Worst Thing You've Seen By Another Broker

This guy came in the other day had an Edward Jones account, he came in saying he just bought all these funds last year and now his Eddie Jones guy is wanting him to get into some different funds.  So, I take a look at his statement (classic Ed Jones style) this guy has $400,000 in 4 different American Fund A-shares(classic Ed Jones).  I run the cusip on them and all of the top 10 holdings are exactly the same and the weights are the same.  On top of being anti-diversified the guy was hit with a 5.35% up-front and now his broker wants to pull them out a year later and hit him up for another front-load.  I quickly got the ACAT and explained to him what was going on.  How are these guys still in business???

Have a client who has a pooled profit sharing plan.  The part I manage is in funds, etf, stocks, bonds  and a cash account, all with liquidity since at any time they may have to take some of the pooled funds for retiring employees.  They have about 20 employees

Their other broker (before he disappeared) put over 750k (about half of their total plan) into two equity indexed annuities that have to be annuitized to get the money out of the contracts, using the owners as the annuitants and the PS Plan as owner and beneficary.  A totally inappropriate product for a POOLED PROFIT SHARING PLAN.  Pocketing a cool 10 to 12 % commission by the way. 

Now that the contracts have reached the end of the surrender period we have annuitized over a 10 year period so they can transfer the money from the annuity to their brokerage account where we can invest at a better return and have the necessary liquidity.

Needless to say the customers were p/o ed when they found out that they had given up access to the money that didn't really even belong to them.

wallstreeter-in my area of the country, I would say 50% of all IRA’s I see are annuities.  Pretty sorry, but I see it all the time.  I have seen some ROTH annuities lately as well.

[quote=wallstreeter]

This could be interesting!

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

What are the worst things you have seen done by another broker?

[/quote]

First, he's not your client. Second, you're pissed that you can't play with his money. Did you really think that noone would see through your bullsh*t?

Worst thing was done by a guy in my office.  Client had all B shares from various families, about 1-2 years old.  Guy sells all B shares, client pays the CDSC, and then puts him into C shares so he can annuitize his business.

[quote=BullBroker]This guy came in the other day had an Edward Jones account, he came in saying he just bought all these funds last year and now his Eddie Jones guy is wanting him to get into some different funds.  So, I take a look at his statement (classic Ed Jones style) this guy has $400,000 in 4 different American Fund A-shares(classic Ed Jones).  I run the cusip on them and all of the top 10 holdings are exactly the same and the weights are the same.  On top of being anti-diversified the guy was hit with a 5.35% up-front and now his broker wants to pull them out a year later and hit him up for another front-load.  I quickly got the ACAT and explained to him what was going on.  How are these guys still in business?????????[/quote]

Care to name the 4 funds so we can see if you're lying? Did you lie to the guy about only paying 2.5% up front? What are YOU going to do? Churn him out of the funds? Add a fee to what he already owns?

I think THIS may be the worst thing I've ever seen someone do to a client!

Gotta agree with BH on this one.  American funds are pretty good about overlap.  There is a nice overlap chart they put out and I think the worst two funds have a 34% overlap.  Some have 1-2% overlap.

I think BullBroker is fibbing.

Worse thing I see is what clients do to themselves without broker's help.

[quote=Dust Bunny]

Have a client who has a pooled profit sharing plan.  The part I manage is in funds, etf, stocks, bonds  and a cash account, all with liquidity since at any time they may have to take some of the pooled funds for retiring employees.  They have about 20 employees

Their other broker (before he disappeared) put over 750k (about half of their total plan) into two equity indexed annuities that have to be annuitized to get the money out of the contracts, using the owners as the annuitants and the PS Plan as owner and beneficary.  A totally inappropriate product for a POOLED PROFIT SHARING PLAN.  Pocketing a cool 10 to 12 % commission by the way. 

Now that the contracts have reached the end of the surrender period we have annuitized over a 10 year period so they can transfer the money from the annuity to their brokerage account where we can invest at a better return and have the necessary liquidity.

Needless to say the customers were p/o ed when they found out that they had given up access to the money that didn't really even belong to them.

[/quote]

YOu probably screwed them up Babs. Annuities that have forced annuitization don't have surrender periods. Which one are you lying about? Annuitization or the 10 year surrender period. Duh, nice job.

I'll tell you what I just did.  This old lady had a house fully paid for, worth about $250,000

I sold her a reverse mortgage.

Then I took the proceeds and put it in an 18 year Equity Index annuity.

We're taking out about 5% per year for her to lease a brand new Lexus.

She's taking another 3% to pay for dues at the local country club for her junky grandson who is unemployed.

You guys think this is okay?

Seriously - do they do worse without us? - As in bad mistakes. Or do they fair worse with Free Lunch?

At least with bad brokers they seem to figure out they made a poor choice.

I was kidding.  I don’t think it could get much worse than that.

[quote=wallstreeter]Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product. Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.[/quote]

If this is the worst thing you've ever seen a broker do, then you must not have been in the business long . 

[quote=BullBroker]I take a look at his statement, this guy has $400,000 in 4 different American Fund A-shares....the guy was hit with a 5.35% up-front... [/quote]  You do understand that A shares in one fund family, assuming mutual funds are the appropriate investment, would be the absolutely correct thing for the client with that amount to invest? 

If the investment was made a year ago, there is not a firm in the US where the client wouldn't have received the breakpoint automatically, Eddie Jones or no.  Just checked, the client only paid 2.5% on that amount invested. 

[quote=BullBroker] I run the cusip on them and all of the top 10 holdings are exactly the same and the weights are the same.[/quote]  How about sharing the names of these 4 funds?  Sure American has a lot of overlap, but I'm guessing you WAY overstated.

[quote=BullBroker]How are these guys still in business?????????[/quote]  That's what I'm wondering about you after I read this post.  Care to enlighten us as to the swell advice you gave him after the ACAT?

[quote=FreeLunch]

I'll tell you what I just did.  This old lady had a house fully paid for, worth about $250,000

I sold her a reverse mortgage.

Then I took the proceeds and put it in an 18 year Equity Index annuity.

We're taking out about 5% per year for her to lease a brand new Lexus.

She's taking another 3% to pay for dues at the local country club for her junky grandson who is unemployed.

You guys think this is okay?

[/quote]

You pretty much HAD to do that with your trailing 12 in the shambles that it is. Do whatever you have to do to keep Wachovia from tossing you out when they find out about you. They don't play with guys like you, unlike A.G. Edwards.

That was a good one Bobby. 

Go sell some proprietary Annuities to some unsuspecting victims. 

And I'm just wondering, w.t.f do you do visiting the Rookie & Trainee sections anyway?  You aren't a rookie and you never offer advice....

U R A loser

I wrote that simply to see what you would say.  I love provoking your silly uneducated repetitive unconstructive criticism.  I can't wait to do some more.

[quote=Ferris Bueller]

Gotta agree with BH on this one.  American funds are pretty good about overlap.  There is a nice overlap chart they put out and I think the worst two funds have a 34% overlap.  Some have 1-2% overlap.

I think BullBroker is fibbing.

I've never understood why overlap is a bad thing.

If two of your funds are overweight, say.....MO

What does that say about MO?  Or GOOG?

I mean, hell...If those are "the best" stocks in the opinion of the managers, let them run with it..

I know PLENTY of you disagree with me on this one, but even with a HUGE overlap you'll still never be overweight any 1 stock too much.

[quote=joedabrkr]

He’s not fibbing Ferris.  He’s a newb
who doesn’t realize just how ignorant he is.  I mean, how else can
you explain someone who doesn’t understand that if you’re buying
A-shares you have an ethical obligation to emphasize one fund family to
get breakpoints?
[/quote]



Stuff I’ve seen that was bad.

[quote=FreeLunch]

I’ve never understood why overlap is a bad thing.

If two of your funds are overweight, say.....MO

[quote=AllREIT]



4) B-shares!, which give you the 1% kickback of C-shares, and if you lose the client you get an bonus from the exit fee.



[/quote]

What are you talking about?  I’ve never seen b-shares that pay the CDSC to the adviser, much less a 1% trail.

Yeah, I agree.

That's a good point.  For the most part, when building a diversified mutual fund portfolio, if you do it in the right way there will generally be hardly any overlap.

But if I am using two international funds, and both of them have 2% in Weyerhauser, and 2% in Roche Holdings, I'm not alarmed.  And neither would you be probably....  But if they are looking the same across the board it wouldn't make sense.

but you're right...I have seen some overlap in some of my portfolios, but I have still never seen any individual stock carry more than a 3% weighting.. but overlap is not top of the priority list, maybe it should be...

Since I am a "newbie" and you all think I to stupid to be in the business please explain this to me.  BREAKPOINT or no breakpoint what kind of an advisor sticks someone in all A-shares and one year later wants to sell them and put them in more A=shares???  Maybe an Indy would do that, I don't know.  Maybe you guys think that is the right thing to do with the client.  Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed. 

As far as the American funds, um it takes maybe 35 seconds to go to their website and look at top holdings and wieghts.  Look at the Income fund, investment company of america, the income builder, for examples.  So I am assuming none of you have bought into the theory of DIVERSIFICATION.  Good luck to all of you if the market turns down. 

Bobby Hull is truly the MOST worthless/ignorant person I have ever even come in contact with.  Did you even have parents did they teach you anything about life????

You people do understand that when you by an A-share it takes the client x amount of YEARS to recover to the point where they break even.  Do they teach that to you at the "shopping center" INDY branches??????  Sounds like LPL needs to go out and train their advisors. 

[quote=FreeLunch]but you’re right…I have seen some overlap in some of
my portfolios, but I have still never seen any individual stock carry
more than a 3% weighting… but overlap is not top of the priority list,
maybe it should be…[/quote]



Overlap is the natural result of having funds with the same investment
style, and or same investment management. I’m reminded of one client I
saw with 5 different growth funds.



“I wanted to diversify.”

[quote=BullBroker]Since I am a “newbie” and you all think I to stupid to be in the business please explain this to me.  You should quit digging the hole…you’re looking dumber by the minute.  BREAKPOINT or no breakpoint what kind of an advisor sticks someone in all A-shares and one year later wants to sell them and put them in more A=shares???  Maybe an Indy would do that, I don’t know.  You’re right…you don’t know.  Pot shots at indies don’t make you look any smarter, either  Maybe you guys think that is the right thing to do with the client.  Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed.  If you’d made this point and shut up, you’d have been much better off.

As far as the American funds, um it takes maybe 35 seconds to go to their website and look at top holdings and wieghts.  Look at the Income fund, investment company of america, the income builder, for examples.  I did look, brainless.  I didn't see anything even close to "all of the top 10 holdings are exactly the same and the weights are the same"  Your reading comprehension sucks to say the least.  So I am assuming none of you have bought into the theory of DIVERSIFICATION.  Good luck to all of you if the market turns down. I think it did that from 2000 to 2002...take a look how Capital Income Builder and Income Fund of America did those three years.  Keep digging, idiot. 

Bobby Hull is truly the MOST worthless/ignorant person I have ever even come in contact with.  Did you even have parents did they teach you anything about life????  The sad thing is, intellectually, he's running rings around you and you don't have the IQ to see it.

You people do understand that when you by an A-share it takes the client x amount of YEARS to recover to the point where they break even.  This statement is incredibly stupid.  At a breakpoint of 2.5%, if the fund averages 10% (and all the funds you reference average more than that), it takes exactly three months to break even.  Do they teach that to you at the "shopping center" INDY branches??????  You're breaking my heart...Sounds like LPL needs to go out and train their advisors.  You'd be screened out.  LPL won't take an advisor who's so ignorant about basic fundamentals.  Where'd you pull that 5.35% number from...your @ss?!![/quote]

You know, if you'd had the good sense to focus on the fact that swapping A-share mutual funds after only one year and left it at that, we could have agreed with you.  Instead you kept talking and disgraced Mother Merrill...how on earth did you make it through the screening?!!

You'd best quit posting and start reading and learning about this business before you fail out.  You don't even know what you don't know at this point.  (hint: look at Blarmston's posts if you want to see what a young intelligent advisor looks like...he's not posting sh*t like you are.)

[quote=BullBroker]

Since I am a “newbie” and you all think I to stupid to be in the business please explain this to me.  BREAKPOINT or no breakpoint what kind of an advisor sticks someone in all A-shares and one year later wants to sell them and put them in more A=shares???  Maybe an Indy would do that, I don’t know.  Maybe you guys think that is the right thing to do with the client.  Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed. 

As far as the American funds, um it takes maybe 35 seconds to go to their website and look at top holdings and wieghts.  Look at the Income fund, investment company of america, the income builder, for examples.  So I am assuming none of you have bought into the theory of DIVERSIFICATION.  Good luck to all of you if the market turns down. 

Bobby Hull is truly the MOST worthless/ignorant person I have ever even come in contact with.  Did you even have parents did they teach you anything about life????

You people do understand that when you by an A-share it takes the client x amount of YEARS to recover to the point where they break even.  Do they teach that to you at the "shopping center" INDY branches??????  Sounds like LPL needs to go out and train their advisors. 

LOL  Indy great minds thinks alike?

Now....back to stories of the worst we've ever seen. 

I left the wirehouse to go indy in Dec. '99.  Had a client, single guy who had been early retired due to disability (just a regular joe -- not high paid), 100k in his whole life savings (plus a paid-for house).  Had never invested in stocks or stock mutual funds and had no interest in doing so.  Was comfortable on his retirement & didn't need any income from the portfolio at that time -- due to the early retirement, he likely will at some point.  I had him in a bond/CD ladder, little bit in bond mutual funds and a fixed annuity.  I leave and he's too nervous to follow (likes the corporate shell) -- he knows one of the brokers in the office from Rotary or something.

He walks into my office October 2002, hands me a statement and says "Is there anything you can do to help me?"  What had been $100k 3 years before was now worth $40k. 

When this broker took over the account (remember this was Dec '99 or Jan '00), he said he could do much better for this guy -- put him into UITs invested in: Internet stocks, wireless stocks, telecom stocks, technology stocks, computer stocks.  Everything that was in bonds and bond mutual funds was sold in Jan. 2000.  The only reason he even had $40k was that the broker wasn't insurance licensed, so he couldn't be on the fixed annuity as rep, didn't know about it, and it was spared. 

I've seen a lot of bad through the years, but this sticks out as perhaps the worst, particularly because it was so inappropriate for the client's experience, knowledge and financial situation. 

[quote=BullBroker]BREAKPOINT or no breakpoint what kind of an advisor sticks someone in all A-shares and one year later wants to sell them and put them in more A=shares???[/quote]

The same kind that ACATs those A shares in, sells them and puts him into a fee program or something else that lines your pocket.  Don't throw stones when you're surrounded by glass

[quote=OldLady]

When this broker took over the account (remember
this was Dec '99 or Jan '00), he said he could do much better for this
guy – put him into UITs invested in: Internet stocks, wireless stocks,
telecom stocks, technology stocks, computer stocks.  Everything
that was in bonds and bond mutual funds was sold in Jan. 2000. 
The only reason he even had $40k was that the broker wasn’t insurance
licensed, so he couldn’t be on the fixed annuity as rep, didn’t know
about it, and it was spared. 

[quote=OldLady]

The same kind that ACATs those A shares in, sells
them and puts him into a fee program or something else that lines your
pocket.  Don’t throw stones when you’re surrounded by glass

Wallstreeter wrote:

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

This is the worst thing that I have ever seen.  People like this should have their butt kicked right out of the industry. 

Wallstreeter,

Just to be clear, when I said, "people like this", I meant people like you.  I have seen far more harm done by brokers with a lack of knowledge than from being intentionally dishonest.

What's wrong with an annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate? 

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=BullBroker]

Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed. 

[/quote]

Since you opened the door, why don't you tell us if you helped the client improve their portfolio by using free exchanges within the existing fund family, or did you sell the funds and buy something else so you could collect a check?

With most fund companies the breakpoint between A shares and C-shares is about 6-7 years as I recall.  This is and the fact that the client was getting screwed was the ONLY point I was trying to make.  BUT, thanks for taking a simple post and wasting everyones time by overevaluating everything(as usual).  AND, yes I do understand breakpoints and fund overlap, maybe I exaggerated to emphasize how much this guy was getting screwed, but he was all in the same style of funds and getting churned. 

AND, yes I did explain to him what was going on and what could be done without getting more screwed.  Had him fill out a questionnaire to determine his risk tolerance and profiled him.  Told him I would love to work with him and he left with his profile, ACAT documents and knowledge,haven't heard from him since.  Probably embarrassed by what had happened to him. 

[/quote]

[quote=BullBroker]

Since I am a "newbie" and you all think I to stupid to be in the business please explain this to me.  BREAKPOINT or no breakpoint what kind of an advisor sticks someone in all A-shares and one year later wants to sell them and put them in more A=shares???  Maybe an Indy would do that, I don't know.  Maybe you guys think that is the right thing to do with the client.  Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed. 

As far as the American funds, um it takes maybe 35 seconds to go to their website and look at top holdings and wieghts.  Look at the Income fund, investment company of america, the income builder, for examples.  So I am assuming none of you have bought into the theory of DIVERSIFICATION.  Good luck to all of you if the market turns down. 

Bobby Hull is truly the MOST worthless/ignorant person I have ever even come in contact with.  Did you even have parents did they teach you anything about life????

You people do understand that when you by an A-share it takes the client x amount of YEARS to recover to the point where they break even.  Do they teach that to you at the "shopping center" INDY branches??????  Sounds like LPL needs to go out and train their advisors. 

[/quote]

I see that you refused to ask my questions in order to TRY not to look like an ass. How many years does it take to gain 2.5% in sales charges? I don't know which market you're looking at, but the one that the rest of us are using would indicate that this client has probably already made it back.

[quote=anonymous]

Wallstreeter wrote:

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

This is the worst thing that I have ever seen.  People like this should have their butt kicked right out of the industry. 

[/quote]

Do you advise your clients not to insure their other assets, too, like their homes and vehicles?

[quote=BullBroker][quote=joedabrkr] [quote=BullBroker]

Obviously, even the client was smart enough to know he was getting screwed. 

[/quote]

Since you opened the door, why don't you tell us if you helped the client improve their portfolio by using free exchanges within the existing fund family, or did you sell the funds and buy something else so you could collect a check?

With most fund companies the breakpoint between A shares and C-shares is about 6-7 years as I recall.  This is and the fact that the client was getting screwed was the ONLY point I was trying to make.  BUT, thanks for taking a simple post and wasting everyones time by overevaluating everything(as usual).  AND, yes I do understand breakpoints and fund overlap, maybe I exaggerated to emphasize how much this guy was getting screwed, but he was all in the same style of funds and getting churned. 

AND, yes I did explain to him what was going on and what could be done without getting more screwed.  Had him fill out a questionnaire to determine his risk tolerance and profiled him.  Told him I would love to work with him and he left with his profile, ACAT documents and knowledge,haven't heard from him since.  Probably embarrassed by what had happened to him. 

[/quote]

YOu probably screwed them up Babs. Annuities that have forced annuitization don't have surrender periods. Which one are you lying about? Annuitization or the 10 year surrender period. Duh, nice job.

Nope.  It was one of those Allianz bonus 10 products.  Even their attorney couldn't get them to let go of the money.  They could take a 5% free withdrawal during the surrender period and then had to annuitize over at least a 10 year period. 

They also put their personal IRAs in the same product which wasn't a problem since they plan to annuitize for extra income when they eventually retire.  The problem was with the pooled funds that they would have to get out at any time in any amount they needed.

[quote=Dust Bunny]

YOu probably screwed them up Babs. Annuities that have forced annuitization don't have surrender periods. Which one are you lying about? Annuitization or the 10 year surrender period. Duh, nice job.

Nope.  It was one of those Allianz bonus 10 products.  Even their attorney couldn't get them to let go of the money.  They could take a 5% free withdrawal during the surrender period and then had to annuitize over at least a 10 year period. 

They also put their personal IRAs in the same product which wasn't a problem since they plan to annuitize for extra income when they eventually retire.  The problem was with the pooled funds that they would have to get out at any time in any amount they needed.

[/quote]

Then you lied. They haven't even been out for 10 years. I think that product sucks, but your embellishment is shameful and disappointing. I thought you were better than that. I don't even want to go skinny-dipping with you anymore.

[quote=anonymous]What’s wrong with an annuity being in an IRA? 
More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might
be appropriate?  [/quote]



The tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often
(though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.



Without tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly
questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very
high expense ratio.

[quote=AllREIT][quote=anonymous]What's wrong with an annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate?  [/quote]

The tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often (though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.

Without tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very high expense ratio.
[/quote]

This has been beaten to death.  But again. You just don't get it. (and probably never will)

You need to look at all investments from the client's viewpoint and not from you own academic statitical analysis viewpoint.  The clients don't (usually) give a rip about the internal costs of the product if their money is SAFE. Especially their retirement money.  If they do care and can handle market volitility, then they don't invest in an annuity.

I seriously doubt that you are a real advisor with real clients. 

The tax deferral feature of an annuity IS redundant in an IRA. That isn't the feature that is the reason people put their retirement money in IRAs.  It is the guaranteed return.

[quote=AllREIT] [quote=OldLady]The same kind that ACATs those A shares in, sells them and puts him into a fee program or something else that lines your pocket.  Don't throw stones when you're surrounded by glass [/quote]

That would depend on the ongoing costs of the A-share vs the managed account. The original load is a sunk cost.
[/quote]

My Morningstar says the expense ratio on the 3 funds the kid gave us are:  ICA - 0.57%, Inc. Fd of Am - 0.56%, and Cap Inc Bldr - 0.58%.  Now what do you think?  Where's the client best served?

[quote=joedabrkr]

[quote=AllREIT]



4) B-shares!, which give you the 1% kickback of C-shares, and if you lose the client you get an bonus from the exit fee.



[/quote]

What are you talking about?  I’ve never seen b-shares that pay the CDSC to the adviser, much less a 1% trail.
[/quote]

AllREIT you never answered this question…enquiring minds want to know which B-shares pay a 1% trail and the CDSC charges get paid to the broker…

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=joedabrkr] [quote=AllREIT]

4) B-shares!, which give you the 1% kickback of C-shares, and if you lose the client you get an bonus from the exit fee.

[/quote]

What are you talking about?  I've never seen b-shares that pay the CDSC to the adviser, much less a 1% trail.
[/quote]

AllREIT you never answered this question....enquiring minds want to know which B-shares pay a 1% trail and the CDSC charges get paid to the broker...
[/quote]

Shhhhh..... he's madly Googling as we speak to try and find some.

[quote=AllREIT][quote=anonymous]What's wrong with an annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate?  [/quote]

The tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often (though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.

Without tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very high expense ratio.
[/quote]

How many times have you been pitched an annuity? How much extra does the tax deferral feature cost?

[quote=OldLady]

[quote=AllREIT] [quote=OldLady]The same kind that ACATs those A shares in, sells them and puts him into a fee program or something else that lines your pocket.  Don't throw stones when you're surrounded by glass [/quote]

That would depend on the ongoing costs of the A-share vs the managed account. The original load is a sunk cost.
[/quote]

My Morningstar says the expense ratio on the 3 funds the kid gave us are:  ICA - 0.57%, Inc. Fd of Am - 0.56%, and Cap Inc Bldr - 0.58%.  Now what do you think?  Where's the client best served?

[/quote]

First, the client is best served by the ethical rep who earns a decent income from helping people.  If the rep stays in business, he can work with and help his clients.  Clients cannot work with a rep who is not earning enough to keep their job and put food on the table.

Second, IMO, the client would be best served by adding Capital World Growth & Income to that asset mix.

Good diversification and overall low volatility.

Third, if the client sees value in the fee-based approach, then the client should move into that structure.  This should be after 3-5 years of the original A-share purchase - depending on the breakpoint.  Higher breakpoints can be moved over sooner than lower breakpoints.

Check with your compliance officer before proceeding.

[quote=AllREIT][quote=anonymous]What's wrong with an annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate?  [/quote]

The tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often (though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.

Without tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very high expense ratio.
[/quote]

When was the LAST time you heard "tax deferral" as the advantage of an annuity?

The insurance features are of INCREDIBLE value - to the person who has market fears.

You are insuring a portfolio.  The portfolio has charges.  So does the insurance.  If you want a specific kind of insurance (rider), it costs a little extra.

The question is:  does it make sense for your client?  Does the client think it makes sense for them?

Easy question.

When I first got into the business I worked for American Express Financial Advisors (now Amerprise) for a Senior Advisor (I was a paraplanner).  It’s a very long story, but I will summarize it. 

My boss was selling mutual funds within client accounts without the clients knowing, turning around and buying AEFA’s ultra expensive financial plans (worth financial plans I might add). 

We all (the rest of her team) had no idea it was going on.  I left in Dec., primarily because the Advisor was a total idiot with very little investment knowledge (pushing AEFA funds left and right).  Her licenses were fully revoked and the entire practice was shut down in March.  The investigation is still going on.  Ugly ugly person, inside and out. 

Joedabker I completely agree with you, when people start insulting my intelligence I get a chip on my shoulder and have a bad attitude.  I need to learn to control how I react to other people. 

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company... a church... a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past... we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you... we are in charge of our Attitudes.”

Charles Swindoll

Bobby Hull take this quote and tattoo it to the back of your hand, and read it before getting out of bed everyday!

[quote=OldLady]

Now....back to stories of the worst we've ever seen. 

I left the wirehouse to go indy in Dec. '99.  Had a client, single guy who had been early retired due to disability (just a regular joe -- not high paid), 100k in his whole life savings (plus a paid-for house).  Had never invested in stocks or stock mutual funds and had no interest in doing so.  Was comfortable on his retirement & didn't need any income from the portfolio at that time -- due to the early retirement, he likely will at some point.  I had him in a bond/CD ladder, little bit in bond mutual funds and a fixed annuity.  I leave and he's too nervous to follow (likes the corporate shell) -- he knows one of the brokers in the office from Rotary or something.

He walks into my office October 2002, hands me a statement and says "Is there anything you can do to help me?"  What had been $100k 3 years before was now worth $40k. 

When this broker took over the account (remember this was Dec '99 or Jan '00), he said he could do much better for this guy -- put him into UITs invested in: Internet stocks, wireless stocks, telecom stocks, technology stocks, computer stocks.  Everything that was in bonds and bond mutual funds was sold in Jan. 2000.  The only reason he even had $40k was that the broker wasn't insurance licensed, so he couldn't be on the fixed annuity as rep, didn't know about it, and it was spared. 

I've seen a lot of bad through the years, but this sticks out as perhaps the worst, particularly because it was so inappropriate for the client's experience, knowledge and financial situation. 

[/quote]

yes but think of all the commissions the rep generated that would have normally been stuck in some fixed income investments.  The rep in turn had more money to spend and therefore stimulated the economy!

[quote=BullBroker]

Joedabker I completely agree with you, when people start insulting my intelligence I get a chip on my shoulder and have a bad attitude.  I need to learn to control how I react to other people. 

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company... a church... a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past... we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you... we are in charge of our Attitudes.”

Charles Swindoll

Bobby Hull take this quote and tattoo it to the back of your hand, and read it before getting out of bed everyday!

[quote=joedabrkr] ...one thing that amazed me was some of the high-level talent I encountered....And yes-we unfortunately have our fair share(maybe more than fair share) of bottom feeders.
[/quote]

Isn't this true of our industry (and most others) regardless of the channel? 

[quote=OldLady]

[quote=joedabrkr] …one thing that amazed me was some of the high-level talent I encountered…And yes-we unfortunately have our fair share(maybe more than fair share) of bottom feeders.
[/quote]

Isn't this true of our industry (and most others) regardless of the channel? 

[quote=skippy]

[quote=AllREIT][quote=anonymous]What’s wrong with an
annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know
the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate?  [/quote]

The
tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often
(though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.

Without
tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly
questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very
high expense ratio.
[/quote]

When was the LAST time you heard "tax deferral" as the advantage of an annuity?

The insurance features are of INCREDIBLE value - to the person who has market fears.

You are insuring a portfolio.  The portfolio has charges.  So does the insurance.  If you want a specific kind of insurance (rider), it costs a little extra.

The question is:  does it make sense for your client?  Does the client think it makes sense for them?

Have you considered the advantages of using a tax-deferred annuity as part of your retirement plan? An annuity enables you to invest for the future on a tax-deferred basis.1

1 If you are considering an annuity to fund your qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of an annuity offers no additional value. Tax-deferral may not be available if the annuity is owned by a "non-natural" person such as a corporation or certain types of trusts.

[quote=skippy]First, the client is best served by the ethical rep who earns a decent income from helping people.  If the rep stays in business, he can work with and help his clients.  Clients cannot work with a rep who is not earning enough to keep their job and put food on the table.[/quote]

Sure...but the client paid an up-front sales charge a year ago.  Assuming mutual funds are an appropriate vehicle for the client, that 400k invested a year ago in those funds is likely now $472k ( I just used an 18% figure for a year -- it's likely higher).  Ok, so the kid tweeks the funds he's in, say moving into Cap. World G&I, maybe some EuroPac, SmallCap World, Growth Fd of Am, but staying in the fund family so as to not rake the client.  Get an allocation set and meet with the client once a year to review their account.  The 12b1 fees are $1,180 the first year  Even if I assume a 30% payout on the grid the broker put in his pocket $354 a year for doing the account and ACAT paperwork (OK, so the first year he's got 2-3 hours into the client), but after that, the money ain't bad for the little bit of work involved.  I don't see where the broker is going to go hungry. 

Sure, there may be changes down the road to 12b1s, but that ain't now

[quote=AllREIT] [quote=skippy]

[quote=AllREIT][quote=anonymous]What's wrong with an annuity being in an IRA?  More importantly for you, do you know the reasons why an annuity might be appropriate?  [/quote]

The tax deferal feature of the annuitiy is wasted in an IRA, but often (though not always) it is the central element of the annuity pitch.

Without tax deferal you are left with insurance features of possibly questionable value, illquidity/surrender charges and for sure a very high expense ratio.
[/quote]

When was the LAST time you heard "tax deferral" as the advantage of an annuity?

The insurance features are of INCREDIBLE value - to the person who has market fears.

You are insuring a portfolio.  The portfolio has charges.  So does the insurance.  If you want a specific kind of insurance (rider), it costs a little extra.

The question is:  does it make sense for your client?  Does the client think it makes sense for them?

Have you considered the advantages of using a tax-deferred annuity as part of your retirement plan? An annuity enables you to invest for the future on a tax-deferred basis.1

1 If you are considering an annuity to fund your qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of an annuity offers no additional value. Tax-deferral may not be available if the annuity is owned by a "non-natural" person such as a corporation or certain types of trusts.

[/quote]

I've heard it from AMP reps, I've heard it from my insurance agent, I've heard it from the insurance companies, and I've heard it from clients who ended up buying annuities when they were younger and didn't need either feature.

If you are selling annuities as an asset accumulation product then you talk about the tax deferral, if you are selling them as an income product then its not the main feature.
[/quote]

I don't know about all the fancy stuff you're talking about, but I do know that I'm selling the piss out of them and I'm stripping off the gains and putting them into another VA or an EIA. I love this high paying job!!!

If you are considering an annuity to fund your qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of an annuity offers no additional value.

If you are considering a growth stock to fund your qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of growth stocks offers no additional value.

The tax treatment that a non-qualified investment gets is irrelevant to whether that same investment is appropriate in a qualified account.

Allreit, you are a classic case study for showing that a little knowledge is worse than none at all.

[quote=BullBroker]

Joedabker I completely agree with you, when people start insulting my intelligence I get a chip on my shoulder and have a bad attitude.  I need to learn to control how I react to other people. 

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company... a church... a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past... we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you... we are in charge of our Attitudes.”

Charles Swindoll

Bobby Hull take this quote and tattoo it to the back of your hand, and read it before getting out of bed everyday!

[/quote]

WOW that tattoo would hurt!! I think it would be too small to read as well.

[quote=anonymous]

If you are considering an annuity to fund your
qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of
an annuity offers no additional value.

If you are considering a growth stock to fund your qualified plan, such as an IRA or 401(k), the tax-deferral feature of growth stocks offers no additional value.

The tax treatment that a non-qualified investment gets is irrelevant to whether that same investment is appropriate in a qualified account.

Allreit, you are a classic case study for showing that a little knowledge is worse than none at all.

Bingo, so you shouldn't own growth stocks in an IRA.

I agree that if one has a choice about where to own growth stocks, a non-qualified account is the better place to do it.  However, this doesn't equate to saying that one should not own a growth stock inside of an IRA/401(k).  Someone's portfolio may be made up of 80% qualified money. 

You want to arbitrage tax deferal by owning the most tax ineffecient assets possible. (e.g not an annuity )

I would actually argue that non-qualifed annuities are about as tax inefficient as one can get.  You are looking at a "surrender" charge in the form of a penalty tax that lasts until age 59 1/2, taxation that takes gains first if it is not annuitized, and all gains taxed as income.  It is a major mistake to assume that tax deferral is a good thing.  None of that makes any difference when deciding what to do with qualified money.  When we can use the guarantees of the annuity to influence investor behavior VA's can be an awesome tool. 

Bottom line is you can't hold growth stocks forever, at some point they are going to top out and their PE is going to shrink big time.  That means you can't have a buy-and-hold strategy with ALL growth stocks.

The arguement that Growth stocks should not be owned in an IRA is irrelevant in MY OPINION.  Growth stocks are more appropriate to trade than any other stock, large-mid-small.  If they are owned in an IRA then trading them is a lot easier than trading in a non-qualified account.

[quote=anonymous]

It is a major mistake to assume that tax deferral is a good thing.

Freelunch, I agree with you.  My point is that saying growth stocks don't belong in an IRA makes as much sense as saying an annuity doesn't belong in an IRA.  Neither statement makes sense.  It depends on the individual case.

Possible disadvantages of tax deferral:

1) "surrender charges until age 59 1/2" (think 10% penalty)

2) client can be in a higher tax bracket at retirement

3) taxes, in general, can be higher in the future

4) loss of step up of basis at death

5) extra tax penalty depending on use (think unqualified 529 distribution)

6) trading of capital gains tax for income tax

7) in the immortal words of our top gun friend TANSTAAFL

I am not saying that tax deferral is bad.  It is good in many instances.  I'm only saying that it is a mistake to ASSUME that it is always good.

Let me get your opinion on a case I'm working on.

High income married couple - $300k+ annual income.  He is age 44.  Desires to retire in 10 years.

His concern:  He's only invested in money markets.

His question:  Should he invest in more real estate, or invest in the markets?

His goal:  Retire in 10 years with a GROSS annual income of $160k per year WITHOUT touching any "qualified" retirement money.

My solution:  A non-qualified variable annuity with a Return of Principle guarantee.  (Not one of those 5% for life because he plans to retire too early to make good use of such a guarantee.)

Begin the annuity with $300k.  Add $125k per year for 10 years.  Total principle contributions:  $1,550,000.

Assuming an 8% ROR:  $2,458,000.  Principle guarantee will allow up to 7% withdrawals for 14.2 years.  Income could be as high as:  $172,000.

Take a 72q distribution beginning at age 54 to last until 59 1/2.  The 72q distribution will be LESS than the guaranteed amount, so the money will last that much longer.  We ARE locked into it under 72q rules, so that is a disadvantage.  But it does avoid the 10% penalty and works with the client's overall plan.

Of course, the hypo that I ran with the VA company looks better, but he and I want to work with a conservative estimate.

The VA is the tool to get us to where we need to go.  It is the proper tool because: 1) money for retirement income, 2)  allows for greater tax deferral of dividend income from the subaccounts, 3)  His goal is to defer INCOME, and the have an INCOME stream.  4)  He knows that he'll still be in a higher tax bracket anyway.

I did bring up life insurance, and he was satisfied with what he had (20 year term).  Since I'm not paid very well on life insurance, I left it at that.

I also did hypos with a CA muni bond fund.  The problem is that the money doesn't GROW as well as the VA could under the same circumstances.  It IS another alternative to the VA if he still wanted to invest in rental real estate and use the tax-free income to pay it down (which I think is a foolish idea).

But I'm a whore for money, so I'll present other ideas depending on how well they are received.  I always give the client a choice.

Based upon the facts as given, the client has an unachievable goal.  I’ll explain later if I have time.

Anonymous,

You made some great points earlier.  If someone does need money before 59.5 out of their annuity, they are hit with that 10% penalty and they lose all the benefits of that tax-deferral.  PLUS they paid a higher fee all that time to get that tax-deferral.

You are right on the money Anonymous.

Skippy - Regarding your situation.

Eaton Vance has some great tax-managed growth&value funds.  they also have some very impressive Municipal funds.  Don't you think you can build a tax-efficient, well-balanced portfolio & far outpace the VA?  It would be far less complicated in my opinion.  What you're doing is a great idea..but I'm just a believer that a solid, powerful, very diversified portfolio will inevitably Crush the returns and benefits of a VA.

[quote=FreeLunch]

Anonymous,

You made some great points earlier.  If someone does need money before 59.5 out of their annuity, they are hit with that 10% penalty and they lose all the benefits of that tax-deferral.  PLUS they paid a higher fee all that time to get that tax-deferral.

You are right on the money Anonymous.

Skippy - Regarding your situation.

Eaton Vance has some great tax-managed growth&value funds.  they also have some very impressive Municipal funds.  Don't you think you can build a tax-efficient, well-balanced portfolio & far outpace the VA?  It would be far less complicated in my opinion.  What you're doing is a great idea..but I'm just a believer that a solid, powerful, very diversified portfolio will inevitably Crush the returns and benefits of a VA.

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

No they haven't.

Your inferiority complex is fully justified

[quote=FreeLunch]

No they haven't.

Your inferiority complex is fully justified

[/quote]

Dear 5 digit midget,

Can't crush those returns, can you?

L.O.L

Of course I could.

Skippy, your guy also sounds like a good candidate, given his age, for a LEAP.  Insurance funded retirement for a portion of his retirement needs.  If he is in good health and can afford to fund a life insurance program to the max, this would be a good way to possibly retire early without the 59 1/2 problem. 

[/quote]

First, he's not your client. Second, you're pissed that you can't play with his money. Did you really think that noone would see through your bullsh*t?

[/quote]

Bobby Dull, you are such a pathetic idiot.  Of course he is my client.  There is no bullsh*t here, he is a young client (35), is not worried about risk at all, and wants to invest in individual stocks.  In case you're not familiar with what an individual stock is, many of them make up mutual funds, and several of those mutual funds make up annuities which seems to be all you know.  Sure, for the right client, annuities are great, but for this client, it was the wrong product.  How often do you invest in annuities for your clients without telling them?  Personally thats not how we run our business.

[quote=wallstreeter]

[/quote]

First, he's not your client. Second, you're pissed that you can't play with his money. Did you really think that noone would see through your bullsh*t?

[/quote]

Bobby Dull, you are such a pathetic idiot.  Of course he is my client.  There is no bullsh*t here, he is a young client (35), is not worried about risk at all, and wants to invest in individual stocks.  In case you're not familiar with what an individual stock is, many of them make up mutual funds, and several of those mutual funds make up annuities which seems to be all you know.  Sure, for the right client, annuities are great, but for this client, it was the wrong product.  How often do you invest in annuities for your clients without telling them?  Personally thats not how we run our business.

[/quote]

This could be interesting!

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

What are the worst things you have seen done by another broker?

Unless you sold him those annuities, he's not your client. Again, you're pissed because you can't make any money off of his money. Tough sh*t. That's one of the many good things about annuities - it's hard for an unethical asshole, like you, to churn the client's dough.

[quote=anonymous]Based upon the facts as given, the client has an
unachievable goal.  I’ll explain later if I have time.[/quote]



On 1.55M you can’t pull 160K and expect that to last for life, you’d need 3.2M assuming a steady 5% withdrawal rate.



Assuming an 8% Net Return inside the annuity requires a pre-fee return
of ~10.5% assuming 2.5% all in costs. That seems a bit high.



When the GMWB expires in 14.2 years, then what?

[quote=FreeLunch]

Eaton Vance has some great tax-managed
growth&value funds.  they also have some very impressive
Municipal funds.  Don’t you think you can build a tax-efficient,
well-balanced portfolio & far outpace the VA?  It would
be far less complicated in my opinion.  What you’re doing is a
great idea…but I’m just a believer that a solid, powerful, very
diversified portfolio will inevitably Crush the returns and benefits of
a VA.

I didn't cover his QUALIFIED retirement assets in my scenario.  They are MUCH larger than his NON-QUALIFIED assets.

14.2 years will be long enough.  His other goal is to go as long as possible without touching his qualified assets.  I didn't mention this in my post.  Sorry.

We don't need THIS money to last for "life."  Just so he can retire at age 54 and see him through until age 59 1/2 to access qualified money w/out penalty and age 62 to get his measly social security benefits.

The 8% ROR in the annuity was also assuming a straight-line return, not factoring in any negative years in the "sequence of returns" we keep hearing about too.

Of course, (now that I'm thinking about it) it wouldn't matter if he took the money from qualified OR non-qualified money since he would need to take a 72t or 72q distribution at the same tax rates.

I still like the idea, and it'll pay me well to implement it.

If God came to your client on his death bed and gave him a choice between leaving $5,000,000 behind or nothing, which would he prefer?

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=wallstreeter]

[/quote]

First, he's not your client. Second, you're pissed that you can't play with his money. Did you really think that noone would see through your bullsh*t?

[/quote]

Bobby Dull, you are such a pathetic idiot.  Of course he is my client.  There is no bullsh*t here, he is a young client (35), is not worried about risk at all, and wants to invest in individual stocks.  In case you're not familiar with what an individual stock is, many of them make up mutual funds, and several of those mutual funds make up annuities which seems to be all you know.  Sure, for the right client, annuities are great, but for this client, it was the wrong product.  How often do you invest in annuities for your clients without telling them?  Personally thats not how we run our business.

[/quote]

This could be interesting!

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

What are the worst things you have seen done by another broker?

Unless you sold him those annuities, he's not your client. Again, you're pissed because you can't make any money off of his money. Tough sh*t. That's one of the many good things about annuities - it's hard for an unethical asshole, like you, to churn the client's dough.

[/quote]

hey ASSHOLE bobby - he moved his non-qualified account to us 2 months ago and now he wants to move his and his wife's qualified accounts to us, which is in the process of being transfered.  So yes, he is a client and no we did not sell the annuity.  Maybe it was your unethical "let's slam EVERYONE with an annuity" dumb ass that sold it to him.  The reason I'm pissed is because we can't do what he wants us to do (individual stocks) because of the 6 year surrender that will penalize him $5,000.  Maybe I'm the ethical one because I won't sell out of it because of the penalty. 

[quote=wallstreeter][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=wallstreeter]

[/quote]

First, he's not your client. Second, you're pissed that you can't play with his money. Did you really think that noone would see through your bullsh*t?

[/quote]

Bobby Dull, you are such a pathetic idiot.  Of course he is my client.  There is no bullsh*t here, he is a young client (35), is not worried about risk at all, and wants to invest in individual stocks.  In case you're not familiar with what an individual stock is, many of them make up mutual funds, and several of those mutual funds make up annuities which seems to be all you know.  Sure, for the right client, annuities are great, but for this client, it was the wrong product.  How often do you invest in annuities for your clients without telling them?  Personally thats not how we run our business.

[/quote]

This could be interesting!

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

What are the worst things you have seen done by another broker?

Unless you sold him those annuities, he's not your client. Again, you're pissed because you can't make any money off of his money. Tough sh*t. That's one of the many good things about annuities - it's hard for an unethical asshole, like you, to churn the client's dough.

[/quote]

hey ASSHOLE bobby - he moved his non-qualified account to us 2 months ago and now he wants to move his and his wife's qualified accounts to us, which is in the process of being transfered.  So yes, he is a client and no we did not sell the annuity.  Maybe it was your unethical "let's slam EVERYONE with an annuity" dumb ass that sold it to him.  The reason I'm pissed is because we can't do what he wants us to do (individual stocks) because of the 6 year surrender that will penalize him $5,000.  Maybe I'm the ethical one because I won't sell out of it because of the penalty. 

[/quote]

If you think you can do a better job than the annuity, then you have a moral and ethical obligation to take the penalty and move on. The FACT that you haven't done that tells me that you don't have much to offer and that you know it. Some of the best work I've done is convincing people to pay a little now to fix a mistake rather than pay the higher price of ignoring the mistake. I'm not shocked that you don't have the guts to do that.

If you think you can do a better job than the annuity, then you have a moral and ethical obligation to take the penalty and move on. The FACT that you haven't done that tells me that you don't have much to offer and that you know it. Some of the best work I've done is convincing people to pay a little now to fix a mistake rather than pay the higher price of ignoring the mistake. I'm not shocked that you don't have the guts to do that.

It's not the performance that is the problem.  HE DOESN'T WANT THE ANNUITY, HE WOULD RATHER INVEST IN INDIVIDUAL STOCKS.  Since the performance is not bad within the annuity, 9% YTD, why pay the penalty?  He and our team agreed that we will take what is out of surrender which is about 50k and move on with that.  When the rest of it is out of surrender, in 2010 and 2012, we'll take care of it then.  Yes we do have the guts to pay now to fix a mistake when that situation occurs, but we don't feel every situation warrants that.

Oh and by the way, I do appreciate your deep concern with this issue.  I am truly impressed by your ability to have nothing else to do but sit on the computer ALL day EVERY day to answer and solve everyone's issues as they are posted.  Everyone should be thanking you for the time you take out of your busy, successful schedule.  I am sure you are a god among true financial professionals and can only hope that you decide to walk across the freeway and proceed to get nailed by a truck.

[quote=wallstreeter]

If you think you can do a better job than the annuity, then you have a moral and ethical obligation to take the penalty and move on. The FACT that you haven't done that tells me that you don't have much to offer and that you know it. Some of the best work I've done is convincing people to pay a little now to fix a mistake rather than pay the higher price of ignoring the mistake. I'm not shocked that you don't have the guts to do that.

It's not the performance that is the problem.  HE DOESN'T WANT THE ANNUITY, HE WOULD RATHER INVEST IN INDIVIDUAL STOCKS.  Since the performance is not bad within the annuity, 9% YTD, why pay the penalty?  He and our team agreed that we will take what is out of surrender which is about 50k and move on with that.  When the rest of it is out of surrender, in 2010 and 2012, we'll take care of it then.  Yes we do have the guts to pay now to fix a mistake when that situation occurs, but we don't feel every situation warrants that.

Oh and by the way, I do appreciate your deep concern with this issue.  I am truly impressed by your ability to have nothing else to do but sit on the computer ALL day EVERY day to answer and solve everyone's issues as they are posted.  Everyone should be thanking you for the time you take out of your busy, successful schedule.  I am sure you are a god among true financial professionals and can only hope that you decide to walk across the freeway and proceed to get nailed by a truck.

[/quote]

Does your team know that their sales assistant is making an ass of herself on the internet?

[quote=wallstreeter]

This could be interesting!

Yesterday we had a client in his mid-30's come in to talk about moving his $150,000 IRA to us.  We look at his statement and it is obvious to us that it is in an annuity.  He has had several 401(k) rollovers before starting his own business and they all went into the annuity.  He said when he met with the guy who did this, all he wanted was an IRA.  He was never told anything about an annuity.  Most of it is still in surrender as it was a 6 year product.

Even worse is that his wife's $10,000 IRA was also put into an annuity.

What are the worst things you have seen done by another broker?

[/quote]

How old is the annuity?

Talked to a lady whose insurance agent convinced her to buy a BAD
15 year equity indexed annuity.

She was in year 2 and needed to access a good chunck of her account.
She cried for about 3 months.

If he doesn't want the annuity, why did he buy it in the first place?  If the results aren't the issue, what doesn't he like about the annuity? 

It's my experience that clients don't care about the vehicle they're riding in as long as they can get to their destination.  Before you blow him out of the annuity, I would have a frank discussion with your client about this issue.

What is the reasoning behind purchasing individual stocks versus funds/SMAs/VAs etc?  Mind you, I can understand the pros and cons of doing either strategy, but I'm curious as to why he feels he will be better served with individual securities.  I find the ones who specifically request individual issues are the same people who individidual stocks won't be appropriate for.

[quote=wallstreeter]

It's not the performance that is the problem.  HE DOESN'T WANT THE ANNUITY, HE WOULD RATHER INVEST IN INDIVIDUAL STOCKS.

The bottom line is that annuities have the highest probability of screwing people over when they do change their mind.

You might as well PUSH B-Share Asset allocation funds in your IRAs

Just kidding - but these crappy insurance salesman selling these equity index annuities need to be thrown in jail for a few days.

[quote=FreeLunch]

The bottom line is that annuities have the highest probability of screwing people over when they do change their mind.

You might as well PUSH B-Share Asset allocation funds in your IRAs

Just kidding - but these crappy insurance salesman selling these equity index annuities need to be thrown in jail for a few days.

[/quote]

So, when you put them in some SMA, charge them 1% year over year, then they decide to change their mind, how do you propose they recoup those lost costs?

Are you aware that B shares exist because in some instances, they're the most appropriate share class for the client?  I know of these cases - do you?

How familiar are you with how EIAs work?  Do you know of any instances where the would be appropriate?  I do, and I'll be happy to share those cases with you.

Look, FL, I'm not asking you these questions to be antagonistic.  I'm asking them because it seems you have a habit of making blanket statments on alot of myths of investing.  I say myths because, in fact, you have not been able to back up your opinions with solid facts.  I'll be the first to admit - I used to think that the only thing an investor needed is a good wrap account and call it a day.  Now I know that dismissing other kinds of investments (ie annuities) is doing your client a disservice.  If you can be open minded, your clients will have a much better advisor.  If not, well, they might not be your client for very long.

First of all - who said I used SMAs all of the time?

Most of my clients are 50/50 A & C Share, and then the rest are equity traders ( I just love stocks, and always will ).  I hardly have ANY wrap accounts - I'm probably too Old school with the transactional approach

I am simply talking about people using Annuities for everybody, all the time, before they even get the people talking they know what they're going to pitch people.  I don't like that.

For the right people, annuities are great. 

Two things:  When in the world is B-Share the most appropriate?  Tell me one, I'll believe it.  I'm an open minded guy

We could debate this issue forever, but you KNOW as well as I do that Equity Index annuities are the MOST ridiculous investment offered out there today.  I am close minded when it comes to this issue.

Actually, don't think I'm being hypocritical....but I'm doing a 1035 this week for $450k worth of annuities.

They are right in this instance!  I'm taking them OUT of 1/2 Fixed and 1/2 EIAs.  They are getting Screwed royally.

I'm using Lincoln National American Legacy. 

Please, Please tell me how EIAs are good - ESPECIALLY in an IRA.  I am not a believer, but I take it back about being close-minded.  If you can convince me I'll change my mind, BUT I'm truly wanting to hear you on this one.

Thanks 

[quote=FreeLunch]

The bottom line is that annuities have the highest probability of screwing people over when they do change their mind.

You might as well PUSH B-Share Asset allocation funds in your IRAs

Just kidding - but these crappy insurance salesman selling these equity index annuities need to be thrown in jail for a few days.

[/quote]

Are EIA's illegal? Who are YOU to say that someone else is crappy? You've been in business for 1.5 years and you can't even break $100,000 in TT. If anybody is crappy....

THe reason your production sucks so bad is that you have failed to figure out what clients want to buy. I sell annuities because that's what people want to buy. If they wanted to buy that sh*t that your pitching, I'd be pitching it, too. You've let yourself blame your failure on the other salesmen who are better at it than you! Don't say that noone warned you that Wachovia will not put up with pikers like AGE will. Listen to all these other idiots tell you that you're doing fine at your own peril.

You can lash out at me all you want, but it won't change your truth.

[quote=FreeLunch]

First of all - who said I used SMAs all of the time?

You didn't.  There are alot of advisors who think SMAs are the end-all be-all of investment planning.  Just like your contention that there are advisors who think VAs are the best in all situations.

Most of my clients are 50/50 A & C Share, and then the rest are equity traders ( I just love stocks, and always will ).  I hardly have ANY wrap accounts - I'm probably too Old school with the transactional approach

That's fine, alot of my business is A and C shares as well.  I'm definitely not a trader and I don't take clients who are.  Different strokes for different folks.....

I am simply talking about people using Annuities for everybody, all the time, before they even get the people talking they know what they're going to pitch people.  I don't like that.

I'm going to guess you're referring to Bobby Hull.  He's stated several times that if a VA isn't the best thing for them, he doesn't sell it.  If he does, it is appropriate.  He just has a way of getting to the point in his prospecting method where his specialty is VAs.  There's nothing wrong with that IMO.

For the right people, annuities are great. 

Two things:  When in the world is B-Share the most appropriate?  Tell me one, I'll believe it.  I'm an open minded guy

For investors who are going to hold a fund for 7-10 years and have less than $50k to invest, B shares leave the most money in a clients account vs. A or C shares.  You can run a hypo that shows this.

We could debate this issue forever, but you KNOW as well as I do that Equity Index annuities are the MOST ridiculous investment offered out there today.  I am close minded when it comes to this issue.

Here's the thing - EIAs are not an investment.  They are a savings vehicle.  The only difference between EIAs and fixed annuities are how the earnings are credited and growth is calculated.  The advisors who say EIAs give you "all the upside of the market and none of the downside" are misrepresenting them.  However, for the client who wants low risk for a portion of their liquid assets with the potential for a better ROR than a traditional fixed annuity, EIAs have their place.  However, the most overlooked reason to purchase an annuity is to give a client an income they cannot outlive.  The annuitiization factor can be a huge benefit to those going into retirement where you as an advisor can see an overspending problem.  Think of it as a 'personal pension'.  Clients like pensions.  Why?  Becasue they can't run out of money.

That is by far the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

You SELL annuities b/c of 2 reasons.

A.  that is all you have knowledge of

B.  You do not have personal skills that will provide you with lifelong clients.  YOU HAVE to make all your money as soon as possible.

I feel sorry for your clients mentality that they just BOUGHT something from you.  You are not a financial advisor and you are certainly not a consultant.  That is why you have only ONE option.

There are a few key differences b/w me and you.  I am a money manager for my clients, whereas you are an annuity salesman.  And that is all you are.  If you can sleep at night, good.  But you are definitely not an admired individual to your clients and their family

DEEKAY - The above post is in response to Bobby Hull

(I guess he chooses to humiliate himself in public.....maybe he doesn't know what he's doing)

Thanks for the good points Deekay, that actually does clear things up a bit.

Like you said, different strokes for different folks - I'm sure you are a great advisor.

[quote=FreeLunch]

That is by far the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

You SELL annuities b/c of 2 reasons.

A.  that is all you have knowledge of

B.  You do not have personal skills that will provide you with lifelong clients.  YOU HAVE to make all your money as soon as possible.

I feel sorry for your clients mentality that they just BOUGHT something from you.  You are not a financial advisor and you are certainly not a consultant.  That is why you have only ONE option.

There are a few key differences b/w me and you.  I am a money manager for my clients, whereas you are an annuity salesman.  And that is all you are.  If you can sleep at night, good.  But you are definitely not an admired individual to your clients and their family

[/quote]

You are correct. I am not a money manager. I have a strategy that I didn't make up and it works better than anything I can come up with. That's why I keep throwing money at it. When Wachovia pushes you out, you need to reflect upon everything I've told you. Don't think it's not coming. I think, at some level, you know what's around the corner for you.

[quote=FreeLunch]

Actually, don't think I'm being hypocritical....but I'm doing a 1035 this week for $450k worth of annuities.

They are right in this instance!  I'm taking them OUT of 1/2 Fixed and 1/2 EIAs.  They are getting Screwed royally.

Please explain how they are getting screwed royally.  They bought the fixed and EIAs for some reason.  Tell me how they weren't appropriate in this situation.

I'm using Lincoln National American Legacy. 

OK - we're going from fixed to variable (assuming to get a better rate of return - please tell me if I'm off base). 

Please, Please tell me how EIAs are good - ESPECIALLY in an IRA.  I am not a believer, but I take it back about being close-minded.  If you can convince me I'll change my mind, BUT I'm truly wanting to hear you on this one.

Actually, I'm of the opinion that annuities (fixed and variable) are better served in IRAs.  All distributions regardless of the invesment vehicle are taxed at ordinary income rates.  Of course, there could be situations where taxable money can be put an in annuity (protection from creditors, maxed out all other retirement savings vehicles, etc).

Like I've stated before, EIAs can be a good fit for the conservative investor who wants a guaranteed rate of return with the possibility of a greater potential rate of return than a traditional FI/CD/bond, etc.  Bobby makes a good point - some people want that kind of concept.  Giving clients what they want and what they may need is how we best serve them.  Dismissing a strategy because some mutual fund wholesaler said it was wrong can be hazardous to your clients, yourself, and your firm.  Keep that in mind.

Thanks 

Tell me how they are getting screwed royally?

They want to get their money out 8 years later and they have a TEN percent CDSC.  I met a guy who got into an 18 year EIA -

8 years later he had only averaged 5% annual return and if he were to cash out $250,000 he would've been hit with a $25,000 penalty.

THATS HOW

[quote=FreeLunch]

Tell me how they are getting screwed royally?

They want to get their money out 8 years later and they have a TEN percent CDSC.  I met a guy who got into an 18 year EIA -

8 years later he had only averaged 5% annual return and if he were to cash out $250,000 he would've been hit with a $25,000 penalty.

THATS HOW

[/quote]

Most people are just getting back to even after 8 years. What did he say when you explained that to him? LOL!!! What a rookie mistake!!!! I can't f**king believe that you overlooked that!!!!! A LITTLE knowledge can be very dangerous and expensive.

[quote=FreeLunch]

That is by far the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

I know Bobby can defend himself, but I feel the need to step in here.

You SELL annuities b/c of 2 reasons.

A.  that is all you have knowledge of

From what I see and what I know of Bobby, he's got alot of knowledge of alot of investing concepts.  He just chooses to use VAs when it's appropriate. 

B.  You do not have personal skills that will provide you with lifelong clients.  YOU HAVE to make all your money as soon as possible.

Even though he comes off as harsh, I've got no doubt he's got some great personal skills.  He wouldn't be a good salesperson if he didn't.  And what's wrong with getting paid upfront for the work that you do?  Isn't that what A shares are all about?

I feel sorry for your clients mentality that they just BOUGHT something from you.  You are not a financial advisor and you are certainly not a consultant.  That is why you have only ONE option.

He's never represented himself as an FA or consultant.  He holds himself out as a salesman.  You assumed that everybody in our business has to be an advisor/consultant/CFP.  That's simply not the case.  I know alot of reps who do a great job for their clients that don't get hung up on titles.

There are a few key differences b/w me and you.  I am a money manager for my clients, whereas you are an annuity salesman.  And that is all you are.  If you can sleep at night, good.  But you are definitely not an admired individual to your clients and their family

Tell us how you differentiate yourself in the crowd of "money managers".  There's literally thousands, almost all of them with greater research capabilities, more effecient processes, more experience and better investment results.  Plus, they've managed money in a bear market.  Did you handle client money in 2001-2002?  How about 1994?  1987?

[quote=FreeLunch]

Tell me how they are getting screwed royally?

They want to get their money out 8 years later and they have a TEN percent CDSC.  I met a guy who got into an 18 year EIA -

8 years later he had only averaged 5% annual return and if he were to cash out $250,000 he would've been hit with a $25,000 penalty.

THATS HOW

[/quote]

If you sold an annuity based on LIQUIDITY, I would agree with you.

Annuities are an INCOME vehicle.  To build an income base, and to generate an income stream.

Annuities are to INSURE that you have an income stream later.  They are NOT for large withdrawals later.

This is/should be disclosed up front when presenting an annuity.  I do.

If you take money out before age 59 1/2, there can be a 10% withdrawal penalty.  There may be a surrender charge depending on the year of surrender above the 10% free withdrawal amount.

[quote=FreeLunch]

DEEKAY - The above post is in response to Bobby Hull

(I guess he chooses to humiliate himself in public.....maybe he doesn't know what he's doing)

Thanks for the good points Deekay, that actually does clear things up a bit.

Like you said, different strokes for different folks - I'm sure you are a great advisor.

[/quote]

Thanks for the compliment.

[quote=skippy][quote=FreeLunch]

Tell me how they are getting screwed royally?

They want to get their money out 8 years later and they have a TEN percent CDSC.  I met a guy who got into an 18 year EIA -

8 years later he had only averaged 5% annual return and if he were to cash out $250,000 he would've been hit with a $25,000 penalty.

THATS HOW

[/quote]

If you sold an annuity based on LIQUIDITY, I would agree with you.

Annuities are an INCOME vehicle.  To build an income base, and to generate an income stream.

Annuities are to INSURE that you have an income stream later.  They are NOT for large withdrawals later.

This is/should be disclosed up front when presenting an annuity.  I do.

If you take money out before age 59 1/2, there can be a 10% withdrawal penalty.  There may be a surrender charge depending on the year of surrender above the 10% free withdrawal amount.

[/quote]

I was gonna comment on this, but skippy summed up my thoughts quite nicely.

When do the clients need the money?  And please tell us the American Legacy VA you're going to use is not the B share.  If it is, your argument holds no water.

With Lincoln's i4Life feature (American Legacy or ChoicePlus), Skippy's guy could access his annuity money before he is 59 1/2 WITHOUT 72q.  It's a pretty cool feature for the right person. AND, a good chunk of the money would be return of principal, which would lower his taxes for quite a while (until his basis is used up).

You could also use their 4Later feature to give the guy some gaurantee's on his income in the future.

[quote=now_indy]

With Lincoln's i4Life feature (American Legacy or ChoicePlus), Skippy's guy could access his annuity money before he is 59 1/2 WITHOUT 72q.  It's a pretty cool feature for the right person. AND, a good chunk of the money would be return of principal, which would lower his taxes for quite a while (until his basis is used up).

You could also use their 4Later feature to give the guy some gaurantee's on his income in the future.

[/quote]

Not being TOTALLY familiar with Lincoln's VA lineup, I looked up some basic facts on this.

http://www.annuitycontent.lnc.com/llsup/PDFLibrary/CP_I4L_FA CT.pdf

i4life appears to be a GMIB or Guaranteed minimum income benefit.  This doesn't require a 72q because it is ANNUITIZING the contract.

There's nothing wrong with annuitizing, but for MY client, I don't think he'd like the idea of losing control of all the money that he has (will have) put in.

But, there is something to be said for using up his basis first via annuitization to lower his overall tax burden once he retires at 54.

Thanks for that idea.  It bears further investigation when I get to the office tomorrow!  (It just might mean that I give the business to MetLife instead of Hartford.)

[quote=deekay]

Like I’ve stated before, EIAs
can be a good fit for the conservative investor who wants a guaranteed
rate of return with the possibility of a greater potential rate of
return than a traditional FI/CD/bond, etc.  Bobby makes a good
point - some people want that kind of concept.  Giving clients
what they want and what they may need is how we best serve them. 
Dismissing a strategy because some mutual fund wholesaler said it was
wrong can be hazardous to your clients, yourself, and your firm. 
Keep that in mind.

Thanks 

[quote=AllREIT]


Just because clients want something, and would buy it if presented to
them doesn’t mean you should sell it to them. Annuities are expensive
and illiquid. Bad attributes for any investment.




[/quote]

Hedge funds?  Oil and gas partnerships?  Timber funds?  Managed Futures pools?

[quote=skippy]

...

i4life appears to be a GMIB or Guaranteed minimum income benefit.  This doesn't require a 72q because it is ANNUITIZING the contract.

There's nothing wrong with annuitizing, but for MY client, I don't think he'd like the idea of losing control of all the money that he has (will have) put in.

...

[/quote]

Skippy, I know this will sound crazy, but yes, it is annuitizing the contract, but NO, he doesn't lose control of the money.  Lincoln has figured out a way to have the income stream treated like an annuitized payout, but leave the customer access to their money up to age 90. (They have patented this, that's why other companies don't offer this).

I would recommend calling your Lincoln Internal to learn the pros and cons of this.

16 different limited partnership interests...only one profitable.  Initial total investment...just over $100K.  Value a few years later when I did her tax return...just over $30K.  The lady had a negative AGI as the bulk of her life savings were in these dogs.

...sold by an Edward Jones broker in the 1980's.  He's still in business and considered highly successful.

I have an 84 year old client. She inherited 1.2 million back in 04.  I started dealing with her in 05 and she transferred here with me in Feb…In a review, she brought in handwritten statements from her insurance SALESMAN, on her multiple EIA contracts.  The insurance guy sold her varying amounts in each contrat, from two different (no name) companies.  One group of 14 different contracts, sold on the same day, amounts to 700k in face value…ALL with 25% surrender first 5 years…and then goes down slightly. The other annuity company only had 15% surrender the first few years.  She has to contact him yearly to get her FREEEEED up money.  What a piece…I think he was mentored by Spiffy.  All I can do is shake my head and sympathize with her…

[quote=Indyone]

16 different limited partnership interests...only one profitable.  Initial total investment...just over $100K.  Value a few years later when I did her tax return...just over $30K.  The lady had a negative AGI as the bulk of her life savings were in these dogs.

...sold by an Edward Jones broker in the 1980's.  He's still in business and considered highly successful.

[/quote]

Did the Jones broker change the tax code that blew up the LP's?

[quote=bspears]I have an 84 year old client. She inherited 1.2 million back in 04.  I started dealing with her in 05 and she transferred here with me in Feb...In a review, she brought in handwritten statements from her insurance SALESMAN, on her multiple EIA contracts.  The insurance guy sold her varying amounts in each contrat, from two different (no name) companies.  One group of 14 different contracts, sold on the same day, amounts to 700k in face value...ALL with 25% surrender first 5 years...and then goes down slightly. The other annuity company only had 15% surrender the first few years.  She has to contact him yearly to get her FREEEEED up money.  What a piece...I think he was mentored by Spiffy.  All I can do is shake my head and sympathize with her....[/quote]

I'm going to call bullsh*t on that.

Would you like me to fax you the handwritten breakdown? Have you ever heard of Amerus or National Western?

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Indyone]

16 different limited partnership interests...only one profitable.  Initial total investment...just over $100K.  Value a few years later when I did her tax return...just over $30K.  The lady had a negative AGI as the bulk of her life savings were in these dogs.

...sold by an Edward Jones broker in the 1980's.  He's still in business and considered highly successful.

[/quote]

Did the Jones broker change the tax code that blew up the LP's?

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Indyone]

16 different limited partnership interests...only one profitable.  Initial total investment...just over $100K.  Value a few years later when I did her tax return...just over $30K.  The lady had a negative AGI as the bulk of her life savings were in these dogs.

...sold by an Edward Jones broker in the 1980's.  He's still in business and considered highly successful.

[/quote]

Did the Jones broker change the tax code that blew up the LP's?

[/quote]

No...he just put all of the client's life savings in an illiquid investment.  Sound familiar?
[/quote]

Funny thing you should mention that....I've been taking gains out of these "Illiquid" annuities and rolling them into the oil deal. I love illiquidity.

[quote=bspears]Would you like me to fax you the handwritten breakdown? Have you ever heard of Amerus or National Western?[/quote]

Yes, I've heard of Amerus.  They've been acquired by Aviva recently.

http://www.amerus.com/

Have you heard of Google to do a search on these companies?

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

[/quote]

What funds inside of a VA have averaged 25%/year for the last 4.5 years?  You are smoking crack.  Do you also have some property in Florida that you like to show us?

[quote=pretzelhead]

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

[/quote]

What funds inside of a VA have averaged 25%/year for the last 4.5 years?  You are smoking crack.  Do you also have some property in Florida that you like to show us?

[/quote]

Why would I want to give helpful information to a punk like you?

[quote=joedabrkr]

[quote=AllREIT]


Just because clients want something, and would buy it if presented to
them doesn’t mean you should sell it to them. Annuities are expensive
and illiquid. Bad attributes for any investment.


[/quote]

Hedge funds?  Oil and gas partnerships?  Timber funds?  Managed Futures pools?
[/quote]



Hedge funds: Mostly smoke and mirrors. The good ones aren’t acessed via retail brokers



Oil/Gas: Publicly traded upstream MLP’s do exactly the same thing



Timber: A number of Timber REITs trade publicly (RYN,PCL,PCH etc)



Managed Futures: Smoke and mirrors with teeth.

[quote=bspears]Would you like me to fax you the handwritten breakdown? Have you ever heard of Amerus or National Western?[/quote]

I totally rely upon handwritten notes.

Hedge funds: Mostly smoke and mirrors. The good ones aren't acessed via retail brokers

If only we were RIA's- then the sea would part and we too could be on your level...

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead]

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

[/quote]

What funds inside of a VA have averaged 25%/year for the last 4.5 years?  You are smoking crack.  Do you also have some property in Florida that you like to show us?

[/quote]

Why would I want to give helpful information to a punk like you?

[/quote]

Well Bobby, us investment professionals, and you are excluded, know that past results are not indicative of future performance.  So you could tell us, we could verify or prove it to be incorrect, and then all go along our separate ways.  Without backing it up, we can see right through your sh*t.

[quote=wallstreeter][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead]

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

[/quote]

What funds inside of a VA have averaged 25%/year for the last 4.5 years?  You are smoking crack.  Do you also have some property in Florida that you like to show us?

[/quote]

Why would I want to give helpful information to a punk like you?

[/quote]

Well Bobby, us investment professionals, and you are excluded, know that past results are not indicative of future performance.  So you could tell us, we could verify or prove it to be incorrect, and then all go along our separate ways.  Without backing it up, we can see right through your sh*t.

[/quote]

Here's the deal...past results ARE indicative of future performance. Things that suck, tend to continue to suck and things that do well, tend to continue to do well. In case noone's ever told you...given an option, people tend to choose the one that has made more money in the past. As far as backing it up goes....I have actual client statements that I show people. This is a very powerful tool. THEY are the ones that I care about believing me, not some punk on the internet.

Skippy, I wan't asking about Amerus, you dumbass, I was pointing to the two companies my client was put into, with the high surrender charge. Since I don't know your real name, I'll use dumbass.

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=wallstreeter][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead]

[/quote]

My VA clients have averaged 25%/year over the last 4.5 years. Please suggest a way to "Crush" these returns.

[/quote]

What funds inside of a VA have averaged 25%/year for the last 4.5 years?  You are smoking crack.  Do you also have some property in Florida that you like to show us?

[/quote]

Why would I want to give helpful information to a punk like you?

[/quote]

Well Bobby, us investment professionals, and you are excluded, know that past results are not indicative of future performance.  So you could tell us, we could verify or prove it to be incorrect, and then all go along our separate ways.  Without backing it up, we can see right through your sh*t.

[/quote]

Here's the deal...past results ARE indicative of future performance. Things that suck, tend to continue to suck and things that do well, tend to continue to do well. In case noone's ever told you...given an option, people tend to choose the one that has made more money in the past. As far as backing it up goes....I have actual client statements that I show people. This is a very powerful tool. THEY are the ones that I care about believing me, not some punk on the internet.

[/quote]

With the number of posts you have, it sure seems that you care what people think.

my my…this has turned into quite the food fight…

[quote=AllREIT]



Managed Futures: Smoke and mirrors with teeth.





[/quote]

Tell that to my clients who have doubled their money in managed futures since 2007.

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=AllREIT]

Managed Futures: Smoke and mirrors with teeth.


[/quote]

Tell that to my clients who have doubled their money in managed futures since 2007.
[/quote]

Joe, quick, what year is it?

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=AllREIT]

Managed Futures: Smoke and mirrors with teeth.


[/quote]

Tell that to my clients who have doubled their money in managed futures since 2007.

Joe, quick, what year is it?

Doubled your money in only 7 years! Wooo woo!

If only there were the greatest commodity bull market in history running during those 7 years.... Wait a minute...

WOW! Your Mangled Futures netted 10%/year while the price of oil per barrel only went up from $20 to $70, but a barrel of oil doesn't give you those 5% trails that make them so hard to liquidate!

Been there, got over that! When the Dollar was tanking and these MO RONs at John Henry still couldn't make money, I fired them and bought natural resource equities (many that paid 7% dividend yields) I knew which ones to buy by looking into all the Natural Resource Funds and buying what they didn't have!

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Doubled your money in only 7 years! Wooo woo!

If only there were the greatest commodity bull market in history running during those 7 years.... Wait a minute...

WOW! Your Mangled Futures netted 10%/year while the price of oil per barrel only went up from $20 to $70, but a barrel of oil doesn't give you those 5% trails that make them so hard to liquidate!

Been there, got over that! When the Dollar was tanking and these MO RONs at John Henry still couldn't make money, I fired them and bought natural resource equities (many that paid 7% dividend yields) I knew which ones to buy by looking into all the Natural Resource Funds and buying what they didn't have!

[/quote]

The Natural Resource Funds weren't all that bad.  Ivy's Natural Resources fund (IGNAX) did 308% from 2000-2007, 44% per year ain't too shabby.

Yes and what did it do from 1/1/2000 to 1/1/2004? Probably sat there like a lump. They all did because the sector was dead and nobody was putting money into them.

They had positions of a fe oli companies, a few oil service companies and maybe a gold and silver position. No coal, no Uranium, no metal (save precious), no Ag, very little timber/lumber.

When money flowed into those funds the managers had to buy the bejesus into all these areas. It was fun!

Of course I managed to get crushed buying whiteness! NL Industries had everything going for it (and even Kramer said so)... Yeeesh! For may I managed to get out with my 20% but them there were the others....

I really need to get a better pair of typing glasses!

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Yes and what did it do from 1/1/2000 to 1/1/2004? Probably sat there like a lump. They all did because the sector was dead and nobody was putting money into them.

They had positions of a fe oli companies, a few oil service companies and maybe a gold and silver position. No coal, no Uranium, no metal (save precious), no Ag, very little timber/lumber.

When money flowed into those funds the managers had to buy the bejesus into all these areas. It was fun!

Of course I managed to get crushed buying whiteness! NL Industries had everything going for it (and even Kramer said so)... Yeeesh! For may I managed to get out with my 20% but them there were the others....

[/quote]

The fund did 92% from 1/00-1/07.  Still think it's pretty good, maybe not the best, but solid.

My bad, 92% from 1/00-1/04.  I need to put down the phone when I type.

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Doubled your money in only 7 years! Wooo woo!

If only there were the greatest commodity bull market in history running during those 7 years.... Wait a minute...

WOW! Your Mangled Futures netted 10%/year while the price of oil per barrel only went up from $20 to $70, but a barrel of oil doesn't give you those 5% trails that make them so hard to liquidate!

Been there, got over that! When the Dollar was tanking and these MO RONs at John Henry still couldn't make money, I fired them and bought natural resource equities (many that paid 7% dividend yields) I knew which ones to buy by looking into all the Natural Resource Funds and buying what they didn't have!

Your client could have, I don't think there were very many 5% trail vehicles otherwise available.

Streeter,

92% over that time period? Wow. That is good, so good that the rest of the period then stinks by comparison.

10,000 1/1/00 = 19,200 1/1/2004

19,200 1/2/2004 = 39,836 1/1/2007 (assuming the 23%, compounded)

That means that it would have done 298% (versus the number it did do which was just over 300% right?)

I don't know how he did so well in the beginning, but nobody can kick about the results anyway.

But if you had TIPs!!!! (Just kidding)

Point is, Managed Futures ARE less good than they ought to be. ARE too expensive given the alternatives. And 100% over 7 years is nothing to write home about.

Oh and most of the "Worst Things" I've seen over the years are things that I have done (but then those are the things I see the most of).

Maybe I'm the only one... And I didn't want what I had done to be the "worst thing" when I did them... But they were and I doubt I'm the only one.

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Indyone]16 different limited partnership interests…only one profitable.  Initial total investment…just over $100K.  Value a few years later when I did her tax return…just over $30K.  The lady had a negative AGI as the bulk of her life savings were in these dogs.

...sold by an Edward Jones broker in the 1980's.  He's still in business and considered highly successful.[/quote]

Did the Jones broker change the tax code that blew up the LP's? [/quote]

I'm sure he appreciates your defense, but the point is moot.  He used one vehicle (LP's) to invest a little old lady's life savings...mostly in one industry.  Common sense says that's a bad idea...completely lacking in diversification.  I think he was a bit more concerned about yield to broker than suitability.

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

Oh and most of the "Worst Things" I've seen over the years are things that I have done (but then those are the things I see the most of).

Maybe I'm the only one... And I didn't want what I had done to be the "worst thing" when I did them... But they were and I doubt I'm the only one.

[/quote]

Yeah, in the beginning, there are a lot of "worst things" that we all probably did--not on purpose, just lack of experience.

All of us except, of course, Bobby...

Heard this story through our compliance training at my old firm:

A couple brokers on a team managed over like a 5 year period or so to send all client statements to a P.O. Box, then create their own statements (slightly altered of course) and sent those ones to the clients.  Over that time period they managed to scam $300 Million from the clients.  Needless to say, they are in jail now and won't be getting out anytime soon.

[quote=wallstreeter]

Heard this story through our compliance training at my old firm:

A couple brokers on a team managed over like a 5 year period or so to send all client statements to a P.O. Box, then create their own statements (slightly altered of course) and sent those ones to the clients.  Over that time period they managed to scam $300 Million from the clients.  Needless to say, they are in jail now and won't be getting out anytime soon.

[/quote]

I can top that. I know a guy who sold a VA to a 68 year old. I'll be he did it just for the commission.

[quote=joedabrkr]

[quote=AllREIT]



Managed Futures: Smoke and mirrors with teeth.





[/quote]

Tell that to my clients who have doubled their money in managed futures since 2007.
[/quote]



You should talk to one of my clients who doubled his money by putting $5000 on the Red Sox.

The futures market is truly zero sum, for each futures position some
else has an equal and offsetting short position. So you have at least a
50% chance of being on the wrong side of a trade.



More seriously, managed futures are so volatile that anything can happen. This is probably the place for people to be fooled by randomness.

[quote=blarmston]

Hedge funds: Mostly smoke and mirrors. The good ones aren’t acessed via retail brokers

If only we were RIA's- then the sea would part and we too could be on your level...

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=wallstreeter]

Heard this story through our compliance training at my old firm:

A couple brokers on a team managed over like a 5 year period or so to send all client statements to a P.O. Box, then create their own statements (slightly altered of course) and sent those ones to the clients.  Over that time period they managed to scam $300 Million from the clients.  Needless to say, they are in jail now and won't be getting out anytime soon.

[/quote]

I can top that. I know a guy who sold a VA to a 68 year old. I'll be he did it just for the commission.

[/quote]

Ha! Bobby, at first I thought you were going to contribute something legitimate...I guess I was wrong...my bad.

I heard one of the “Senior Guys” in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said “The VA’s of today are like the LP’s of the 80’s” 

 "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's" 

How so?

[quote=Dust Bunny]

 "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's" 

How so?

[/quote]

Yes, do tell

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Don't you merrill girls only get paid 4% on annuities, before the grid?

[quote=Bobby Hull]

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Don't you merrill girls only get paid 4% on annuities, before the grid?

[/quote]

I think it's 4.5 to grid.  Now I get 7.5% where I am. And a better grid.

[quote=pretzelhead][quote=Bobby Hull]

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Don't you merrill girls only get paid 4% on annuities, before the grid?

[/quote]

I think it's 4.5 to grid.  Now I get 7.5% where I am. And a better grid.

[/quote]

Cha-Ching. No wonder the merrill girls hate annuities. They don't get paid on them and we do! Selling VA's to merrill clients is a piece of cake.

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Yeah I see the similarity.  When the LP's went under, all the investor's money was lost.  As an example: Bill Cosby was invested heavily in Oil LP's, they went under, he lost a ton of money, and now needed money, so he started the Cosby Show.  When the insurance co's go under, the clients will at least get something from the separate accounts the insurance co's have to legally maintain...so yeah, that "senior guy" makes sense.

[quote=wallstreeter]

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Yeah I see the similarity.  When the LP's went under, all the investor's money was lost.  As an example: Bill Cosby was invested heavily in Oil LP's, they went under, he lost a ton of money, and now needed money, so he started the Cosby Show.  When the insurance co's go under, the clients will at least get something from the separate accounts the insurance co's have to legally maintain...so yeah, that "senior guy" makes sense.

[/quote]

WallStreeter, if you're being sarcastic, I agree with you. Bullbroker, are you sure the "Senior Guys" didn't mean Equity Indexed Annuities. When those insurance companies go belly up, so goes the client's money

Has anyone ever lost money in a fixed annuity when an insurance company went out of business?  I'm asking a serious question.

I ask because I know that a death benefit has never gone upaid because of a company going out of business.

Why do I think that Wallsteeter is making a serious comment and he just doesn't have a clue?

[quote=now_indy][quote=wallstreeter]

[quote=BullBroker]I heard one of the "Senior Guys" in the office make an interesting comment today.  He said "The VA's of today are like the LP's of the 80's"  [/quote]

Yeah I see the similarity.  When the LP's went under, all the investor's money was lost.  As an example: Bill Cosby was invested heavily in Oil LP's, they went under, he lost a ton of money, and now needed money, so he started the Cosby Show.  When the insurance co's go under, the clients will at least get something from the separate accounts the insurance co's have to legally maintain...so yeah, that "senior guy" makes sense.

[/quote]

WallStreeter, if you're being sarcastic, I agree with you. Bullbroker, are you sure the "Senior Guys" didn't mean Equity Indexed Annuities. When those insurance companies go belly up, so goes the client's money

[/quote]

Sorry for the confusion indy, yes i was being very sarcastic - except for the Cosby story, that's true. 

[quote=anonymous]

Has anyone ever lost money in a fixed annuity when
an insurance company went out of business?  I’m asking a serious
question.

I ask because I know that a death benefit has never gone upaid because of a company going out of business.

Why do I think that Wallsteeter is making a serious comment and he just doesn't have a clue?

Annuities are __________

[quote=FreeLunch]Annuities are __________[/quote]

So I see we've turned this into a mad libs thing?!?!  Let's see, do you want a verb or a noun or an adjective.  I say baseball.  Annuities are baseball.  No, that doesn't quite work...

In all seriousness, for the sake of your game, annuities are great for the right client.  I can see bashing the "annuity sharks" that will sell it to anyone, but since they do serve their place in the right portfolio, you can't bash the product. 

I know Bobby can tell us the best ways to sell it, but the best I've heard is that you have a .3 chance of your house burning down, a .6 chance of getting in a car accident, and a 33% chance of your investments losing money, which would you want to insure?  Which do you insure? 

Bobby, thoughts? Better ideas? I'm sure you're foaming at the mouth waiting to express your colorful thoughts.

Allreit, Thanks.  Let me rephrase my post.

Has anyone ever lost money in a fixed annuity when a U.S. insurance company went out of business?  I'm asking a serious question.

I ask because I know that a death benefit has never gone upaid because of a U.S. Insurance company going out of business.

I take back my anti-Wallstreeter comment.  I apologize.

[quote=anonymous]

Has anyone ever lost money in a fixed annuity when an insurance company went out of business?  I'm asking a serious question.

I ask because I know that a death benefit has never gone upaid because of a company going out of business.

Why do I think that Wallsteeter is making a serious comment and he just doesn't have a clue?

[/quote]

Nobody has ever lost money in an EIA for ANY reason.

[quote=FreeLunch]Annuities are __________[/quote]



Annuities are very profitable for everyone except the client.



Where are the annuitant’s yachts?

Annuities Are Not ___________

because they ___________

Bobby,

What has happened to the annuity policyholders in the past when the company has gone out of business?

Annuities are very profitable for everyone except the client.

AllREIT, Are you having fun or you just really this unknowledgeable?

[quote=FreeLunch]

Annuities Are Not ___________

because they ___________

[/quote]

FL, what are you getting at here?

[quote=anonymous]

Bobby,

What has happened to the annuity policyholders in the past when the company has gone out of business?

Annuities are very profitable for everyone except the client.

AllREIT, Are you having fun or you just really this unknowledgeable?

[/quote]

Another company comes in and backs the guarantees.

[quote=FreeLunch]

Annuities Are Not ___________

because they ___________

[/quote]

Careful, son. Per your PM to me, I haven't treated you poorly.

i’m just trying to turn this into the longest running never-ending debate with no resolution topic post in the history of this forum

[quote=FreeLunch]i'm just trying to turn this into the longest running never-ending debate with no resolution topic post in the history of this forum[/quote]

I literally started a sh*tshow I guess...wow congrats to me

I am jealous.

This has been unbelievable.  Here I'll keep it going.

Annuities Suck for everybody

[quote=FreeLunch]

I am jealous.

This has been unbelievable.  Here I'll keep it going.

Annuities Suck for everybody

[/quote]

Thanks for adding to the conversation. 

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead][quote=Bobby Hull]

Cha-Ching. No wonder the merrill girls hate annuities. They don't get paid on them and we do! Selling VA's to merrill clients is a piece of cake.

[/quote]

So what Bobby has just said is that he sells the client what makes him the most money.  Yeah, it does sound alot like the LP's of the 80's.  "If something sounds too good to be true it probably is".  Advisors like Bobby Hull make the discount brokers look really good to the consumer.  What % of your book is in VA's???  

This could've been pretty bad:  75 year old lady had a broker who somehow got half of her investable assets, about $300k, in a Mexican Telecom stock.  She came to a guy in our office who quickly got her out of it and basically saved her from losing half of her investments.  Could have been absolutely tragic.

Any other bad stories?

[quote=BullBroker][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead][quote=Bobby Hull]

Cha-Ching. No wonder the merrill girls hate annuities. They don't get paid on them and we do! Selling VA's to merrill clients is a piece of cake.

[/quote]

So what Bobby has just said is that he sells the client what makes him the most money.  Yeah, it does sound alot like the LP's of the 80's.  "If something sounds too good to be true it probably is".  Advisors like Bobby Hull make the discount brokers look really good to the consumer.  What % of your book is in VA's???  

[/quote]

Bobby, if he does the business ethically like he says, could sell 100% of his clients an annuity.  If he only sells annuities, why would there be other investments in his book.  If you're a stockbroker, your clients will only have stocks.  The clients will go to another guy for their other needs.  When you SPECIALIZE like that, you generally won't have 100% of the client's assets. 

[quote=BullBroker][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=pretzelhead][quote=Bobby Hull]

Cha-Ching. No wonder the merrill girls hate annuities. They don't get paid on them and we do! Selling VA's to merrill clients is a piece of cake.

[/quote]

So what Bobby has just said is that he sells the client what makes him the most money.  Yeah, it does sound alot like the LP's of the 80's.  "If something sounds too good to be true it probably is".  Advisors like Bobby Hull make the discount brokers look really good to the consumer.  What % of your book is in VA's???  

[/quote]

About 85%. The rest is in EIA's and DPP's. Why?

What company do you use?  Do you put them in the Daily step-up, or annual step-up VA’s??  Are you with a company that will pull money out of the market and into cash-equivalents if the market turns down??  Do your clients know how much fees they are paying??

[quote=BullBroker]What company do you use?  Do you put them in the Daily step-up, or annual step-up VA's??  Are you with a company that will pull money out of the market and into cash-equivalents if the market turns down??  Do your clients know how much fees they are paying??[/quote]

Oh, shut up.

Haven’t heard of them.  What is their rating?  Are they appropriately leveraged?  What is their step-up guarantee? 

[quote=wallstreeter]

This could’ve been pretty bad:  75 year old lady had a broker who somehow got half of her investable assets, about $300k, in a Mexican Telecom stock.  She came to a guy in our office who quickly got her out of it and basically saved her from losing half of her investments.  Could have been absolutely tragic.

Any other bad stories?

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=wallstreeter]

This could've been pretty bad:  75 year old lady had a broker who somehow got half of her investable assets, about $300k, in a Mexican Telecom stock.  She came to a guy in our office who quickly got her out of it and basically saved her from losing half of her investments.  Could have been absolutely tragic.

Any other bad stories?

[/quote]

Maybe she originally put 5-10% in the stock and had made significant profits, and was so ecstatic she refused to sell because "the stock was going up". 

Oh no....clients never do that.
[/quote]

If I remember correctly, it was a cheap stock and there were no gains...in fact there were losses she had to take.  But I am well aware, as I know you are too, of choices clients make sometimes if left up to them.  That being said, I wouldn't post that here if it was the client's fault she ended up like that.

[quote=FreeLunch]

Annuities Are Not easy to sell

because they are too complicated for me to explain in terms that my clients can understand.

[quote=skippy][quote=FreeLunch]

Annuities Are Not easy to sell

because they are too complicated for me to explain in terms that my clients can understand.

[/quote] [/quote]

I'm imagining skippy reading his answers aloud a la Richard Dawson....

"SURVEY SAYS..........NUMBER ONE ANSWER!!!!!"

Good stuff, my man. 

[quote=AllREIT] [quote=FreeLunch]Annuities are __________[/quote]

Annuities are very profitable for everyone except the client.

Where are the annuitant's yachts?
[/quote]

You are ASSUMING that all VAs are sold.  Perhaps in Bobby Hull's practice, that's all he sells.  Not me.

I give the client a choice.  The client chooses between 3 different "platforms" to work together.

#1 - Mutual Funds (A la Carte) - this is a bucket of stocks, bonds, mutual funds, treasuries, ETF's - whatever.  Annual costs run about 1.25% per year depending on WHAT we choose to put in the bucket.

#2 - Mutual Funds w/portfolio insurance.  You have the same expenses of the mutual funds, but we put an insurance wrapper around your portfolio.  You insure your car, life, house, health, why not your portfolio?  Expenses run about 2.5% per year.  You enjoy the peace of mind knowing that you won't lose what you put in this account because it's insured by one of the largest insurance companies in the world.  This option works well if you have a hard time sleeping at night that your portfolio may be at risk.  But that peace of mind does cost extra, and you can't take out all your money at one time.  Otherwise, you're assessed a penalty from the insurer.

#3 - Mutual Funds "Pay as you go".  This is typically known as a fee-based, wrap or managed money account.  This is where we hire a team of strategists to manage your portfolio.  These expenses run about 1.75% per year (including portfolio mangement expenses).

Of these 3 platforms, which do you think might make the most sense for you?

Over time, we'll hone in on exactly which will work out the best given your circumstances and your plans.

When I sell a VA, it's in a way that the client sees an extra value in having portfolio insurance.  It's not the only way to sell VAs.  I don't sell THAT many of them, but it's another way for the multiple-disciplined advisor to discuss them.

[quote=skbroker]

[/quote]

My back office doesn't help with ANY planning or case presentation ideas.  Sometimes, they can barely process the papers I send them properly.

I'll get input on any case that I want, on whatever forum I want.  I'll spend my time any way that I see fit.  I don't need some "online babysitter" to tell me what to do and when to do it.  Got it?

Why don't you ADD something constructive to the conversation? 

[quote=skbroker]

[/quote]

Well, I can't speak of other reps on the boards, but I've only been posting here after hours. 

[quote=skippy][quote=FreeLunch]

Annuities Are Not easy to sell

because they are too complicated for me to explain in terms that my clients can understand.

[/quote] [/quote]

Then you are not a very good salesman and probably not too smart either if you can't explain a product to your clients.

Here is some advice: Learn some grammar and you might not sound like such a complete and total douchebag.

Ferris

Grammer looks pretty good.   Ok, I leave now.  All you big producers have a great time in this forum.  I have never heard so many 200k producer sound so important.  Get on the phone and make some outgoing call and stop bitching about your life. 

Go Wachovia 

Are your eyes narrow slits?  You sound like it.

[quote=skbroker]

Ferris,

What's a eyes narrow slit?  you mean epicanthic eyefolds?  You mean chink, jap, and nips?  Don't be afraid to say it.  You can hide your racist feeling on the internet.  No one will report you to your manager.  Its ok.  you can say it.

I never heard anyone say eyes narrrow slit?  I heard slanted, chinky, toothfloss but never eyes narrow slit.  You are too dumb enough too be racist.  LOL  

Your last post just proved my point.

Outsourced Poster, courtesy of Joe, you will now be called.

[quote=Ferris Bueller]

Your last post just proved my point.

Outsourced Poster, courtesy of Joe, you will now be called.

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=skbroker]

[/quote]

Ok I think I've figured it out.  It's all about the new economy.  You're not actually the million dollar producer you say you are, you're obviously an "outsourced poster" that the million dollar producer hired to keep his presence on the RR board because he's too busy doing business.  So you're sitting in your cubicle in Mumbai writing posts based on the outline he gave you, and in light of that we should certainly understand your grammar and spelling.

Very impressive!
[/quote]

Joe, Mumbai?!?! That is some funny sh*t!  I just can't understand why he is the only one on this RR forum that writes in such big letters...kinda like my 8 year old nephew...I thought you had to be at least 13 to get on this board anyways...

[quote=wallstreeter][quote=joedabrkr] [quote=skbroker]

[/quote]

Ok I think I've figured it out.  It's all about the new economy.  You're not actually the million dollar producer you say you are, you're obviously an "outsourced poster" that the million dollar producer hired to keep his presence on the RR board because he's too busy doing business.  So you're sitting in your cubicle in Mumbai writing posts based on the outline he gave you, and in light of that we should certainly understand your grammar and spelling.

Very impressive!
[/quote]

Joe, Mumbai?!?! That is some funny sh*t!  I just can't understand why he is the only one on this RR forum that writes in such big letters...kinda like my 8 year old nephew...I thought you had to be at least 13 to get on this board anyways...

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=Ferris Bueller]

Your last post just proved my point.

Outsourced Poster, courtesy of Joe, you will now be called.

[/quote]

Let's name him "Habib, the guy from the Mastercard call center".
[/quote]

I just ordered a new Dell computer for the office and I swear I spoke with Habib and his ENTIRE freaking family, but I'm not sure because I couldn't understand him. 

I am glad he found this board because I have to ask him a question:

Hey skbroker (Habib) - Should I go with Vista or stick with XP???

Sheeeee’s baaaaaack.

As to the question of anyone ever having lost money when an insurer goes belly up.

The answer is YES! YES YES YES and YES some more!

Anybody remember Executive Life? This guy was in bed with Junk Bonder Milikin and would use funds from the annuity company to buy the bonds of leveraged buyouts...

One example that I remember was a company named (IIRC) Pacific Lumber. The buyer went to Milikin and said "They have an overfunded pension fund."  Well it all depended on how you looked at it, if the company assumed a 3% return, the pension plan was funded conservatively, but if you assumed a 15% return, there was way too much money in the plan.

Milikin calls Carr and sets up a $600,000,000 financing deal. Buyer buys Pac Lumb, takes 600,000,000 and funds the pension with an Executive Life Annuity (which was "paying" around 15%) pocketted the difference (which would have been several hundred millions of dollars) and pretty much shut down the company (who wanted to be stuck running a lumber company on the left coast afterall?).

Junk Bonds tanked, companies went out of business at rates never seen before and Executive life's portfolio was all of a sudden worth spit! It went out of business... guess what? The retirees of Pacific Lumber now held worthless annuity policies with a company that was out of business.

In NY, when Exewcutive Life of NY went under, the policy holders were shifted over to Met Life and got a minimal payout (used to be that 3% was seen as an impossibly low rate) and a HUGE surrender fees for about 7 years (regardless of how long they had held the ELoNY policy) and so their income went from 13,000 per year (on a 100,000 policy) to 3,000.

Be careful when you see things like "A dividend every year since 1831" in that they may have paid on in January of 1929 and then a penny in December of 1930 and they still can claim the "uninterrupted" dividend. (IIRC, Con ED was one like this, and during the 60's they were really really close to breaking the string. Not that it is a bad company today, but just be aware that there are ways to make disaster look like a happy ending.

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

As to the question of anyone ever having lost money when an insurer goes belly up.

The answer is YES! YES YES YES and YES some more!

Anybody remember Executive Life? This guy was in bed with Junk Bonder Milikin and would use funds from the annuity company to buy the bonds of leveraged buyouts...

One example that I remember was a company named (IIRC) Pacific Lumber. The buyer went to Milikin and said "They have an overfunded pension fund."  Well it all depended on how you looked at it, if the company assumed a 3% return, the pension plan was funded conservatively, but if you assumed a 15% return, there was way too much money in the plan.

Milikin calls Carr and sets up a $600,000,000 financing deal. Buyer buys Pac Lumb, takes 600,000,000 and funds the pension with an Executive Life Annuity (which was "paying" around 15%) pocketted the difference (which would have been several hundred millions of dollars) and pretty much shut down the company (who wanted to be stuck running a lumber company on the left coast afterall?).

Junk Bonds tanked, companies went out of business at rates never seen before and Executive life's portfolio was all of a sudden worth spit! It went out of business... guess what? The retirees of Pacific Lumber now held worthless annuity policies with a company that was out of business.

In NY, when Exewcutive Life of NY went under, the policy holders were shifted over to Met Life and got a minimal payout (used to be that 3% was seen as an impossibly low rate) and a HUGE surrender fees for about 7 years (regardless of how long they had held the ELoNY policy) and so their income went from 13,000 per year (on a 100,000 policy) to 3,000.

Be careful when you see things like "A dividend every year since 1831" in that they may have paid on in January of 1929 and then a penny in December of 1930 and they still can claim the "uninterrupted" dividend. (IIRC, Con ED was one like this, and during the 60's they were really really close to breaking the string. Not that it is a bad company today, but just be aware that there are ways to make disaster look like a happy ending.

[/quote]

Whomit said "happy ending."

[quote=skbroker]

[/quote]

Where you rearn Engrish?

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Whomitmayconcer]

As to the question of anyone ever having lost money when an insurer goes belly up.

The answer is YES! YES YES YES and YES some more!

Anybody remember Executive Life? This guy was in bed with Junk Bonder Milikin and would use funds from the annuity company to buy the bonds of leveraged buyouts...

One example that I remember was a company named (IIRC) Pacific Lumber. The buyer went to Milikin and said "They have an overfunded pension fund."  Well it all depended on how you looked at it, if the company assumed a 3% return, the pension plan was funded conservatively, but if you assumed a 15% return, there was way too much money in the plan.

Milikin calls Carr and sets up a $600,000,000 financing deal. Buyer buys Pac Lumb, takes 600,000,000 and funds the pension with an Executive Life Annuity (which was "paying" around 15%) pocketted the difference (which would have been several hundred millions of dollars) and pretty much shut down the company (who wanted to be stuck running a lumber company on the left coast afterall?).

Junk Bonds tanked, companies went out of business at rates never seen before and Executive life's portfolio was all of a sudden worth spit! It went out of business... guess what? The retirees of Pacific Lumber now held worthless annuity policies with a company that was out of business.

In NY, when Exewcutive Life of NY went under, the policy holders were shifted over to Met Life and got a minimal payout (used to be that 3% was seen as an impossibly low rate) and a HUGE surrender fees for about 7 years (regardless of how long they had held the ELoNY policy) and so their income went from 13,000 per year (on a 100,000 policy) to 3,000.

Be careful when you see things like "A dividend every year since 1831" in that they may have paid on in January of 1929 and then a penny in December of 1930 and they still can claim the "uninterrupted" dividend. (IIRC, Con ED was one like this, and during the 60's they were really really close to breaking the string. Not that it is a bad company today, but just be aware that there are ways to make disaster look like a happy ending.

[/quote]

Whomit said "happy ending."

[/quote]

There's a great place for "happy ending" in china town in Philly. 

There's a great place for "happy ending" in china town in Philly.

Describe it to us. Spare no detail.

i had an ed jones broker 1035 an annuity from me ( I did not sell to him in the first place). the client was 81 years old and the death benefit was 85k. the value was about 40k. i even tried to call the broker who would not take my call. i explained to the client the situation and he did the 1035 anyway.

the worst i ever heard, but it may be urban legend ,was a broker who messed up a 1035 and liquidated and bought an annuity from the same company, but not the same product. sunamerca has three different channels. i heard this from a wholesaler

[quote=blarmston]

There's a great place for "happy ending" in china town in Philly.

Describe it to us. Spare no detail.

[/quote]

[quote=aldo63]

i had an ed jones broker 1035 an annuity from me ( I did not sell to him in the first place). the client was 81 years old and the death benefit was 85k. the value was about 40k. i even tried to call the broker who would not take my call. i explained to the client the situation and he did the 1035 anyway.

the worst i ever heard, but it may be urban legend ,was a broker who messed up a 1035 and liquidated and bought an annuity from the same company, but not the same product. sunamerca has three different channels. i heard this from a wholesaler

[/quote]

So what? The client doesn't care about the DB and wants to start making some money. You should've offered to help him, instead of making assumptions about what he wanted.

Like Ferris says my eyes are eyes narrow slit thats why I write in big letters.  Its kind of funny how a 16 years old can touch a nerve of such a big produers who brag about their number while spending 4 hours a day waiting on the computer for others to respond to their massage.  Get a life guys.    

mr hull

sell with a built in double when he dies and his life epectancy is about 5 years???? maybe you would do that, i could not.

Aldo, why do you assume that the client cares about leaving money behind?

[quote=aldo63]

mr hull

sell with a built in double when he dies and his life epectancy is about 5 years???? maybe you would do that, i could not.

[/quote]

mr alpo, yes. that's what i'm saying. his new death/living benefit base will be $300,000. with the new annuity, a drop in value to anything less than $300,000 will be captured by the guarantee. if you don't do it, he'll can lose $200,000 without any protection. if i were to show him that before you, i'd get the business. you gotta use your noodle, son.

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=aldo63]

mr hull

sell with a built in double when he dies and his life epectancy is about 5 years???? maybe you would do that, i could not.

[/quote]

mr alpo, yes. that's what i'm saying. his new death/living benefit base will be $300,000. with the new annuity, a drop in value to anything less than $300,000 will be captured by the guarantee. if you don't do it, he'll can lose $200,000 without any protection. if i were to show him that before you, i'd get the business. you gotta use your noodle, son.

[/quote]

Sorry about my illogical response. I'm thinking of something else.

Again, you're assuming that he gives a sh*t about the DB. Obviously he doesn't. You didn't change his mind, did you? If it were an older contract, you could've taken out all but a few thousand bucks, reduced the SB dollar for dollar and put the money in a new one, maintaining the high DB amount.

I dunno I rean englishee from you a muther while she was suckii mu deek. 

stick with XP.  no point in wasting money

[quote=skbroker]stick with XP.  no point in wasting money[/quote]

Too late, the computer just arrived today.  It would have actually cost MORE at Dell to install it with XP.  I just hope there isn't much software incompatability since we are using the Bill Good system.  Anyhow, I guess everything will be made using Vista in the future, so we'll see. Being an indy, it's time to put my IT hat on and set up the system myself (it was much easier having the tech guy at Merrill do it for me in the past)

[quote=skbroker]

I dunno I rean englishee from you a muther while she was suckii mu deek. 

[/quote]

If she could be doing that and still speaking, it means she didn't have much of a mouthfull!

In this country, those with tic tac sized danglers don't like to advertise that fact.

I guess you were buttf**ked by asian and couldn’t feel anything.

fyi  

I m hispanic not asian. you racist pig.  Have a good day   

[quote=skbroker]

fyi  

I m hispanic not asian. you racist pig.  Have a good day   

[/quote]

Hispanic isn't a race.  I don't believe you anyway.

Hey Dipsh*t

hispanic is a race.  Look it up.  Why wont you believe me?  I have been honest with you the whole time.  LOL

No it isn't. The three main races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. There are blended, isolated and sub groups such as Amerindians, South African Bushmen, Australian Aborigines, which are classified as Caucasoid the way.

The classification of races mostly is done with the skin and meat off:  by the bones, skull features and teeth.  It has nothing to do with skin color or cultural attributes.

Hispanic is a culture.

You haven't been honest at all.  You are the reincarnated troll echo et all.

cant believe you actually looked it up.  Now go outside,come back in, spin 3 times and stick your finger in you nose.  Is like playing with a 3 year old.  ok no more.  Have a great career. 

Didn't need to look it up. I knew it already.......I have an education.

I'm also off work and studying .....more education (actually avoiding studying atm ), listening to classroom lectures on CDs and bored out of my mind.  What's your excuse?

cant believe you actually looked it up. Now go outside,come back in, spin 3 times and stick your finger in you nose. Is like playing with a 3 year old. ok no more. Have a great career.

[quote=Dust Bunny]

No it isn't. The three main races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. There are blended, isolated and sub groups such as Amerindians, South African Bushmen, Australian Aborigines, which are classified as Caucasoid the way.

The classification of races mostly is done with the skin and meat off:  by the bones, skull features and teeth.  It has nothing to do with skin color or cultural attributes.

Hispanic is a culture.

You haven't been honest at all.  You are the reincarnated troll echo et all.

[/quote]

I'm having doubts about some of the Slave-Americans. Can we skin some just to make sure?

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Dust Bunny]

No it isn't. The three main races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. There are blended, isolated and sub groups such as Amerindians, South African Bushmen, Australian Aborigines, which are classified as Caucasoid the way.

The classification of races mostly is done with the skin and meat off:  by the bones, skull features and teeth.  It has nothing to do with skin color or cultural attributes.

Hispanic is a culture.

You haven't been honest at all.  You are the reincarnated troll echo et all.

[/quote]

I'm having doubts about some of the Slave-Americans. Can we skin some just to make sure?

[/quote]

Well, that "would" be the definitive test.  But I think not.  Let's just guess.

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=Bobby Hull][quote=Dust Bunny]

No it isn't. The three main races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. There are blended, isolated and sub groups such as Amerindians, South African Bushmen, Australian Aborigines, which are classified as Caucasoid the way.

The classification of races mostly is done with the skin and meat off:  by the bones, skull features and teeth.  It has nothing to do with skin color or cultural attributes.

Hispanic is a culture.

You haven't been honest at all.  You are the reincarnated troll echo et all.

[/quote]

I'm having doubts about some of the Slave-Americans. Can we skin some just to make sure?

[/quote]

Well, that "would" be the definitive test.  But I think not.  Let's just guess.

[/quote]

You're such a buzzkill.

[quote=Dust Bunny]

No it isn't. The three main races are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. There are blended, isolated and sub groups such as Amerindians, South African Bushmen, Australian Aborigines, which are classified as Caucasoid the way.

The classification of races mostly is done with the skin and meat off:  by the bones, skull features and teeth.  It has nothing to do with skin color or cultural attributes.

Hispanic is a culture.

You haven't been honest at all.  You are the reincarnated troll echo et all.

[/quote]

I haven’t used a broker but the worse thing I have seen them do is get down and dirty with other posters here. 

[quote=WYSIWYG]I haven’t used a broker but the worse thing I have seen them do is get down and dirty with other posters here. [/quote]

OK Madison.  Thanks for sharing.