offer the best funds from many different fund families without being handcuffed to one family for breakpoints (as mandated by our current rules).

[/quote]

It's not just a different pricing structure.  (I used to think that, and made the conversion because, as you said, I thought it would be nice to make 1% on my book.)  I've learned first hand that it is also a completely different way of thinking and building portfolios.

Maybe some day if you move to a real investment management platform you'll understand.
[/quote]

I think you are responding to the wrong person.  Perhaps you meant the Hulk? 

I agree it isn't just a different pricing structure when you are fee based or using wrap accounts.  It is the ability to better structure your client's portfolios if without all the restrictions of mutual fund A share rules and the perception that commissions are driving the activity. 

While I am not there yet, still studying for the 65 , I am eagerly anticipating the transition. Not just for the fee based income, but more because I can really get in there and restructure clients portfolios when needed. 

Am I wrong in thinking that this is the greater advantage not just to me but to my clients?  Serious question.

[/quote]

Am I wrong in thinking that this is the greater advantage not just to me but to my clients? Serious question.

AND THE WINNERS ARE: Tossthekoolaid and Devoted SA- BUT you each on answered HALF the question. It was DOUG HILL who thunk the whole thing up- what did it get him? Managing Partner crown for a year - then out on his can after the NASD looked under the hood. If Jones ‘didn’t do anything different than anyone else’ then why were they the only firm required to present a head on a platter? HHMMMM- kinda makes you wonder…

Hulk- you are way off base- John Bachmann was not the presenter of Revenue sharing… Sorry to you sooth- but jump over to Jones Secrets Revealed for a little tidbit on the great Mr. Bachmann… if you dare

Revealer- I guess I have been around. Now I don’t know the exact miles but I do know the TNT Brokers put on 150 miles a day 3-4 days a week… close enough? Here’s one for you- what was the name of Ted’s favorite horse?

Muny…I like your stories better than the boring old…“brown bag sandwich”…“Ed Jones Sr Cigar story”…“threadbare suits worn by bachmann” Yours are much more exciting.

BTW...was it Chester?

Muny: “Talk” to me about one of the original jones scandals, namely, perhaps a 20 yr. ago article in Forbes titled “Jonestown”. Article described how the GPs @ jones were allowed to bail on a Petro-Lewis (name from the past) partnership while jones left their customers holding the bag. (NOT the “most ethical” thing to do,ya’know). I’d really like to have a copy of that article. This jones s**t isn’t anything new. 

Munytalks: According to “legend” poor ole Ted had 800,000 miles on his MB diesel. Was soooooo frugal that he preached his frugality to the troops and customers.

Billy boy just totes the company line.  Beyond that he seems to have almost no original thought. 

Zacko just totoes the Indy company line. Beyond that he seems to have almost no original thought. Or humor. Or charm. But boy oh boy, he makes a lot of money, as he unfailingly reminds us. Oh, and he's much happier now and...lets see, Jones is going bankrupt...and...those damn GP's!! What was that about original thought?

"Zacko just totoes the Indy company line"

One of the funniest things I've read lately...I guess no one took the time to explain to focker that indy (notice lower case i) is short for independent.  Perhaps we also need to explain that independent means he doesn't have a Company line.  Also, perhaps a 3rd grade lesson on possessive vs. plural is in order ("...damn GP's" meaning to represent multiple general partners).