Wachos at AGE

or Register to post new content in the forum

40 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.
Jun 2, 2007 9:12 pm

Worried about culture changing? IT ALREADY CHANGED. After Bobby BAGby's move, brokers were talking about what's best for THEM (stay, go, sign or not) not the firm. That's the CHANGE in culture.

AGE brokers stayed because we thought we were the BEST (for our clients).

If we cared about being the 2nd largest ( as Danny and Bobby said), why not go to THE largest (ML)? What a load of crap... Maybe they figure they'll buy Stifel or JEF... and then... haha!!! be THE Largest!!!

The general is rolling in his grave. AGE RIP.

Jun 2, 2007 9:18 pm

BTW, WS charges the brokers $15 NET for each stock trade between $95 and $1,000. Trades less than $95 pay the broker $0 PLUS he pays $15 ticket charge.

Payout is 20% on the first $10,500 each month, and 50% after that.

Jun 2, 2007 9:53 pm
Sedona:

Worried about culture changing? IT ALREADY CHANGED. After Bobby BAGby's move, brokers were talking about what's best for THEM (stay, go, sign or not) not the firm. That's the CHANGE in culture.


The general is rolling in his grave. AGE RIP.



Agreed!

Jun 2, 2007 10:10 pm

Sorry for venting, but they've been working on this for at least the past 6 months (maybe longer, since Wachovia was brought in to "advise" on the Beta system implementation... compatibility anyone?), while all along TELLING US that they would do everything to STAY INDEPENDENT. Cut commissions to stay independent, do more fee-based bus to stay independent, recruiting bonus to attract high producing FCs to stay independednt, ...

Nice move Bobby "2 face" Bagby. All good things must come to an end. Maybe we should have been more aggressive in increasing productivity, maybe we should have done more fee based, too late now.

But Bobby didn't have to go overboard telling us they were doing all they had to do to remain independent. He could have just stayed quiet or better, just lay it like it is:

Guys, we'll do all we can to stay independent, maybe consider merging with a good partner, maybe acquire someone else, but we can't afford a hostile takeover. We need to look at options.

Not too hard.

Jun 2, 2007 10:37 pm

I think it's a done deal.  They'll wave $$ to keep people, sign them, merge, then cut commissions.  Not sure, over a 10 year period, what the total compensation would be going with WS as opposed to staying on their own.  The top producers may be paying for their bonues more than once in lower commission levels over time.


But if you look at the progression of a "stock broker" over the last decade or more, they're moving into more of a money manager role than an actual broker.  If you are managing money, you need all the tools at your disposal in order to do your job and stay competitive.  But that being said, there seems to be a multitude of other options open to provide those tools.  Time will tell.


Maybe AGE culture is stronger than WS? and will ultimately win out?  A person also has to look at the other side of the coin, if the WS advisors weren't that happy they might view this as the light at the end of the tunnel and jump on board with the AGE culture as well.  Or it might end up a place where the traditional AGE culture can prosper along side of the WS culture.  230 offices will be closing though.  Apparently most will merge with other AGE/WS offices in the same areas but if some consultant has a nice office and is then thrown into a cubical, they're not going to be happy.


I'm a newb at AGE so I'm no expert.  But I can't see how this can be good for AGE consultants.  However, that doesn't mean it will be a bad thing either. 

Jun 2, 2007 11:20 pm

A Wachovia broker I spoke with, former PRU of 20 yrs before the merge, said they were very happy that operations were moving to STL, because their ops suck. They're also happy with AGE research.

Problem is, most AGE branch managers are also the biggest producers in their offices. They like being mgr, will they put up with Wachovia's salaried managers if they lose their branches?

Jun 2, 2007 11:56 pm
Sedona:

A Wachovia broker I spoke with, former PRU of 20 yrs
before the merge, said they were very happy that operations were moving
to STL, because their ops suck. They're also happy with AGE research.





AGE research is top notch, if they gut that out, it would be a real loss.




Jun 3, 2007 12:00 am
AllREIT:
Sedona:

A Wachovia broker I spoke with, former PRU of 20 yrs
before the merge, said they were very happy that operations were moving
to STL, because their ops suck. They're also happy with AGE research.





AGE research is top notch, if they gut that out, it would be a real loss.




Agree, they do a good job of coming up with timely ideas as well (hot line trading program based on technicals and with 1-2 month price targets). But there's talk that some operations, such as investment banking, maybe research, would move to Richmond, VA.

Moving to STL was probably a recomendation from a Real Estate broker, since unloading 2.6 million square feet in "abandoned" STL isn't easy. I saw many abandoned building near the AGE beutiful home office.

Jun 3, 2007 1:32 am

WS has a very detailed history of gutting brokerages they buy.  It's how they pay for them.  At AGE there is 1.25 support people for every broker, at WS there is less than 1.  I can't believe they'll somehow change those ratios in this merger.    Lots of jobs are going away.  What are they going to do with all the people who support the WS brokers now when they move support to STL?  Pink slips?  And what are they going to do with all the AGE people after their next merger?  


Here's the link detailing the merger and some numbers:


http://www.wachovia.com/file/WBAGE_Investor_Presentation.pd f

Jun 3, 2007 1:42 am
Sedona:


Problem is, most AGE branch managers are also the biggest producers in their offices. They like being mgr, will they put up with Wachovia's salaried managers if they lose their branches?


The Mgrs who've been wanting out (since the job has totally changed) make try it out, as long as Mr Salary leaves them alone.....the ones who want to stay BOM won't put up with some paper pusher riding their ass.


I'm wondering if the indy arm will be available to us immediately if we turn down retention deals?  Did they let Pru go that way off the bat?

Jun 3, 2007 2:24 am

Their payout grid is easy to get from onwallstreet.com


At my level it's the same payout as before.  The people that get hurt are the sub 300K producers.  So they can waive $$ in my face and make me sign a 6 year forgivable loan and if at the end of 6 years there is too much BS, I will leave.  And I'll leave a lot richer.


They also know that if the sub 300K brokers leave due to no incentive package, that I'll be on the phone helping to call their clients and gaining new assets.




Omirp222:

I think it's a done deal.  They'll wave $$ to keep people, sign them, merge, then cut commissions.  Not sure, over a 10 year period, what the total compensation would be going with WS as opposed to staying on their own.  The top producers may be paying for their bonues more than once in lower commission levels over time.


But if you look at the progression of a "stock broker" over the last decade or more, they're moving into more of a money manager role than an actual broker.  If you are managing money, you need all the tools at your disposal in order to do your job and stay competitive.  But that being said, there seems to be a multitude of other options open to provide those tools.  Time will tell.


Maybe AGE culture is stronger than WS? and will ultimately win out?  A person also has to look at the other side of the coin, if the WS advisors weren't that happy they might view this as the light at the end of the tunnel and jump on board with the AGE culture as well.  Or it might end up a place where the traditional AGE culture can prosper along side of the WS culture.  230 offices will be closing though.  Apparently most will merge with other AGE/WS offices in the same areas but if some consultant has a nice office and is then thrown into a cubical, they're not going to be happy.


I'm a newb at AGE so I'm no expert.  But I can't see how this can be good for AGE consultants.  However, that doesn't mean it will be a bad thing either. 

Jun 3, 2007 9:54 am
Sedona:

BTW, WS charges the brokers $15 NET for each stock trade between $95 and $1,000. Trades less than $95 pay the broker $0 PLUS he pays $15 ticket charge.

Payout is 20% on the first $10,500 each month, and 50% after that.



FTYI


Every firm has a ticket charge. Most just hide it from you.


Jun 3, 2007 11:28 am

They aren't going to finalize the payout grid until 2008.  AGE grid on OWS.com doesn't add in the 401k contributions of the company of 7.5% of gross last year (according to an article released by AGE).  But the WS grid on that site might not include things either, so I don't know a true apples to apples comparision.  Maybe a WS broker can shed some light on this.


I just find it odd they are going to sign everyone and then release the payout grid.  And if this is such a good deal for brokers, why do they even have to have retention packages?  I would think since we can offer car loans now, everyone would want to come to WS. 

Jun 3, 2007 11:45 am
Omirp222:

They aren't going to finalize the payout grid until 2008.  AGE grid on OWS.com doesn't add in the 401k contributions of the company of 7.5% of gross last year (according to an article released by AGE).  But the WS grid on that site might not include things either, so I don't know a true apples to apples comparision.  Maybe a WS broker can shed some light on this.


I just find it odd they are going to sign everyone and then release the payout grid.  And if this is such a good deal for brokers, why do they even have to have retention packages?  I would think since we can offer car loans now, everyone would want to come to WS. 




Most of my clients pay cash for their cars.  Why on earth would I want to offer car loans?

Jun 3, 2007 12:00 pm
Ferris Bueller:
Omirp222:

They aren't going to finalize the payout grid until 2008.  AGE grid on OWS.com doesn't add in the 401k contributions of the company of 7.5% of gross last year (according to an article released by AGE).  But the WS grid on that site might not include things either, so I don't know a true apples to apples comparision.  Maybe a WS broker can shed some light on this.


I just find it odd they are going to sign everyone and then release the payout grid.  And if this is such a good deal for brokers, why do they even have to have retention packages?  I would think since we can offer car loans now, everyone would want to come to WS. 




Most of my clients pay cash for their cars.  Why on earth would I want to offer car loans?




LOL it was a joke.

Jun 3, 2007 12:03 pm

Sorry.  I don't officially have a sense of humor

Jun 3, 2007 12:53 pm
Omirp222:

They aren't going to finalize the payout grid until 2008.  AGE grid on OWS.com doesn't add in the 401k contributions of the company of 7.5% of gross last year (according to an article released by AGE).  But the WS grid on that site might not include things either, so I don't know a true apples to apples comparision.  Maybe a WS broker can shed some light on this.


I just find it odd they are going to sign everyone and then release the payout grid.  And if this is such a good deal for brokers, why do they even have to have retention packages?  I would think since we can offer car loans now, everyone would want to come to WS. 



You just nailed the whole smelly situation...


They are going to march into your region sometimes in the near future & will present you with an offer while at the same time they have also said that the payout structure will definitely change in 2008 all of this....well after your 6yr contract has been signed.  Sounds like a bank deal to me.

Jun 3, 2007 1:31 pm

As I understand it the offers will be forgivable loans with a 6 year period.  So if in 3 years it's not working out, you keep 1/2 and give the other 1/2 back.  Then take a larger check to move.  Win Win.

Jun 3, 2007 1:37 pm

I can't quote fact, because I haven't seen my offer but I have talked to a branch manager at WS who is a buddy, & he tells me that in past acquisitions the offer has a little paragraph which makes your clients "their" clients. This "non compete" is for the duration of the 6yr deal.


Why would you sign a contract where non exists right now?

Jun 3, 2007 1:47 pm

because that paragraph doesnt work.  It's been proven in many arbitration cases that they can not enforce those clauses.  If I leave, a client is free to do whatever they want.


And even if I did care about it, so I wait out the 6 years and keep my check.  I have plenty of time to get my clients for the jump and then I take a bigger check or go indy.