Retention
76 RepliesJump to last post
Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work.ws,
You are completely and utterly wrong. There are very few trade offs. Any one who thinks so is just stupid.[quote=WSxAG]Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work. [/quote]You still seem to be missing my point, so I'll have to be blunt.
Your lousy results are caused by your poor business decisions, not by independence. If you should be warning people against anything, it should be against making the mistake you made of spending money in the hopes of generating revenue, and insisting on building a "gorgeous" office for people you hoped to recruit, while you now admit you can't recruit those people because you can't compete against the wirehouses you hoped to compete with.
You have embraced one strategy and it has proven to be a flawed one. But you accept no responsibility for your actions, and instead blame everything and everyone else around you, including those like myself who point out this obvious fact to you.
If it makes you feel better to blame independence itself or question anyone's allocation of time to this forum, go ahead and add it and me to your long list of reasons why you can't be blamed for such poor financial results. Or maybe you should go to Washington seeking a bailout.
Just don't dare looking in the mirror, or who knows what you might find.
Now I need to finish my coffee before heading in to my ordinary but highly profitable office to go to work.
I believe we have found our next Kool-Aid candidates - they have graduated from EDJ to the indie side. In addition they are the only brokers whose business plan is flawless and are completely unaffected by the worst economy and market since the Great Depression. I don’t know why they are working at all. They are apparently so galactically brilliant that they should have been financially independent years ago. Tried to offer a counter-balance to overwhelming indie bias on these posts. As for looking in the mirror - the last riposte of the bitter and cynically minded. As for your advice - wasn’t looking any was simply pointing out some of the pitfalls of the “Hybrid” model, and company specific issues. I know dozens of FCs who have met similar challenges.
End of thread -[quote=WSxAG]Uh, I believe that was the point of my original post.
Was simply trying to alert those who think there is fantasyland of complete autonomy and 90% payouts that there is a trade-off - lots and lots of trade offs. Not sure why you're so sensitive. However, I'm glad you've reached a level of success that has freed up your time for nearly 800 posts on this forum. Me, I have to go back to work. [/quote]Indeed there are plenty of tradeoffs.
Show me where any experienced and reputable indy poster on this board has implied that you can expect a NET of 90%, or that everything is perfect.
You make your choices, and then you have to live with the results. When you are indy, you have more choices to make, and as such you can have a greater positive(or negative) impact on your bottom line.
I have a nice office that I spend good money to build out. I have extra office space that I'm hoping to fill with other advisors. But, right now it's empty and I'm paying for it....though I'm still plenty profitable. Nonetheless, it's dead weight and I'd like to change that.
But I'm not bitching and whining. That space isn't full because I haven't put enough effort into recruiting other advisors. People aren't just going to magically come to it because I've built the space. It doesn't work that way. This is no 'field of dreams'. It's up to me to make calls, network, send letters, have lunches and dinners, play golf with other advisors, etc. At some point I'll start finding some folks who want to enjoy the flexibility(and greater payout) of independence without the hassle and expense of becoming an OSJ and building out a physical office space.
What we're talking about here is no different than the folks we all know in this business who bitch and moan that their book isn't big enough and they don't have enough new clients coming in, but when you dig beneath the surface you find that they simply aren't doign enough to bring in new business.
In my experience the autonomy is pretty super...largely complete as long as you follow the compliance rules at your b/d. The payout is darn nice too.
Good luck to you.
[quote=WSxAG]I believe we have found our next Kool-Aid candidates - they have graduated from EDJ to the indie side. In addition they are the only brokers whose business plan is flawless and are completely unaffected by the worst economy and market since the Great Depression. I don’t know why they are working at all. They are apparently so galactically brilliant that they should have been financially independent years ago. Tried to offer a counter-balance to overwhelming indie bias on these posts. As for looking in the mirror - the last riposte of the bitter and cynically minded. As for your advice - wasn’t looking any was simply pointing out some of the pitfalls of the “Hybrid” model, and company specific issues. I know dozens of FCs who have met similar challenges.
End of thread -[/quote]Your attitude is so crappy right now that you'd be struggling no matter where you were. Your negativity is "platform agnostic".
No doubt it is challenging, but the successful advisors on ANY platform don't get caught up in the negativity. They make an objective realistic assessment of the situation, look for opportunities that have been created for themselves and their clients, and then they take action.
Ferris - sorry for the hijack. I honestly didn't read the topic before firing off a couple of posts. Bad form.
Thanks for bringing a bit of sanity and civility back to this post.
The point of my original post was the following; I have been a successful recruiter in the past. I work hard at it, and there are a lot of candidates. What I did not expect is that I would end up competing against my own firm for the same recruits. The glaring flaw in the RJ hybrid model is that as part of the RJA side of the biz, the RJFS (fully indie) directly competes with me for recruits. I have one candidate that has expressly told them the she is already talking with us - didn't matter they keep dripping on her, creating confusion. On the other side of the coin, the traditional side talks to the same recruits and has transition $$ to offer. We recently had a case where a group of FCs were recruited to the Hybrid platform, "Advisor Select", only to get snatched away at the last minute by the traditional side - with no communication between the platforms. (Led to the recriuter leaving the firm, by the way.) The autonomy is definitely a plus - the key reason I opted for this platform. I don't mind competeing for recruits with other firms- compare and contrast is always a good thing, but when its your own firm - gets a little sticky. No whining here. Knew full well what I was opting for, and have no regrets leaving the mess that has become of AGE/WACH/WFC. Just wish others would have held up their end of the bargain. Lets just say the courtship was better than the marriage, but here I am and now I have to make the best of it. On a seperate note - is it just me, or doe sthe market collapse every time Paulsen opens his mouth ?Fair point about the highjacking, although FTR we were simply responding to WSxAG who added the original highjack post. Hard to let such blanket criticism of an entire platform go unchallenged. Interesting to note in his latest contribution he now wants to hijack his hijack so he can blame Paulsen for the market's woes. Besides, Ferris, I know you love this talk and secretly fantasize about buying paper in bulk. You can't fool me!I don’t understand why the Indy folks always need to hijack the retention/WB/ML threads. We don’t go over to their threads to discuss payroll, bulk paper buying, employment laws, electric bills, and the paying of rent.
It was a simple question - a rumination perhaps. Wasn’t blaming anything or anyone for anything. Perhaps you should stop looking for the negative in EVERYTHING and perhaps just enjoy the varied viewpoints that exist in this forum. As for hi-jacking, I apparently didn’t receive my RR Forum protocol guidebook - no worries - simply confirms that most (not all) of this forum is an utter waste of time.
Yeah. Now it’s the Forum. Certainly there is no possibility that YOU could ever actually responsible for anything that happens.
Okay- it’s all yours. You are the MASTER of THE RR ADVISORLAND BB.
By the way - whether you're refering to the Greek God of Dreams or the delusional character in The Matrix films - it's Morpheus.[quote=WSxAG]Okay- it’s all yours. You are the MASTER of THE RR ADVISORLAND BB.
By the way - whether you're refering to the Greek God of Dreams or the delusional character in The Matrix films - it's Morpheus.[/quote]Wow. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. No doubt that seemed like an enormous discovery to you.