Banks, Wirehouses, Regionals

As my GDC grows from my own hardwork (not bank referrals) I start to ask myself the same question.

[quote=Helter Skelter]I don't get it...what the heck do these firms do for you that causes you to want to pay them 60-70% of YOUR money?[/quote]

Ask the thousands of large producers throughout the industry who belong to those firms why they think it's worth the cost. It's a mistake to assume they haven't done the math and determined, that at least for now, it's worth it. (btw, nobody that I know of takes 70%, the range runs more like 64% to 56%)

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Helter Skelter]I don't get it...what the heck do these firms do for you that causes you to want to pay them 60-70% of YOUR money?[/quote]

Ask the thousands of large producers throughout the industry who belong to those firms why they think it's worth the cost. It's a mistake to assume they haven't done the math and determined, that at least for now, it's worth it. (btw, nobody that I know of takes 70%, the range runs more like 64% to 56%)

[/quote]

You aren't what I had in mind when I posed the question.

Obviously, we should consider the business end of the cut as payment for services received.  It's no different than life as an indy.  I give my B/D roughly 14% in override and ticket charges for providing a technology/product platform, clearing trades, printing statements, etc.  There are some services that banks, wirehouses and regionals provided (name recognition, referrals, operations management, etc.) that I did not use or value sufficiently for me to consider my employer's cut a good deal.

At the same time, I do several tasks that my employer used to do for me.  The money part of the decision to stay with an employer vs. go independent is as simple as asking yourself whether or not you feel that you are overpaying for the services your employer provides that an indy B/D won't.  Those that stay employed do so for as variety of reasons, but the money part of the decision was not the primary consideration in my choice.  I wanted my freedom...the extra money is just gravy and compensation for the management functions I take care of now.

[quote=Helter Skelter]I don’t get it…what the heck do these firms do for you that causes you to want to pay them 60-70% of YOUR money?[/quote]

You’re too focused on percentages.   Who cares if your payout percentage is higher, when your total income is lower?

The average FA at a Wirehouse makes about $250K.  The average independent takes home a lot less than that.  Not all FAs who go indy see an increase in their take home.  I know some who made more by going indy, and some who did not.

Sure, you can probably take most of your book with you.  Probably.  But can you grow your book?  How well will you weather a bear market?  Will you see more growth as an indy than with a big name?  These are all big unknowns.

Whatever the reason, you can’t deny that the majority of million dollar producers prefer working with a major firm.

If they are unhappy with their current firm, they just move to a better one.  These are smart people, and they are interested in building for the long-term.  Give them some credit. 

[quote=Indyone]At the same time, I do several tasks that my employer used to do for me.  The money part of the decision to stay with an employer vs. go independent is as simple as asking yourself whether or not you feel that you are overpaying for the services your employer provides that an indy B/D won’t.  Those that stay employed do so for as variety of reasons, but the money part of the decision was not the primary consideration in my choice.  I wanted my freedom…the extra money is just gravy and compensation for the management functions I take care of now.[/quote]

You make a good point about freedom.  A good number of the indy FAs that I know wanted the ability to hire others and build a firm (instead of just a practice).  It’s almost as though they wanted to become a branch manager (only with more freedom).

You can do that at a good wire.  We are allowed to build a team
with as many partners and employees as we want.  The firm is
limited as to what they will pay for 100%, but you can hire and create
comp for them based on goals you set up for them. 



As an example- If I am a producer doing 1.5 million at a 45% pay-out I
am making $675,000 pre bonus.  Now I want to grow but am at
capacity, so I hire a newbie and pay them $50,000 to handle all
accounts under $250k, but I keep all fees from these accounts. 
They get a bonus for each new account they bring in by putting those
accounts into a pool where they earn fee’s on top of the $50K I am
paying them.  This free’s up my time to spend more time with the
better clients and develop more real business.   



How much do I need to bring to pay for the $50k?  About $10
million in new business-just once (its fee based)  after that I am
in the black.  Thats a few clients plus a little market tailwind
easily done inside of a year.  Do this on a regular basis,
bringing people along the way and you have a nice business.  This
is how many of the real big teams (5 million plus in production) do
it.  I know people that we 1 million and change 7 years back that
are now 6 million plus under this model…it works.



All the while having 2-3 assistants paid for by the firm plus the tools
and resources.  Add in your corp stock growing like my employers
is (nearly doubling in 4 years) and you have a nice base to build some
wealth.  All the while providing a profound and noble service to
the public.  Not a bad gig.

[quote=Helter Skelter][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Helter Skelter]I don't get it...what the heck do these firms do for you that causes you to want to pay them 60-70% of YOUR money?[/quote]

Ask the thousands of large producers throughout the industry who belong to those firms why they think it's worth the cost. It's a mistake to assume they haven't done the math and determined, that at least for now, it's worth it. (btw, nobody that I know of takes 70%, the range runs more like 64% to 56%)

[/quote]

You aren't what I had in mind when I posed the question.

[/quote]

Like it matters what's in your mind......

[quote=JCadieux] [quote=Helter Skelter]I don't get it...what the heck do these firms do for you that causes you to want to pay them 60-70% of YOUR money?[/quote]

You're too focused on percentages.   Who cares if your payout percentage is higher, when your total income is lower?

Nobody with any brains.

The average FA at a Wirehouse makes about $250K.  The average independent takes home a lot less than that.  Not all FAs who go indy see an increase in their take home.  I know some who made more by going indy, and some who did not.

I'm not average. I saw a marked increase in take home and in gross. I found that the more gross I get to keep, the more I do. Ironic.

Sure, you can probably take most of your book with you.  Probably.  But can you grow your book?  How well will you weather a bear market?  Will you see more growth as an indy than with a big name?  These are all big unknowns.

THese are not unknowns. My book is more than twice as large and it's EASY to take business from wirehouses. Real easy.

Whatever the reason, you can't deny that the majority of million dollar producers prefer working with a major firm.

Why the hell do you think I asked the question? What you see as million dollar producers I see as $400,000 earners.

If they are unhappy with their current firm, they just move to a better one.  These are smart people, and they are interested in building for the long-term.  Give them some credit. 

Yes, they are smart people. That's why I'm baffled.


[/quote]

[quote=Helter Skelter]

[quote=JCadieux]

You’re too focused on percentages.   Who cares if your payout percentage is higher, when your total income is lower?

    HS> Nobody with any brains.

    HS> I'm not average. I saw a marked increase in take home and in gross. I found that the more gross I get to keep, the more I do. Ironic.

        JC> I think that's my point.  Not everybody is the same. Some do better, and some do worse.  That's why not everybody goes indy.

Sure, you can probably take most of your book with you.  Probably.  But can you grow your book?  How well will you weather a bear market?  Will you see more growth as an indy than with a big name?  These are all big unknowns.

    HS> THese are not unknowns. My book is more than twice as large and it's EASY to take business from wirehouses. Real easy.

        JC> But you're not like everybody.  Not everybody is certain that they will do better before they jump.  And a certain percentage are wrong about it, and end up doing worse.

Whatever the reason, you can't deny that the majority of million dollar producers prefer working with a major firm.

    HS> Why the hell do you think I asked the question? What you see as million dollar producers I see as $400,000 earners.

If they are unhappy with their current firm, they just move to a better one.  These are smart people, and they are interested in building for the long-term.  Give them some credit. 

    HS> Yes, they are smart people. That's why I'm baffled.

         JC> I talk to candidates all the time about switching wirehouses, only to lose them to the indy channel.  Some of them have good reasons for going.  I really can't blame them.  Some of them don't seem to know what they're doing.  All of them understand that it's a big change with lots of hassles and risks.

        [/quote]

All of them understand that it's a big change with lots of hassles and risks

Isn't that the definition of life in general?

[quote=babbling looney]

All of them understand that it’s a big change with lots of hassles and risks

Isn't that the definition of life in general?

Let me see when I worked at the wirehouse I had 0 clients walk in the door and I had a 50% payout and a free office.



If I go indy I get a 90% payout with no one coming to see me but I have to pay rent and do the business owner tasks.



At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don’t you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long.

[quote=bankrep1]

At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don't you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long.

[/quote]

One $2k IRA at a time.....

Mike, your information is dated…IRAs are $4K now.

[quote=Indyone]Mike, your information is dated...IRAs are $4K now.[/quote]

That's the limit, that's not what the average bank customer contributes 

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]

At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don’t you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long.

[/quote]

One $2k IRA at a time.....

[quote=Indyone]Mike, your information is dated…IRAs are $4K now.

That's the limit, that's not what the average bank customer contributes  [/quote]

ouch...glad I'm out of the bank so I can escape your wrath...

Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month. As for IRA’s I open a lot of them I have no shame in that.

[quote=bankrep1]Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month. As for IRA's I open a lot of them I have no shame in that.
[/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[quote=bankrep1]Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, [/quote]

Given there are a limited number of hours in a day (much less what you have in the lobby) what's the max you can make dealing with smaller, less profitable households? Either you're screwing yourself on potential income or you're screwing them by shortchanging them on the time required to do the job right. I'd rather spend that time dealing with people with real assets, giving them real time and attention.

[quote=bankrep1]Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month.[/quote]

I couldn't care less what fiction Goode spits out in order to sell his marketing system. Anyone adding only 8 households above $250k, much less 4 a year is on his way out of the business.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, [/quote]

Given there are a limited number of hours in a day (much less what you have in the lobby) what's the max you can make dealing with smaller, less profitable households? Either you're screwing yourself on potential income or you're screwing them by shortchanging them on the time required to do the job right. I'd rather spend that time dealing with people with real assets, giving them real time and attention.

[quote=bankrep1]Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month.[/quote]

I couldn't care less what fiction Goode spits out in order to sell his marketing system. Anyone adding only 8 households above $250k, much less 4 a year is on his way out of the business.

There definitely seems to be a disconnect concerning running your business in the bank setting.

I've been in my practice two years and have never solicited an annuity product.  

How did bank brokerage get this perhaps undeserved repuatation?

Whether we are working in a bank, wirehouse or Indy channel make sure your setting is what works best for you and your clients.   Hardly makes a difference which of the three is chosen.

scrim

[quote=scrim67]

There definitely seems to be a disconnect concerning running your business in the bank setting.

I've been in my practice two years and have never solicited an annuity product.  

How did bank brokerage get this perhaps undeserved repuatation?

Whether we are working in a bank, wirehouse or Indy channel make sure your setting is what works best for you and your clients.   Hardly makes a difference which of the three is chosen.

scrim

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=scrim67]

There definitely seems to be a disconnect concerning running your business in the bank setting.

I've been in my practice two years and have never solicited an annuity product.  

How did bank brokerage get this perhaps undeserved repuatation?

Whether we are working in a bank, wirehouse or Indy channel make sure your setting is what works best for you and your clients.   Hardly makes a difference which of the three is chosen.

scrim

[/quote]

Perhaps because you are the exception that proves the rule....
[/quote]

I had little idea what the proverb actually means.   Here is what I found:

You’re right to query the expression. It has caused as much confusion as any other in the language and is often argued about. The misunderstanding has been amplified by well-meaning but incorrect attempts going back a century to explain it.

These days it is often used sweepingly to justify an inconsistency. Those who use it seem to be saying that the existence of a case that doesn’t follow a rule proves the rule applies in all other cases and so is generally correct, notwithstanding the exception. This is nonsense, because the logical implication of finding that something doesn’t follow a rule is that there must be something wrong with the rule. As the old maxim has it, you need find only one white crow to disprove the rule that all crows are black.

It has often been suggested in reference works that prove here is really being used in the sense of “test” (as it does in terms like “proving ground” or “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”, or in the printer’s proof, which is a test page run off to see that all is correct with the typesetting). It is said that the real idea behind the saying is that the presence of what looks like an exception tests whether a rule is really valid or not. If you can’t reconcile the supposed exception with the rule, there must indeed be something wrong with the rule. The expression is indeed used in this sense, but that’s not where it comes from or what it strictly means.

The problem with that attempted explanation is that those putting it forward have picked on the wrong word to challenge. It’s not a false sense of proof that causes the problem, but exception. We think of it as meaning some case that doesn’t follow the rule, but the original sense was of someone or something that is granted permission not to follow a rule that otherwise applies. The true origin of the phrase lies in a medieval Latin legal principle: exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis, which may be translated as “the exception confirms the rule in the cases not excepted”.

Let us say that you drive down a street somewhere and find a notice which says “Parking prohibited on Sundays”. You may reasonably infer from this that parking is allowed on the other six days of the week. A sign on a museum door which says “Entry free today” leads to the implication that entry is not free on other days (unless it’s a marketing ploy like the never-ending sales that some stores have, but let’s not get sidetracked). H W Fowler gave an example from his wartime experience: “Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight until 11pm”, which implies a rule that in other cases men must be in barracks before that time. So, in its strict sense, the principle is arguing that the existence of an allowed exception to a rule reaffirms the existence of the rule.

Despite the number of reference books which carefully explain the origin and true meaning of the expression, it is unlikely that it will ever be restored to strict correctness. The usual rule in lexicography is that sayings progress towards corruption and decay, never the reverse. Unless this one proves to be an exception ...

You don't have to say it:   Yes, I have way too much free time!

scrim

I service all accounts under 100K a year, one time per year when they are dropping off a check usually. At some point I will not open IRA’s, then I will hire a jr. broker to do it.



I do 0 stock business so I don’t spend time talking about portfolios, tinkering with research, looking up stuff, etc. I outsource prospecting, money management and all reporting, to me it is the most efficient path to success. If you like what you do good, you don’t hear me saying the wirehouse sucks even though I think it does.

[quote=bankrep1]I service all accounts under 100K a year, one time per year when they are dropping off a check usually. At some point I will not open IRA's, then I will hire a jr. broker to do it.

I do 0 stock business so I don't spend time talking about portfolios, tinkering with research, looking up stuff, etc. I outsource prospecting, money management and all reporting, to me it is the most efficient path to success. If you like what you do good, you don't hear me saying the wirehouse sucks even though I think it does.[/quote]

When you freely admit that you outsource everything, including the prospecting, it's a logical question to ask why the bank needs you.

How old do you figure you'll be when the bank fires you--well, let's say they downsize you?  You won't own your book, your clients are at the bank because they're afraid to be anywhere else, so what will you have to offer a future employer?

What happens to the entry level people in banks--your slot on the organization chart seems to me to be a revolving door to nowhere.

You say you do "zero" stock trades--so why in the world would a real brokerage firm want you when the bank explains that they're going to consolidate and the nice black woman from another branch will be handling your branch too since both of your branches are "mature" and need little more than once or twice a week coverage.

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, [/quote]

Given there are a limited number of hours in a day (much less what you have in the lobby) what's the max you can make dealing with smaller, less profitable households? Either you're screwing yourself on potential income or you're screwing them by shortchanging them on the time required to do the job right. I'd rather spend that time dealing with people with real assets, giving them real time and attention.

[quote=bankrep1]Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month.[/quote]

I couldn't care less what fiction Goode spits out in order to sell his marketing system. Anyone adding only 8 households above $250k, much less 4 a year is on his way out of the business.

[/quote]

MikeB don't forget it's easy to handle small accounts like that when you slam 'em into an annuity and never call them again......
[/quote]

You make that sound like a bad thing. Why call them if they can't do any more business?

[quote=bankrep1]I service all accounts under 100K a year, one time per year when they are dropping off a check usually. At some point I will not open IRA's, then I will hire a jr. broker to do it.

I do 0 stock business so I don't spend time talking about portfolios, tinkering with research, looking up stuff, etc. I outsource prospecting, money management and all reporting, to me it is the most efficient path to success. If you like what you do good, you don't hear me saying the wirehouse sucks even though I think it does.[/quote]

If I had your type of success, I'd call myself a failure.

I don’t need to defend myself I have several clients who would follow me if I decided to leave, but I don’t see why I would.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]

At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don't you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long.

[/quote]

One $2k IRA at a time.....

[/quote]

I worked at Morgan Stanley as well as a bank.  For someone who so diligently corrects others on their inaccuracies and 'fear mongering; MikeButler222's comments are totally spoken from the a*s.

I spoke with exponentially more high net worth prospects in one month at the bank than I did in 2 years at Morgan Stanley.  Perhaps it had something to do with my natural market (I was even younger then) and not personally knowing alot of wealthy foks.  Never the less my average account was easily $100,000 plus...with quite a few $500,000 and above accounts.  I never opened an account less than $50,000 at the bank.  Small IRA's were for the bank CD's or the 'platform' rep.

As far as I know, I was not the exception among my other bank broker peers.

MikeButler222, I have been on both sides and can say that I had plenty of sophisticated clients (one was a senior executive of GE/Boeings' joint aircraft engine project) at the bank.  Many of them had acconts with major brokerage houses and were fed up with what they percieved as 'slicksters' running their money.

I have come to the conclusion that those who make broad, blind comments based on their own ego centered opinions (as opposed to what the truth is) are bad at giving good advice.

I would say, though, that I would prefer to work at a wirehouse far more than my previous bank program. 

Please ignore the grammar f*ck ups.  I understand that I may be asking too much though.

Dude, you make good points here.  I, too, spent some time in a bank program, and the program itself wasn't terrible for attracting assets...it was bank management that was my problem.  At one point, I had two accounts in the $5 million + range, and I had probably 12-13 in the million dollar plus range.

Mike zealously defends his platform and he's entitled to do so.  Many on here know that at one point, he & I had a pretty spirited debate about wirehouses vs. indies.  We later made nice and I respect his choice to affiliate with MS and defend them (even though one of the biggest lying @ssholes I ever competed against was from a Morgan Stanley office).

That being said, I do think that MB is too quick to generalize about bank brokers, as are others on these boards.  I certainly met some very stout advisors while I was in the bank channel, and certainly, there have been many successful migrations out of the bank channel to other platforms.  Although my production is modest, I would classify my move form a bank to indy as successful...I'm certainly making more than I did at the bank.  No doubt, there are some lazy bank brokers that perpetuate the stereotypes that many cling to, but I for one think that banks, for all of their warts, do a much better job of recruiting quality reps than they've done in the past.

...and Dude, after you're done reading this post, please log back on as Grammar Police and fix your post...

[quote=dude]

I worked at Morgan Stanley as well as a bank. For someone who so diligently corrects others on their inaccuracies and 'fear mongering; MikeButler222's comments are totally spoken from the a*s. [/quote]

You forget I was at a bank as well, dude, a national program that‘s mentioned here often... So who’s talking from where?

[quote=dude]I spoke with exponentially more high net worth prospects in one month at the bank than I did in 2 years at Morgan Stanley. Perhaps it had something to do with my natural market (I was even younger then) and not personally knowing alot of wealthy foks. [/quote]

I'm not trying to be cruel here, dude, but do you think it's because you didn't bring HNW to MS? I don't know what kind of bank you were at, but where I was HNW people went to private bank and the trust dept. They did not talk to the guy in the investment arm. The bank employees were paid to send them to PB and trust, not me. Furthermore, PB and trust had first crack at all accounts over $300K.

Most of the referrals I did get from bank people were either cranks that PB wouldn't work with or were opening an asset account they could borrow against with the bank folks with little or no work to be done with the investments. The average client there just wasn’t the same sort of investor I work with today and their asset levels simply don’t compare.

If the picken’s were that great, why would you leave?

[quote=dude] I never opened an account less than $50,000 at the bank. [/quote]

That would make you something of a rarity, dude.

[quote=dude] Small IRA's were for the bank CD's or the 'platform' rep.[/quote]

What's a "platform rep"?

[quote=dude]

MikeButler222, I have been on both sides and can say that I had plenty of sophisticated clients (one was a senior executive of GE/Boeings' joint aircraft engine project) at the bank. Many of them had acconts with major brokerage houses and were fed up with what they percieved as 'slicksters' running their money. [/quote]

Then your program was a marvel, because in most bank programs you wouldn't have gotten those folks, PB would have.

[quote=dude]

I have come to the conclusion that those who make broad, blind comments based on their own ego centered opinions (as opposed to what the truth is) are bad at giving good advice.[/quote]

Pot, kettle, black.

[quote=dude]

I would say, though, that I would prefer to work at a wirehouse far more than my previous bank program.

[/quote]

Now that surprises me given how positively you described it. Why is that?

[quote=dude] [quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don’t you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long. [/quote]

One $2k IRA at a time…

[/quote]

I worked at Morgan Stanley as well as a bank. For someone who so diligently corrects others on their inaccuracies and ‘fear mongering; MikeButler222’s comments are totally spoken from the a*s.

I spoke with exponentially more high net worth prospects in one month at the bank than I did in 2 years at Morgan Stanley. Perhaps it had something to do with my natural market (I was even younger then) and not personally knowing alot of wealthy foks. Never the less my average account was easily $100,000 plus…with quite a few $500,000 and above accounts. I never opened an account less than $50,000 at the bank. Small IRA’s were for the bank CD’s or the ‘platform’ rep.

As far as I know, I was not the exception among my other bank broker peers.

MikeButler222, I have been on both sides and can say that I had plenty of sophisticated clients (one was a senior executive of GE/Boeings’ joint aircraft engine project) at the bank. Many of them had acconts with major brokerage houses and were fed up with what they percieved as ‘slicksters’ running their money.

I have come to the conclusion that those who make broad, blind comments based on their own ego centered opinions (as opposed to what the truth is) are bad at giving good advice.

I would say, though, that I would prefer to work at a wirehouse far more than my previous bank program.

[quote=bankrep1]
This sounds like my program, I do not have any 5 million dollar accounts, but probably 10+ over a million and many over 250K.

We do not have private banking, trust, or a platform program so I handle everything. Million dollar accounts to the 2K IRA and things are great. I have the option of dumping my branches for increased payout 40-55% when my book is large enough.
[/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

You handle everything but don’t have any accounts over $5MM? Look, my jabs about $2k IRAs were 40% jest, and I’ll admit to blurring together a few of you folks with “bank” or “ez” in your names, but the prompting was the assertion by one of you guys that you essentially do what wirehouse (and I assume you’d include indies and regionals) do, except you don’t have to prospect.

My point was that that’s just not true. You (and these are generalizations across the bank world) have to deal with anyone referred to you (or you may p$ss off the referrer and thereby never get another) no matter how poor a prospect. You deal largely with smaller, less profitable accounts and that forces you, as you admitted, to under-service those accounts (once a year? Really?). You just don’t get much of a crack at the bigger, more profitable relationships that careers are built on.

Now, having said that, if I were a twentysomething and new to the industry, I may well try to earn my little broker wings at a bank rather than take the plunge (unless I had a network in place already) into a wirehouse or regional (and I wouldn’t even consider an indy role, there you really need to start seasoned). Even imagining having to go back to building a book as I did when I started out (if you even could with DNCL and the like) sends a chill up my spine and I’d even endure life at a bank to avoid it.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]
This sounds like my program, I do not have any 5 million dollar accounts, but probably 10+ over a million and many over 250K.

We do not have private banking, trust, or a platform program so I handle everything. Million dollar accounts to the 2K IRA and things are great. I have the option of dumping my branches for increased payout 40-55% when my book is large enough.
[/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

You handle everything but don’t have any accounts over $5MM? Look, my jabs about $2k IRAs were 40% jest, and I’ll admit to blurring together a few of you folks with “bank” or “ez” in your names, but the prompting was the assertion by one of you guys that you essentially do what wirehouse (and I assume you’d include indies and regionals) do, except you don’t have to prospect.

My point was that that’s just not true. You (and these are generalizations across the bank world) have to deal with anyone referred to you (or you may p$ss off the referrer and thereby never get another) no matter how poor a prospect. You deal largely with smaller, less profitable accounts and that forces you, as you admitted, to under-service those accounts (once a year? Really?). You just don’t get much of a crack at the bigger, more profitable relationships that careers are built on.

Now, having said that, if I were a twentysomething and new to the industry, I may well try to earn my little broker wings at a bank rather than take the plunge (unless I had a network in place already) into a wirehouse or regional (and I wouldn’t even consider an indy role, there you really need to start seasoned). Even imagining having to go back to building a book as I did when I started out (if you even could with DNCL and the like) sends a chill up my spine and I’d even endure life at a bank to avoid it.[/quote]

You are making very BROAD and narrow generalizations Mike.  I told the tellers who I wanted to talk with and although I would receive some low quality referrals, most were well above my minimums.

A platform rep is 63 and 6 licenced and can sell a limited menu of mutual funds and annuities.  These reps would be more in line with your stereotypes.

I left the bank because I relocated to a new state to cover three branches in a very remote area where there are many wealthy retirees.  My wife ended up hating it because there was nothing for her and our two children to do...plus there was a significant culture shock for her. 

Then the bank started f*cking with the grid (within my first 4 months too) and I saw a 30% drop in income during a time when I had signed up based on the income I would be making.  I should also note that I lived in a very high cost of living area...the income drop crushed me.  It wouldn't have been so bad if I had a year to get settled in.

The combination of my wife's misery and the bank's bullsh*t persuaded me to leave.  I was pretty despondent about the whole thing since I was looking for an opportunity to live in one of the most beautiful places in this country and have enough time to be a father while doing the work I love.

MB, much of what you just said is a pretty fair assessment of what I saw.  I literally had to ignore 90% of the referrals I received and build my book with the remaining 10% that were worth something and my own prospecting efforts.  No doubt I irritated some folks by not qualifiying their referrals, but thankfully, most of the folks I worked with understood my dilemma and admitted to me that they knew most of what they sent me was crap sent just to hit goal numbers to keep bak management happy.

We didn't have it, but I've seen the platform licensed reps referenced earlier, which are often part customer service reps and part-time mutual fund/annuity sales people.  They are either series 6 reps or strictly insurance licensed for fixed annuities and are designed to handle the small prospects.  I think that kind of program is great for a full-time rep who wants to chase the bigger dollars while not being bogged down with the infamous "2K IRA"...

[quote=dude]Then the bank started f*cking with the grid (within my first 4 months too) and I saw a 30% drop in income during a time when I had signed up based on the income I would be making.[/quote]

Dude...are you sure we didn't work for the same company?!!

I've learned that my experience pretty much sums up the majority of bank broker's experiences (other than the relocation stuff).

Even with my wretched experience, I'm sure that there are many other banks that are probably fine places to park a business.

In my bank program it appears the median production is around 300k.

I'm around that figure in year 2 and should exceed it in year 3.

I figure by year 5 I should have approx 30M in managed assets at about 1.25% so on Jan 1 i'm guaranteed almost 400k if I stay home all year.

My goals two years ago was to reach production of 500k in five years.  I'm on target, but more importantly I'm happy and my clients are too.

Have a good weekend.

Scrim

Scrim, I’m pretty surprised about your velocity, which appears to be between 2 & 3% if I remember your AUM number right.  I just wonder how long it will take the bank to start tinkering with your payouts…get back to us in a year on that, OK?

Would you agree velocity is not as relevant until your practice is mature?

I'm mostly opening up new accounts at this stage and getting usually around 2.5-3% up front.

scrim

[quote=dude][quote=mikebutler222] <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=bankrep1]
This sounds like my program, I do not have any 5 million dollar accounts, but probably 10+ over a million and many over 250K.

We do not have private banking, trust, or a platform program so I handle everything. Million dollar accounts to the 2K IRA and things are great. I have the option of dumping my branches for increased payout 40-55% when my book is large enough.
[/quote]

You handle everything but don’t have any accounts over $5MM? Look, my jabs about $2k IRAs were 40% jest, and I’ll admit to blurring together a few of you folks with “bank” or “ez” in your names, but the prompting was the assertion by one of you guys that you essentially do what wirehouse (and I assume you’d include indies and regionals) do, except you don’t have to prospect.

My point was that that’s just not true. You (and these are generalizations across the bank world) have to deal with anyone referred to you (or you may p$ss off the referrer and thereby never get another) no matter how poor a prospect. You deal largely with smaller, less profitable accounts and that forces you, as you admitted, to under-service those accounts (once a year? Really?). You just don’t get much of a crack at the bigger, more profitable relationships that careers are built on.

Now, having said that, if I were a twentysomething and new to the industry, I may well try to earn my little broker wings at a bank rather than take the plunge (unless I had a network in place already) into a wirehouse or regional (and I wouldn’t even consider an indy role, there you really need to start seasoned). Even imagining having to go back to building a book as I did when I started out (if you even could with DNCL and the like) sends a chill up my spine and I’d even endure life at a bank to avoid it.[/quote]

You are making very BROAD and narrow generalizations Mike.  I told the tellers who I wanted to talk with and although I would receive some low quality referrals, most were well above my minimums.

[/quote]

My “generalizations” based on my personal experience (and, it would appear, Indy’s) are no broader than yours. In our program there were no Series 6 people, we had the obligation (and management was happy to remind us) of fielding all calls. In fact, at a wirehouse I like to say I don’t have to work with everyone I encounter, at the bank I specifically had to agree to do just that.

 [quote=dude]

A platform rep is 63 and 6 licenced and can sell a limited menu of mutual funds and annuities.  These reps would be more in line with your stereotypes. [/quote]

I don’t know how common “platform reps” are in the industry, but I’ve heard they often come with their own set of issues, like “call nights”, splitting commissions and fighting for referrals.

 [quote=dude]

I left the bank because… [/quote]

I understand your reasons, it’s just interesting how you portrayed it as a HNW target rich environment and then said you wouldn’t go back.

fyi,

My velocity right now is around 1.4%

Since 80% of my practice is fee based at around that aforementioned 1.4% my velocity would usually be around that figure even when my practice is mature.

Of course, that biggest variables are that as economies of scale and competitive pressures kick in the advisory fee being charged can only decrease hence my production will be sliced somewhat.   I am definitely anticipating that somewhere down the line.

scrim

[quote=scrim67]

I figure by year 5 I should have approx 30M in managed assets at about 1.25% so on Jan 1 i'm guaranteed almost 400k if I stay home all year.

[/quote]

It's insane to think that any organization is going to allow employees who took none of the risks to establish such arrangments.

It just isn't going to happen, period.

As I've said since day one, this idea of fee based compensation is too new to know if clients will accept it and it's also too new to know if employers are going to accept it.

Why in the world would any employer allow an employee to stay home and earn anything, much less signficant income.

I know, I know--the employee won't stay home, they'll go to the office and talk to the girls.  Still won't work.

Banks are notorious for cutting people free who are dead wood.  Of all of the venues where people can invest bank customers are the least likey to leave the broker/dealer.  They are investing at the bank because they are nervous investors to begin with--the same reason that a wirehouse or independent broker has a very difficult time luring a bank client to their shop, a bank broker will be just as unable to move clients with them--even to another bank.

"Michelle, you're a nice woman and I appreciate that you've handled my account while you were here, but I am a customer of the bank and I am sure that your replacement will be a nice person too."

If a teller moves from Bank A to Bank B is it expected that the clients will all move to Bank B too?

Of course not.

[quote=Indyone]

MB, much of what you just said is a pretty fair assessment of what I saw.  I literally had to ignore 90% of the referrals I received and build my book with the remaining 10% that were worth something and my own prospecting efforts.  [/quote]

Some how I was under the impression you were in PB or trust and not a "bank broker".

I think a fee based practice whether at a bank, indy or wire is most often a best arrangement.

It tends to mitigate the conflict of interest issues that arise is a purely transactional business.

Why would such a win-win-win scenario disappear?   Certainly evolve, but not disappear.

scrim

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=dude][quote=mikebutler222] <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=bankrep1]
This sounds like my program, I do not have any 5 million dollar accounts, but probably 10+ over a million and many over 250K.

We do not have private banking, trust, or a platform program so I handle everything. Million dollar accounts to the 2K IRA and things are great. I have the option of dumping my branches for increased payout 40-55% when my book is large enough.
[/quote]

You handle everything but don’t have any accounts over $5MM? Look, my jabs about $2k IRAs were 40% jest, and I’ll admit to blurring together a few of you folks with “bank” or “ez” in your names, but the prompting was the assertion by one of you guys that you essentially do what wirehouse (and I assume you’d include indies and regionals) do, except you don’t have to prospect.

My point was that that’s just not true. You (and these are generalizations across the bank world) have to deal with anyone referred to you (or you may p$ss off the referrer and thereby never get another) no matter how poor a prospect. You deal largely with smaller, less profitable accounts and that forces you, as you admitted, to under-service those accounts (once a year? Really?). You just don’t get much of a crack at the bigger, more profitable relationships that careers are built on.

Now, having said that, if I were a twentysomething and new to the industry, I may well try to earn my little broker wings at a bank rather than take the plunge (unless I had a network in place already) into a wirehouse or regional (and I wouldn’t even consider an indy role, there you really need to start seasoned). Even imagining having to go back to building a book as I did when I started out (if you even could with DNCL and the like) sends a chill up my spine and I’d even endure life at a bank to avoid it.[/quote]

You are making very BROAD and narrow generalizations Mike.  I told the tellers who I wanted to talk with and although I would receive some low quality referrals, most were well above my minimums.

[/quote]

My “generalizations” based on my personal experience (and, it would appear, Indy’s) are no broader than yours. In our program there were no Series 6 people, we had the obligation (and management was happy to remind us) of fielding all calls. In fact, at a wirehouse I like to say I don’t have to work with everyone I encounter, at the bank I specifically had to agree to do just that.

 [quote=dude]

A platform rep is 63 and 6 licenced and can sell a limited menu of mutual funds and annuities.  These reps would be more in line with your stereotypes. [/quote]

I don’t know how common “platform reps” are in the industry, but I’ve heard they often come with their own set of issues, like “call nights”, splitting commissions and fighting for referrals.

 [quote=dude]

I left the bank because… [/quote]

I understand your reasons, it’s just interesting how you portrayed it as a HNW target rich environment and then said you wouldn’t go back.[/quote]

C'mon MikeB, I clearly explained what happened.  To be completely honest, I was blown away by the quality of referrals I was getting at the time and was happy as a lark until my wife started b*tching and then the bank dropped my payout like a hot rock at a very bad time for me.  I don't see anything unusual or 'interesting' about what I have explained.  I would go back to the same AREA if my wife would have it, just not the same company...like I have stated many times before, banks are not for me.

[quote=scrim67]

I think a fee based practice whether at a bank, indy or wire is most often a best arrangement.

It tends to mitigate the conflict of interest issues that arise is a purely transactional business.

Why would such a win-win-win scenario disappear?   Certainly evolve, but not disappear.

scrim

[/quote]

I think it will disappear because clients will come to resent having their pockets picked my middlemen who are performing little or no service worth paying for.

I suspect it is the first step to a compensation format where clients only pay fees if their portfolios increase in value.  That has always been a goal, but the problem is how to institute it without encouraging a frenzy of churning by advisors who know that if the client doesn't profit they don't either.

The way to pay you guys is a one time commission for selling the fund to a client, and then a trail based on the performance of the client's portfolio.

Something I legitimately do not know because it's never been of interest to me.  If a client wants to take delivery of his mutual fund shares I assume he won't have to pay the 100 to 125 basis points so many of you are currently raping them for.

Don't you think that a spokesman for some group--say AARP--appearing in TV commericals could persuade most people to ask to have their shares delivered to them to stop the bleeding?

I will also add that the generalizations you were making concerning $2k IRA's etc... are akin to people lambasting the wirehouses about production quotas, proprietary product quotas, selling crappy stock 'out of inventory' for bigger commissions, conflicted research or any other moot points.

And we know how 'colorful' you get when others start reciting the above tired lines about wirehouses.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]

At the bank I get about a 40% payout, free office abd my calendar is pretty full without doing any prospecting. What exactly don't you get? while your looking for your next sale I am writing business all day long.

[/quote]

One $2k IRA at a time.....

[/quote]

PWN3D!

[quote=dude]

I will also add that the generalizations you were making concerning $2k IRA's etc... are akin to people lambasting the wirehouses about production quotas, proprietary product quotas, selling crappy stock 'out of inventory' for bigger commissions, conflicted research or any other moot points.

And we know how 'colorful' you get when others start reciting the above tired lines about wirehouses.

[/quote]

Seems to me the difference is I saw the $2k IRA flow....

And I saw MASSIVE pressure to sell Portfolio Architect over Fund Solution, this was after all the proprietary fallout.

Hmmmmmm, maybe all that crap about wirehouses is true.

~rolls eyes~

[quote=dude]

And I saw MASSIVE pressure to sell Portfolio Architect over Fund Solution, this was after all the proprietary fallout.

Hmmmmmm, maybe all that crap about wirehouses is true.

~rolls eyes~

[/quote]

How did the "massive pressure" present itself?

Branch manager giving accounts, attention, resources etc… to those who focused more on Portfolio Architect.  It was subtle for those who didn’t focus on the wrap business…but for us rookies and those who did wrap business it was quite obvious what our manager wanted us to do.

I will clarify that my comment about wirehouses was drenched in sarcasm. 

[quote=dude]Branch manager giving accounts, attention, resources etc... to those who focused more on Portfolio Architect.  It was subtle for those who didn't focus on the wrap business...but for us rookies and those who did wrap business it was quite obvious what our manager wanted us to do.[/quote]

Over those that did the other fund program? That had to have been an office issue, not firm wide, or perhaps your perception as a newbie.

[quote=dude]

C'mon MikeB, I clearly explained what happened.  To be completely honest, I was blown away by the quality of referrals I was getting at the time ....[/quote]

If this is meant as a response to my final comment, the one about you leaving the bank, relax. It wasn't intended as an attack. You had your reasons, fine by me, I won't question them.

By the same token, I saw what I saw in a bank program, perhaps the biggest in the country. Brokers there have to take every referral (or risk the rath of management angry that you haven't been a "team player" for ther bank side) while watching the real money go to the PB. Dump in unpaid "bank side" activities (I had to attend a couple of evening "spirit sessions" that made my skin crawl) and the ever changing grid/relationship with the bank junk and I hated it.

[quote=Devil’sAdvocate]

I think it will disappear because clients will come to resent having their pockets picked my middlemen who are performing little or no service worth paying for.[/quote]

Blah, blah, blah....there's no reason to explain, yet again, to Putsy that often the net effect is lower costs for the client...

[quote=Devil'sAdvocate]

Something I legitimately do not know because it's never been of interest to me.  If a client wants to take delivery of his mutual fund shares I assume he won't have to pay the 100 to 125 basis points so many of you are currently raping them for.[/quote]

First, I couldn't care less about accounts so small that they really should be in mutual funds. Second, if you're talking about the 12b-1, it's paid even if the fund is held AT the fund. Then again, in most flat fee accounts clients get the 12b-1 refunded to them AND they avoid loads.

[quote=Devil'sAdvocate]Don't you think that a spokesman for some group--say AARP--appearing in TV commericals could persuade most people to ask to have their shares delivered to them to stop the bleeding?

[/quote]

If your hero Schawb and every hack $8 trade outfit can't talk people out of the value a good advisor provides, why would the spokesperson for AARP be able to do it?

It's amazing how little you understand about the mechanics and fee structure of the biz, Putzy. Were you too busy keeping the paperclip boxes full?

Mike,

Give up on NASD Newbie or what ever his handle of the moment is.

It's hard, he's on almost every thread. The Ignore feature would help this forum, then if everyone didn't reply he wouldn't exist at all!

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=dude]

C'mon MikeB, I clearly explained what happened.  To be completely honest, I was blown away by the quality of referrals I was getting at the time ....[/quote]

If this is meant as a response to my final comment, the one about you leaving the bank, relax. It wasn't intended as an attack. You had your reasons, fine by me, I won't question them.

By the same token, I saw what I saw in a bank program, perhaps the biggest in the country. Brokers there have to take every referral (or risk the rath of management angry that you haven't been a "team player" for ther bank side) while watching the real money go to the PB. Dump in unpaid "bank side" activities (I had to attend a couple of evening "spirit sessions" that made my skin crawl) and the ever changing grid/relationship with the bank junk and I hated it.

[/quote]

Butler, what percentage of your bank clients followed you?  Thanks in advance.

I was curious about that too Mike. How long were you there and what percentage eventually came with you? Thanks.<!–
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–>

If any of you other former bank guys (Indy, rightway, Babs, etc) could
add their takes on the above questions I would appreciate it. Thanks.<!–
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–>

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=Indyone]MB, much of what you just said is a pretty fair assessment of what I saw.  I literally had to ignore 90% of the referrals I received and build my book with the remaining 10% that were worth something and my own prospecting efforts.  [/quote] Some how I was under the impression you were in PB or trust and not a "bank broker".[/quote]

The program was designed to not create competition between trust/PB and retail...so we did it all...

[quote=Indyone]

The program was designed to not create competition between trust/PB and retail...so we did it all...

[/quote]

Did your bank have separate trust, PB and retail profit centers?

Mine is a little misleading as about half of my book was either junk/underpriced accounts, or were structured so they had to stay at the bank (bank as trustee, etc.).  Of the half that I could take, I've taken about 80% and am still moving accounts, although it's slowed considerably.  I'm guessing that I'll ultimately take about 85% of what I targeted.

When I decided to make my move, I did an honest appraisal and realized that early on, I was far too focused of AUM sometimes at the expense of quality.  I then used my move to cull my book of unwanted accounts, and yes, I told several former clients who asked to move that I could not take them.

[quote=Devil'sAdvocate][quote=Indyone]The program was designed to not create competition between trust/PB and retail...so we did it all...[/quote]Did your bank have separate trust, PB and retail profit centers?[/quote]

I don't think they separated the revenues and expenses, but I'm not sure.  That would have involved allocating my time, as well as many other employees.  Most of the support staff were dedicated to one area, but advisors were not.

[quote=Indyone]

I don't think they separated the revenues and expenses, but I'm not sure.  That would have involved allocating my time, as well as many other employees.  Most of the support staff were dedicated to one area, but advisors were not.

[/quote]

Would you say you worked for a bank, or a bank, or a BANK

a bank.

I’d say I work for a freak’n BANK, and I’m sick of it.

[quote=no idea]I was curious about that too Mike. How long were you there and what percentage eventually came with you? Thanks.<!-- var SymRealOnLoad; var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–> [/quote]

I was there about 2 1/2 years and I'd say about 65% (my deal wasn't dependent on assets coming with me) of the "real" brokerage clients came along. I was more successful moving the larger, more profitable accounts than the others.

So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire.



I am just thinking about my own situation. I never worked long hours, I have made decent money since day one, I never cold called, and now I have the option of going to a wire and taking a big fat check, going indy, or staying where I am, of course I am staying where I am.

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire.



I am just thinking about my own situation. I never worked long hours, I have made decent money since day one, I never cold called, and now I have the option of going to a wire and taking a big fat check, going indy, or staying where I am, of course I am staying where I am.[/quote]

Because otherwise you might actually have to work?  Develop an actualy relationship with your client?

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. [/quote]

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.

Now, for someone like you, with you work ethic and the fact that you contact so many clients just once a year, you're better off where you are. Youwouldn't survive at a wirehouse.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. [/quote]

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.

Now, for someone like you, with you work ethic and the fact that you contact so many clients just once a year, you're better off where you are. Youwouldn't survive at a wirehouse.

[/quote] I'm not sure in all cases but the whole contacting your customers' issue in a bank setting has to be a bit different than in other settings.   I "contact" my customers many times throughout the year simply because they walk into the bank to take care of their banking needs.   I'll simply invite them over to do an account review.  In actuality i'm "contacting" them 10-15 times a year in this manner.

scrim

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. [/quote]

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.

[/quote]

That sounds pretty good <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Butler.  Often we hear on this board how bank clients stay due to bank loyalty.  What do you attribute to the successful transfer / following of your book?

Also, I would appreciate if I could hear from Babs, IndyOne and Rightway.

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

[quote=Mike Damone][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. [/quote]

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.

[/quote]

That sounds pretty good <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Butler.  Often we hear on this board how bank clients stay due to bank loyalty.  What do you attribute to the successful transfer / following of your book?

[/quote]

If my income after I moved was contingent on the "success" of moving just some 40% (roughly 65% of 60%) of my bank book I don't think I'd be very happy. I’m speaking in generalities here based on my experience in the format my bank had, but very often bank clients aren't the standard investor you'd see elsewhere and they see the broker at the bank as replaceable a cog in their “banking investment machine” as the teller at the drive-thru.

They have more loyalty (or financial ties) to the bank than you, and that’s not strange considering they had a relationship with the bank before they met you. I made an effort to court those that looked and acted like the traditional investors I’d known before and I had some success in creating a solid relationship there. It didn't hurt that I have enough experience to sport some gray hair and the people the bank sought to replace me with were fresh-out-of-the-box rookies.

[quote=scrim67][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. [/quote]

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.

Now, for someone like you, with you work ethic and the fact that you contact so many clients just once a year, you're better off where you are. Youwouldn't survive at a wirehouse.

[/quote] I'm not sure in all cases but the whole contacting your customers' issue in a bank setting has to be a bit different than in other settings.   I "contact" my customers many times throughout the year simply because they walk into the bank to take care of their banking needs.   I'll simply invite them over to do an account review.  In actuality i'm "contacting" them 10-15 times a year in this manner.

scrim

[/quote]

I was speaking any about bankrep and his once a year cycle for accounts under $100k.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=bankrep1]So if everyone agrees you can take 50+% of your book, and you can build a business way faster in a bank than outside of one. Why would anyone start at a wire. 

Notice I didn't say 50% of the book, I said 65% of the "real brokerage clients". They amounted to 50% to 60% of the book. The deal I set up didn't require me taking many clients with me for the bank, thankfully.[/quote]

That sounds pretty good <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Butler.  Often we hear on this board how bank clients stay due to bank loyalty.  What do you attribute to the successful transfer / following of your book?

Also, I would appreciate if I could hear from Babs, IndyOne and Rightway.[/quote]

Damone, see next to the last post on page seven of this thread...I took (and am still taking) most of what I wanted.  Loyalty to the bank was overrated in my situation (although it certainly applies for many advisors who haven't had the time to establish deep relationships with their clients before they leave).  I even maintain an account relationship with the president of the bank I worked at...and he's still there.

[quote=My Inner Child]

[quote=bankrep1]Mike my avg. account is 67K. I will take it all day long even though it is lower than some wires minimum, Bill Good on his website says wirehouse brokers are lucky to add I think he said 8 new HNW (250K+) relationships per year, might of been 4 I will check it out I add a few every month. As for IRA’s I open a lot of them I have no shame in that.
[/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I only contact my under 100K accounts 1 time per year, under 250K every 6 months and over 500K every quarter and some every month. This is via a meeting face to face, I usually see most of my clients throughout the year they pop in and say hi. Sometimes they call me or I call them. I don’t get what is so crazy about this I have a friend who is an RIA and touches base with his clientel 1 face to face meeting per year his minimum is 500K.



I am already successful. If you enjoy what your doing good for you. I make a damn good living, and like going to work. I bring in more money in a few months than most of you have in your books.

So you bring in more money in a few months than most of us have on our books huh? Now you’re full of it!

EZ most people on here come and go, there are a handful of screen names that have been here since I joined and I hope they to are having the same type of success. I am bringing in about 1.5 - 2 Mil a month now. GIve or take, 5 mil a quarter, I bet there are alot of guys on here who don’t have a 5 million dollar book. I am not referring to the people who have been in the biz for awhile.



So some idiot who just passed his series 7 or sits in an office and stares out the window is going to tell me how often I should call my clients. C’mon, I get it they are listening to what someone told them, not reality.

[quote=bankrep1]EZ most people on here come and go, there are a handful of screen names that have been here since I joined and I hope they to are having the same type of success. I am bringing in about 1.5 - 2 Mil a month now. GIve or take, 5 mil a quarter, I bet there are alot of guys on here who don't have a 5 million dollar book. I am not referring to the people who have been in the biz for awhile.

So some idiot who just passed his series 7 or sits in an office and stares out the window is going to tell me how often I should call my clients. C'mon, I get it they are listening to what someone told them, not reality.[/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!