WS/WFC Layoffs?

or Register to post new content in the forum

17 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.
Dec 1, 2008 8:30 pm

Does anyone think there will be layoffs of brokers when the merger is complete? Concerned about business hitting wall....LOS 4 years with TT 130M, market has obviously paused growth. Do you think WFC will be laying brokers off?

Dec 1, 2008 8:41 pm
ChurnNBurn:

Does anyone think there will be layoffs of brokers when the merger is complete? Concerned about business hitting wall....LOS 4 years with TT 130M, market has obviously paused growth. Do you think WFC will be laying brokers off?

 
NO Chance for 2009, they need to keep headcount up and WB/AGE calling the shots.  Typical guy at AGE is about 225/250K T-12.  Next year if market stays here lots of guys doing well under 200K, when that happens 2010 might be a ???.  AGE guys guaranteed a 35% payout next year even if they do 120K this year, which would be 20% payout for WB guys.  So that tells you 120K and over actually get a 15% year end bonus at WB/AGE for 2009.  Other than feeding your family would not worry for awhile.
Dec 1, 2008 8:48 pm

I know a lot of guys in my office with LOS 10+ who will not hit the minimums of 275M, will WS and WFC look the other way due to the extraordinary circumstances of the last year?

Dec 1, 2008 8:54 pm
ChurnNBurn:

I know a lot of guys in my office with LOS 10+ who will not hit the minimums of 275M, will WS and WFC look the other way due to the extraordinary circumstances of the last year?

 
thats the hot topic in the office.. hard to say, what do you mean "hit the minimums?"
Dec 1, 2008 8:57 pm

From my understanding, brokers with LOS 10+ are required to do 275 TT, as do brokers in the training programs. by "hit the minimums", do you think they will look the other way this year and maybe next when their production falls below that level?

Dec 1, 2008 8:59 pm
ChurnNBurn:

From my understanding, brokers with LOS 10+ are required to do 275 TT, as do brokers in the training programs. by "hit the minimums", do you think they will look the other way this year and maybe next when their production falls below that level?

 
No such thing as LOS 10+ 275k. at WS.  We would have 1/2 the office gone long ago.
Dec 1, 2008 9:14 pm

[/quote]

 
No such thing as LOS 10+ 275k. at WS.  We would have 1/2 the office gone long ago.[/quote]

We have 75 in our major market and excluding LOS<2 in the training program we only have
4 FA's under $300k. Looks like your office needs some fresh blood.
Dec 1, 2008 9:24 pm
fritz:
ChurnNBurn:

From my understanding, brokers with LOS 10+ are required to do 275 TT, as do brokers in the training programs. by "hit the minimums", do you think they will look the other way this year and maybe next when their production falls below that level?

 
No such thing as LOS 10+ 275k. at WS.  We would have 1/2 the office gone long ago.
 
We just hired two guys from Smith Barney doing about 250K each..and some how they got north of 100% total deal.. they are 6 and 8 years LOS.  We had 7 empty seats before those two.  From what I understand 3500 Reps doing between 200K and 250K on T-12 basis, that you can easily confirm.
Dec 3, 2008 11:35 am
 
We just hired two guys from Smith Barney doing about 250K each..and some how they got north of 100% total deal.. they are 6 and 8 years LOS.  We had 7 empty seats before those two.  From what I understand 3500 Reps doing between 200K and 250K on T-12 basis, that you can easily confirm.[/quote]
 
Amen, take out the guys or gals who are recruited into their father's/grandfather's/uncle's/father-in-law's (etc.) team, or who bought a book and I only see about 1 in 10 over 300K by year 5.  Does anybody see anything different?
 
and watch what happens to the fees come january.  remember, we're still getting paid fees from Oct 1 asset levels. 
Dec 3, 2008 5:11 pm

Office Econ 101- The offfice has fixed costs they have to pay them with or without you. The less you make the higher percentage they take. Anybody ever heard of a firm actually booting brokers as a general rule for lower production other than MS and the Dean Whitter debacle? It just doesnt make sense. They will want you to think so as motivation for more production. At the end of the day ITA ALL ABOUT HEAD COUNT and this business has negative broker growth.

Dec 3, 2008 6:45 pm

if anything the firm is hiring as many as they can. Only guys I think need to worry are ISG or similar bank FA programs ( I dont know any that compare to Wach) as they are looking to get down to one man per branch. This could make things rough for many in that channel. I would expect a cavalcade of wirehouse refugees looking for a spot in ISG or other similar bank programs over the next couple of months and room will be made for them. 

Dec 3, 2008 8:45 pm

Why would anyone jump to our sinking ship from another wirehouse?

Dec 3, 2008 9:15 pm

Because of the built in referral system. Frankly, if your going to leave a wirehouse you may as well go to another wirehouse and get your 100 to 200% signing bonus. Even 250/300k guys are getting the 100% +. I cant imagine ISG is paying anymore than 50% (I have no idea for certain). Yeah there are referrals, but there are a lot of moving parts and relationships that must be cultivated and maintained for it to all work smoothly. And right now even the referrals have dried up as cust are in no hurry to invest in anything and the "partners" are in no hurry to refer and wind up having an unhappy bank cust. At this point I cant blame them. 

Dec 3, 2008 9:25 pm

I take it you are legacy Wachovia....us AGE guys know what life on the outside is like and this clusterfuck is certainly not it...just gets worse daily.

Dec 3, 2008 9:43 pm

I'm curious to know what the AGE biggest complaint is re the merger other than the obvious meltdown/buy out of the Wach and bad pr that resulted. Needless to say thats bad enough, but whats the other issues.

Dec 3, 2008 9:51 pm
3rd ID:

I'm curious to know what the AGE biggest complaint is re the merger other than the obvious meltdown/buy out of the Wach and bad pr that resulted. Needless to say thats bad enough, but whats the other issues.



What isnt there to complain about lol!
Poor service from home office depts..had great service, no voicemail nonsense when it was AGE!
The new sucky payout plan...less % that I was making at AGE
All the new client fees coming that AGE didnt have
Worse research then we had at AGE
Less communication then we had at AGE
I see more corp bullshit, higher fees, lower payout...nothing better for clients or brokers...scale and scope my ass.
WHo knows if WFC will make this worse or better, but the setup WS has plain sucks IMO...on many levels.
Everything went from simple to more layers of BS...we hired a new FC in our office and no one can even tell us who we need to talk to in order to get the workstation setup lol!
AT AGE one call and it would have been done.
I feel like we are going backward into the dark ages on soooo many levels...

Oh yeah and the small issue of going from one of the most ethical and best respected names on teh street to a laughing stock that the Wachovia name is/was

Dec 3, 2008 10:17 pm

Well, I guess we are all going into the tumbler together this time and where we wind up who knows? Frankly, I have been happy at Wachovia. But change is tough when your used to the way things were, especially when they worked well. So I can understand your frustration. I'm dealing with some changes nowand they are disappointing and frustrating. Somehow we'll make it through.