Edwad Jones on Fee Based circa 2001
I found something rather interesting in my “This Will Come Back to Bite EDJ” file. It is a Dilbert cartoon that was blast-faxed to all EDJ branches while Bachmann was at the helm. The three-window cartoon goes like this:
Frame 1: "For a 1% annual fee I will invest your money......." Frame 2: "He'll charge 1% per year to put your money in mutual funds that charge 1% per year." Frame 3: Dilbert asks, "Will I make any money?" Answer: "I don't see you doing any of the work!" At the top of the blast fax was was this hand-written message from Bachmann: "To Our IRs, Even the Comic Strips are Catching On!" --John" So my question to Mr. Bachmann would be, "What say you now?" I have long maintained that the further EDJ got away from Bachmann, the more they would realize he was never the genius that they thought he was. He was nothing more than a narcissistic meglomaniac with really bad chiclits who got caught red-handed banging his secretary. BTW for all of you Jonesers, that idiot is still on your gravy train to the tune of $3-4 million per year. What was your take home in 2007?And you’d be talking to the wall, because John Bachmann doesn’t run the firm any longer. Good for you for being more of a genius than Bachmann was.
Why don't you guys just give it a rest. Jones has ZERO impact on you any longer. They have done a 180 on fee based, under different leadership. It is good for the clients, good for the FAs, good for Jones.[quote=Soothsayer]I found something rather interesting in my “This Will Come Back to Bite EDJ” file. It is a Dilbert cartoon that was blast-faxed to all EDJ branches while Bachmann was at the helm. The three-window cartoon goes like this:
Frame 1: "For a 1% annual fee I will invest your money......." Frame 2: "He'll charge 1% per year to put your money in mutual funds that charge 1% per year." Frame 3: Dilbert asks, "Will I make any money?" Answer: "I don't see you doing any of the work!" At the top of the blast fax was was this hand-written message from Bachmann: "To Our IRs, Even the Comic Strips are Catching On!" --John" So my question to Mr. Bachmann would be, "What say you now?" I have long maintained that the further EDJ got away from Bachmann, the more they would realize he was never the genius that they thought he was. He was nothing more than a narcissistic meglomaniac with really bad chiclits who got caught red-handed banging his secretary. BTW for all of you Jonesers, that idiot is still on your gravy train to the tune of $3-4 million per year. What was your take home in 2007? [/quote] Wow, that is HOT! So he was banging his secretary.. What did she look like? Do you know if they did it on her desk, his desk? Give me the details.. That is more interesting than the fact that he doens't run our firm anymore and the fact that (WOW) people change their minds... Miss JSooth-
You are so right. Thank god Bachman hasn't run the firm in like, I don't know, 5 years or something. Wouldn't it be strange if every company continued to operate the way the past leaders ran the company, instead of changing and adapting? (GE would still just be making lightbulbs, Berkshire Hathaway would still be a textile manufacturer, and Enron would still be in business as a simple natural gas distributor).
Bottom line, yes, past Edward Jones's leaders believed that fees were inappropriate. Current Edward Jones leaders feel they have created something that is appropriate for clients. The big difference is that Weddle knows that you must adapt and change to changes in the marketplace. Prior leadership did not do that. You guys are taking business decisions and making them personal.
[quote=B24]Sooth-
You are so right. Thank god Bachman hasn't run the firm in like, I don't know, 5 years or something. Wouldn't it be strange if every company continued to operate the way the past leaders ran the company, instead of changing and adapting? (GE would still just be making lightbulbs, Berkshire Hathaway would still be a textile manufacturer, and Enron would still be in business as a simple natural gas distributor).
Bottom line, yes, past Edward Jones's leaders believed that fees were inappropriate. Current Edward Jones leaders feel they have created something that is appropriate for clients. The big difference is that Weddle knows that you must adapt and change to changes in the marketplace. Prior leadership did not do that. You guys are taking business decisions and making them personal.
[/quote] B24- Almost every quote i heard from the home office concerning fee based was something along this line. " We are going to do fee based the right way, the Edward jones way" If that doesn't smack of the way the company has acted in the past, remember the WSJ article.......Miss J, they did on her desk and his desk–at least according to Tom Bartow. B24 misses the point. Things do change at some companies, but have they really changed all that much at Jones when Bachmann is still flying on private jets making speacial appearances at regional meetings, divo trips, and other company functions? He’s still on the payroll, as is Doug Hill. The polices and practices of these two guy cost your firm hundreds of millions of dollars. And, I’ll bet that each of these two guys outcheck Spiff, Miss J, and B24 combined by five-fold.
I'm glad for you guys that in some ways that Brill Cream seems to be moving EDJ forward. But, for all of us who left under the Bachmann/Hill regime, it's always somewhat vindicating to see just how wrong they were all of those years. And, many very good brokers and good people were ostracized and marginalized within the company for many years for having a more forward thinking view of our industry. "You want to fee based business, then this is the wrong firm to be working for. We don't care if you leave, because we'll (watch my lips) never, ever, ever be in that business. It would run counter to the core principles and culture that this company was built on." That is pretty much an exact quote from a GP with Bachmann sitting at the same table. You see, it's the hypocrisy, stupid!Nog - And your point is, what, exactly?
Would you have felt better if Weddle had said, yep, we're going to do fee based. We'll slap something together for you guys here in the next couple of weeks. We don't know if it's good, bad, or otherwise so we'll make adjustments as we go. Shoot, if we could just get it as good as those guys over at LPL, we'd be happy. We don't expect you folks to really use it anyway, so it's not that big of a deal. I know I'm wasting my breath, but you guys really do need to start thinking about something else and let it go. If the name on your business isn't Edward Jones it has ABSOLUTELY ZERO impact on you. That is unless you're worried that the other EDJ guys in town now have a fee based platform to promote and the possibility of losing some of your current clients has you shaking in your boots. Sooth - The MAP program was launched in 1994. That's right, Jones has had a fee based program for 14 years. So, why hasn't anyone mentioned how awful Jones is for launching that one? Oh yeah, the Trust Company is also a fee based program. But, again, nobody mentions that one either. If my memory is correct, both of those were originated under that hypocritical John Bachmann's watch. He was such a loser. How dare he allow such things to exist. I'll bet a bunch of you as much of a hypocrite as you say Bachmann is. I'll bet at some point in the past you said, man, if Jones just had a fee based platform, I'd really consider staying here longer. Now, you're spending time bashing the newly launched platform. You want to have your cake and eat it too.[quote=Soothsayer]Miss J, they did on her desk and his desk–at least according to Tom Bartow. B24 misses the point. Things do change at some companies, but have they really changed all that much at Jones when Bachmann is still flying on private jets making speacial appearances at regional meetings, divo trips, and other company functions? He’s still on the payroll, as is Doug Hill. The polices and practices of these two guy cost your firm hundreds of millions of dollars. And, I’ll bet that each of these two guys outcheck Spiff, Miss J, and B24 combined by five-fold.
I'm glad for you guys that in some ways that Brill Cream seems to be moving EDJ forward. But, for all of us who left under the Bachmann/Hill regime, it's always somewhat vindicating to see just how wrong they were all of those years. And, many very good brokers and good people were ostracized and marginalized within the company for many years for having a more forward thinking view of our industry. "You want to fee based business, then this is the wrong firm to be working for. We don't care if you leave, because we'll (watch my lips) never, ever, ever be in that business. It would run counter to the core principles and culture that this company was built on." That is pretty much an exact quote from a GP with Bachmann sitting at the same table. You see, it's the hypocrisy, stupid![/quote] I get your points.. Valid as they are Sooth. I am not making 2-3 Million a year though I REALLY wish I was!! But in all fairness, I don't care if the firm pays them each 10 Million a year. Let's not be confused I know why I am at EDJ it's to get my 40% commission, my LP, my profit sharing, my P&L bonus & Div trips.. All the while still running my shop with NO ONE asking me how or why. Yes, I get a FSPEND here and there (actually got one today.. But didn't bother me one bit) I am happy with my job, my firm and my way of life so since I knew what I was getting into when I joined I am Happy!! I see what you mean.. You don't like Doug Hill, John Bachman and for that matter Tom Bartow.. They are two faced.. Well, haven't we all been at one time in our lives.. Yes! They were trying to reinforce something to the 'troops' and it has come back to bite them. Oh well.. We (the current FA's at Jones) have moved on and realized people make mistakes. This is one mistake we are glad they made. So what?? They aren't in charge anymore- Jim Weddle is. I still get your point, all we ask is that you get ours. Period! Miss JMiss Jones, that was the most articulate, lovely, beautiful, thoughtful and humble post I’ve read here. I bet you’re hot as hell and I wish I was your client. I can see it now…coming into your office for a late night meeting…hell, it beats thinking about the market!!
Spears!! You act at though you don't know me and also act as though you don't know what I look like!! What's the deal? Are we playing a game?! This could be fun. Miss JMiss Jones, that was the most articulate, lovely, beautiful, thoughtful and humble post I’ve read here. I bet you’re hot as hell and I wish I was your client. I can see it now…coming into your office for a late night meeting…hell, it beats thinking about the market!!
Miss Jones…leaving me already? Ferris had me attempting to date you yesterday I asked my wife …apparently I am not available , but will of course check with her in the future. Of course the granddaughters will also have to approve
Now, Now.. I know you mistook Ferris and his comments. There are a few things you need to learn about Ferris.. He doesn't like sharing his toys! That and he doesn't play well with others.. Love you Ferris! Miss JMiss Jones…leaving me already? Ferris had me attempting to date you yesterday I asked my wife …apparently I am not available , but will of course check with her in the future. Of course the granddaughters will also have to approve
Sort of like my two granddaughters when it comes to sharing. More than enough for both of them, but they always want what the other has…if only life was that simple!!
Miss J,
I like games.....role playing games. Okay...so....You're my advisor and I'm your client. I have a very LARGE account but it seems to be a little down right now. You call me in for face to face to examine this LARGE account. How would this appt go...down...please explain.[quote=Spaceman Spiff]Nog - And your point is, what, exactly? My point is that when other firms were getting fined, Edward Jones ran an ad in WSJ that indicated that everyone was bad, Edward Jones was good. That thought or mindset permeates the culture at Edward Jones…so much so that old friends in my region are afraid to call me because they have been told that doing so is being disloyal to Jones… I do have a good deal of respect for you even though you may not think that is the case. About 2 months prior to my departure , I did a prelim interview for a potential recruit. He was 22 yrs old, just out of college, no sales experience. He was white however he spoke like a gangster rapper, i could barely understand him. I let Jones know that they should not hire him. They not only hired him they gave me credit for his hire… He just got an abandoned office of about 5 M near me, he drives a car with spinners, silvered windows and gullwing doors. That was the last straw for me… The guy who is competing for those assets carries around a picture of that car and shows it to clients he wants to move over, priceless! Have you noticed that LPL has more brokers than Jones, the reason is simple 35-40% of the brokers are former Jones brokers who have tired of the doubletalk and want to actually own their business and actually operate in their client’s best interest not the GP’s.
Would you have felt better if Weddle had said, yep, we're going to do fee based. We'll slap something together for you guys here in the next couple of weeks. We don't know if it's good, bad, or otherwise so we'll make adjustments as we go. Shoot, if we could just get it as good as those guys over at LPL, we'd be happy. We don't expect you folks to really use it anyway, so it's not that big of a deal. I know I'm wasting my breath, but you guys really do need to start thinking about something else and let it go. If the name on your business isn't Edward Jones it has ABSOLUTELY ZERO impact on you. That is unless you're worried that the other EDJ guys in town now have a fee based platform to promote and the possibility of losing some of your current clients has you shaking in your boots. Sooth - The MAP program was launched in 1994. That's right, Jones has had a fee based program for 14 years. So, why hasn't anyone mentioned how awful Jones is for launching that one? Oh yeah, the Trust Company is also a fee based program. But, again, nobody mentions that one either. If my memory is correct, both of those were originated under that hypocritical John Bachmann's watch. He was such a loser. How dare he allow such things to exist. I'll bet a bunch of you as much of a hypocrite as you say Bachmann is. I'll bet at some point in the past you said, man, if Jones just had a fee based platform, I'd really consider staying here longer. Now, you're spending time bashing the newly launched platform. You want to have your cake and eat it too. [/quote]Noggin–
I think you and I must be from the same era, or at least had a very, very similar experience within our region......LETS PUT THIS TO REST:
I just had dinner with Bachman at our regional 3 weeks ago. I was originally from another firm and we were discussing why experienced FAs were not coming to Jones. Never one to mince words, I looked at John Bachman and said "because they could not sell their book." Silence. Then, John allowed as to how "we want people who want to be with us to stay, and we want the people who dont want to be with us to leave." I appreciated his honesty, but bit back my following question: "then why do you make us sign non compete agreements?" There is no real greay area at Jones...you follow the program, or leave. Unlike Ben Edwards, at AG, Jones wants to keep your clients when you leave, even though that change may be what they want. My prior regional leader did a good job at masking the politics, but that was because I was in the inner circle. Take the good with the bad, accept the BS that goes on, or move on down the highway. It's not that different from anywhere else: the firm wants its's cake, and wants to eat it too. If you outgrow the company, (or, in my case, the company outgrows you)...you take the lumps, make the creative change, and leave.I have not posted in quite some time. I have to chime in on the Jones fee based platform.
Let me say I am happy for my friends who are there that now have access to this way of doing business. That said it was the pure smugness displayed toward other firms and other advisors who did business this way by the GP's/ RL's down to the majority of the "inner circle" people. An example of this attitude is a GP gets up front of everyone and said "we don't do fee based because we don't screw our clients!" I will not say his name but it rhymes with Play Daily. That is why many of us may hold resentment toward EJ on this matter among other things it is the word I continue to use SMUGNESS. As a Seinfeld episode so eloquently points out "smugness is not a good quality."You are correct. That attitude was incredibly prevalent while Bachmann and Hill were running the company. However, I believe that attitude has changed somewhat since Weddle took the helm. Don't get me wrong, we still, as a group, believe we are the best thing that has ever happened to the brokerage business. But, I'll bet you'd say the same thing about your own practice or company. I wouldn't expect anything different.
Bachmann and Hill made some big time errors because of their arrogance. Bachmann is still an incredibly arrogant man. I have no doubt in my mind that if John were still running the firm that we wouldnt' be having this discussion about fee based biz. However, he's not, and we are. Things have changed a bit at Jones. IMHO much for the better.[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
You are correct. That attitude was incredibly prevalent while Bachmann and Hill were running the company. However, I believe that attitude has changed somewhat since Weddle took the helm. Don't get me wrong, we still, as a group, believe we are the best thing that has ever happened to the brokerage business. But, I'll bet you'd say the same thing about your own practice or company. I wouldn't expect anything different.
Bachmann and Hill made some big time errors because of their arrogance. Bachmann is still an incredibly arrogant man. I have no doubt in my mind that if John were still running the firm that we wouldnt' be having this discussion about fee based biz. However, he's not, and we are. Things have changed a bit at Jones. IMHO much for the better. [/quote] Appreciate your candor Spiff. My disagreement is that, no, I do not have that attitude nor do I belive it makes any sense to view anything that way. Know what you are great at and then do it over and over but don't be so arrogant to think that yours is the only way or you are the only one who can do it the right way. I have not encountered that level of smugness anywhere else. However, EJ is still in business since I left so my assumption is they are doing OK.This kind of reminds me of my sister, who’s married to an asshole. Everyone on the outside can clearly see he’s an asshole. She, on the other hand appears blissfully unaware…
You mean you don’t walk into the office every day fully believing that everyone you speak with that day SHOULD be doing business with you, because the way you do it is, in your opinion, the absolutely best way? Really? Cause that’s the mindset I have when I pick up the phone every morning to talk with clients and prospects.
But if you want to start your day thinking that there are a lot of other people who could do your job just as well as you can, more power to you.The business you do is sales...not advising. When I talk with people, I make a decision whether they're someone I can do business with forever. I don't do it so I can make my month or keep above the performing line or win a trip. I do it to build a business in which I talk with them and only them on an ongoing basis about their account, their kids, their hobbies, their latest vacation. I don't hound the so called prospect to beg them to do business or con them in purchasing a 25 year bond, paying 3 points. I do a great job for my clients and they refer people to me. What a concept.
[quote=skolbrother]I have not posted in quite some time. I have to chime in on the Jones fee based platform.
Let me say I am happy for my friends who are there that now have access to this way of doing business. That said it was the pure smugness displayed toward other firms and other advisors who did business this way by the GP's/ RL's down to the majority of the "inner circle" people. An example of this attitude is a GP gets up front of everyone and said "we don't do fee based because we don't screw our clients!" I will not say his name but it rhymes with Play Daily. That is why many of us may hold resentment toward EJ on this matter among other things it is the word I continue to use SMUGNESS. As a Seinfeld episode so eloquently points out "smugness is not a good quality."[/quote] I remember a conversation regarding ETFs with a GP back in St. Louis in 2001. He said they were nothing more than, "financial gimmicks, similar to the Nifty Fifty back in the 70's. Only a fool would ever invest in such a contraption," he went on to say. I pointed out that the dollar flow into ETFs had grown almost exponentially year over year since their introduction, and they seemed to be here to stay and carve out their piece of the financial services landscape. The guy went into a slobbering, ranting hissy-fit, complete with personal attacks such as "I've forgotten more about this business than you'll ever know." And, "If you think ETFs are where one nickel of your client's money belongs, then resign right now because I guarantee that they will never, ever be offered by Edward Jones." Once again, it's the hypocrisy, stupid!This is not a pissing match. I have done this a long time and I think those on this forum who know me will verify I'm doing a few things right. That said, I see alot of very good advisors at my firm and other firms so IMO it would be unprofessional to think I am the ONLY right fit for every client/institution.
[quote=Soothsayer][quote=skolbrother]I have not posted in quite some time. I have to chime in on the Jones fee based platform.
Let me say I am happy for my friends who are there that now have access to this way of doing business. That said it was the pure smugness displayed toward other firms and other advisors who did business this way by the GP's/ RL's down to the majority of the "inner circle" people. An example of this attitude is a GP gets up front of everyone and said "we don't do fee based because we don't screw our clients!" I will not say his name but it rhymes with Play Daily. That is why many of us may hold resentment toward EJ on this matter among other things it is the word I continue to use SMUGNESS. As a Seinfeld episode so eloquently points out "smugness is not a good quality."[/quote] I remember a conversation regarding ETFs with a GP back in St. Louis in 2001. He said they were nothing more than, "financial gimmicks, similar to the Nifty Fifty back in the 70's. Only a fool would ever invest in such a contraption," he went on to say. I pointed out that the dollar flow into ETFs had grown almost exponentially year over year since their introduction, and they seemed to be here to stay and carve out their piece of the financial services landscape. The guy went into a slobbering, ranting hissy-fit, complete with personal attacks such as "I've forgotten more about this business than you'll ever know." And, "If you think ETFs are where one nickel of your client's money belongs, then resign right now because I guarantee that they will never, ever be offered by Edward Jones." Once again, it's the hypocrisy, stupid![/quote] This reminds me of the annuity thread and offering a client a new improved annuity after the 7 year surrender is over. Why would someone do that? Seems like several folks believe that a lot has changed in 7 years and some of their clients would benefit from the changes that have happened. I wonder if an advisory account and ETFs would fall into a similar situation. NAW thats just silly, I know if I would have changed my mind about the way I view the world over the last 7 yrs that would be hypocisy so I vow never change my views about anything. swI am going to assume that you really don’t understand why someone would switch to another annuity after seven years. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Annuities have gone through a monumental change over the past seven years. We now have living benefits that weren't even dreamed of in 2001. If I have a client who is in a plain "vanilla" annuity from 2001, it could make perfect sense to "upgrade" their contract. Especially if they have some income concerns. Even if they just have death benefit concerns, there are some incredible death benefit gaurantees that weren't around in 2001. Wondering why someone would switch annuities after seven years is kind of like wondering why someone would need to upgrade their computer after seven years. The changes in the products are enormous over that time frame.[quote=now_indy]I am going to assume that you really don’t understand why someone would switch to another annuity after seven years. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Annuities have gone through a monumental change over the past seven years. We now have living benefits that weren't even dreamed of in 2001. If I have a client who is in a plain "vanilla" annuity from 2001, it could make perfect sense to "upgrade" their contract. Especially if they have some income concerns. Even if they just have death benefit concerns, there are some incredible death benefit gaurantees that weren't around in 2001. Wondering why someone would switch annuities after seven years is kind of like wondering why someone would need to upgrade their computer after seven years. The changes in the products are enormous over that time frame.[/quote] I guess my post wasn't very clear. I agree things change after 7 years why is it hypcrosy for a business to change along with the times?Because in the collective mind of this forum, EDJ is not allowed to change it’s mind. Ever. Under any circumstances.
Soothsayer is calling hypocrisy on a conversation he had with a single GP...SEVEN YEARS AGO. Seven years ago ETFs were so new that most of us didn't even know what they were. I'm honestly suprised that Jones has them in the Advisory Solutions platform because most of them don't even have a 5 year track record. You gotta admit, that's pretty outside the box thinking for EDJ. Oh yeah, on another note. I heard a small rumor yesterday that Jones is going to be moving away from the old EDJ green. They're going to be repainting all of our offices, getting rid of those green EDJ folders, and moving towards a different color scheme. I haven't had any way to confirm that yet, but the person who told it to me has a REALLY good source of info re: all things EDJ. So, maybe the color of the kool aid is going to change too.[quote=Spaceman Spiff]Because in the collective mind of this forum, EDJ is not allowed to change it’s mind. Ever. Under any circumstances.
Soothsayer is calling hypocrisy on a conversation he had with a single GP...SEVEN YEARS AGO. Seven years ago ETFs were so new that most of us didn't even know what they were. I'm honestly suprised that Jones has them in the Advisory Solutions platform because most of them don't even have a 5 year track record. You gotta admit, that's pretty outside the box thinking for EDJ. Oh yeah, on another note. I heard a small rumor yesterday that Jones is going to be moving away from the old EDJ green. They're going to be repainting all of our offices, getting rid of those green EDJ folders, and moving towards a different color scheme. I haven't had any way to confirm that yet, but the person who told it to me has a REALLY good source of info re: all things EDJ. So, maybe the color of the kool aid is going to change too. [/quote] Oh wow, I need to come back to Jones because they changed their color scheme......I wish I had known that because I would have just stayed with Jones. I am sure when they repaint the offices that they won't charge your P & L........My point all along has been just how wrong EDJ was on this issue for so long. Do you have any idea of the talent drain that the company experiecned beginning in 2003, much of which centered around this issue? How could the people at the highest level of your company have been so wrong? How come people who understood the changing nature of our business were treated with such contempt--effectively banished to the corporate closet. If you changed, great. But, how was EDJ so wrong for so long? What kind of a company culture fosters that kind of closed off thinking?
This latest episode where Weddle says, "We're gonna do fee based, but we're going to do it right," smacks of the same arrogance when you didn't have it all. Are the rest of the industry's fee based programs "wrong"? More cult-like control the message, control the spin. I'll stop bashing when Weddle says, "We are late to the game, and made a critical error by not coming to grips sooner with the fact that many of our clients and advisors preferred to work together under a fee based arrangement. We simply misjudged an important component of the business landscape in our industry. That being said, we have moved forward with a program developed by our company for our advisors and clients. It's a little bit different than anything else being used in the industry at this time, an we feel addresses some of the shortcomings of fee based platforms. We are anxious to see how it is received in the marketplace." Can a company change it's mind 7 years later? Sure. But in my mind, 7 years is way, way, way too long. The talent drain of the early 2000s will be the legacy of Bachmann and Hill.Sooth,
You are pretty dead-on. Here's the problem...Weddle has his own "internal" spin to deal with. You ever wonder how much dancing it ook for him to get this out there? Or e-mail, for that matter? Jones is a private company. They don't have to come out and announce to everyone that they did anything. Weddle has to be FAR more careful about how he is perceived internally (especially by Bachman, Hill, etc., as well as a pantheon of veteran advisors that may have more allegiance to Bachman) if he wants to get things done that go against the grain of the 80-year culture of the firm. Realistically, Weddle is not going to come out and essentially bash the history and the veteran leaders of the firm. Whether the veterans made mistakes or not, he needs to still be a company guy, and move the firm forward at the same time. He has made MASSIVE progress in 2 years. I give him credit for that. But I also accept that he has to spin it all carefully so that it doesn't come out as "look how I am fixing this company." But functionally, Sooth, you are right.Talent drain? What talent are you talking about that can’t be replicated ten times over with new people. I’ve been around for a while and I seriously don’t remember any devastating talent drain. Jones lost some big producers, like Van Pearcy who may be a bad example, but if you think that the legacy Bachmann and Hill will leave behind is that we lost some advisors in a down market, then you’re fooling yourself. My region lost some people to LPL, BAC, and ML, but we didn’t sit around and cry about it. We hired new people, who in my opinion, are better than the ones who left and moved on. Those offices are now humming just like they were before.
How was EDJ wrong for so long? Bachmann and Hill didn't believe in fee based business. Simple. I don't think they saw the impact of it on the horizon. Either through pig headedness or an over inflated ego, they both completely missed the impact it was having on other firms and the investment world in general. Weddle comes in and within months of his starting date there is a substantiated rumor that Jones is going to launch a fee based biz. Aug 4 for my area it actually happens. That's a pretty quick turnaround for a company who, just a few short years ago, didn't believe in fee based business. They're never going to say that they made a mistake and are late to the game. However, the second part of your statement I've heard him say. They know we came late to the game. They know we wanted fee based business. They took the time to create something that they believe is just a bit different than everyone else out there. They made sure they had the correct players in place to make sure the thing runs smoothly. They are confident that it will become an important part of our business and an important part of the revenue stream. I personally believe it will eventually become as important to Jones as revenue sharing is. Think what you will about Bachmann and Hill. They don't manage the company any more. I don't care for former president Clinton. But it doesn't matter. He doesn't run the country anymore. Same concept.[quote=Spaceman Spiff]Talent drain? What talent are you talking about that can’t be replicated ten times over with new people. I’ve been around for a while and I seriously don’t remember any devastating talent drain. Jones lost some big producers, like Van Pearcy who may be a bad example, but if you think that the legacy Bachmann and Hill will leave behind is that we lost some advisors in a down market, then you’re fooling yourself. My region lost some people to LPL, BAC, and ML, but we didn’t sit around and cry about it. We hired new people, who in my opinion, are better than the ones who left and moved on. Those offices are now humming just like they were before.
[/quote] Oh, Spiffy, you're a bigger Jones tool than I even thought. Maybe in your region it was like Steve Young following Joe Montana. But in my region it was like Jay Fiedler following Dan Marino, Cliff Stoudt following Terry Bradshaw, and Todd Marinovich following Jim Plunkett. In other words, guys who weren't fit to carry the previous guy's jock--on their best day. I'm talking about guys who started their careers at Jones, but left to go elsewhere and have since had huge success. I'll give you a few examples in my trade area: 1st guy left after about 2 years as a scratch strater at Jones. RL treated him like crap because he was a Mormon. Went to LPL. At present he has 3 full time assistants, a 401(k) specialist, and a LTC/Life specialist working in his office. His production last year was somewhere north of $1.25 million. 2nd guy left Jones after 3.5 years producing around $200K. Today he is the lead guy on a team at a wirehouse that does more than $2 million in production. Ironically, he is the majority shareholder in an LLC that owns both the buildings that Jones leases in the same town. One office is currently vacant, and the office he started in 1999 just turned over again (broker went to RJ), and is on the fourth broker since he left. 3rd guy left Jones producing just short of $300K after 4.5 years from scratch. Started his own RIA. Has a few guys working below him now, and just landed a huge institutional account a few weeks back. Production has more than doubled since leaving Jones just more than two years ago. There are more than 15 people in the trade area who left EDJ between 2002 and 2005 who are still in the business having considerable success. Jones has more than 25 offices in the area. The 15 guys outproduce the 25 Jones guys by a wide margin, and are now permanent competition (primarily as independents) for years and years to come. Who does Jones have? A bunch of failed Morgan Stanley, American Express, and various insurance hacks, a couple of big producers' wannabe kids, and some GP pets transplanted to the area to take over open offices--pathetic. That, Spiffy, is called "talent drain."[quote=Soothsayer][quote=Spaceman Spiff]Talent drain? What talent are you talking about that can’t be replicated ten times over with new people. I’ve been around for a while and I seriously don’t remember any devastating talent drain. Jones lost some big producers, like Van Pearcy who may be a bad example, but if you think that the legacy Bachmann and Hill will leave behind is that we lost some advisors in a down market, then you’re fooling yourself. My region lost some people to LPL, BAC, and ML, but we didn’t sit around and cry about it. We hired new people, who in my opinion, are better than the ones who left and moved on. Those offices are now humming just like they were before.
[/quote] Oh, Spiffy, you're a bigger Jones tool than I even thought. Maybe in your region it was like Steve Young following Joe Montana. But in my region it was like Jay Fiedler following Dan Marino, Cliff Stoudt following Terry Bradshaw, and Todd Marinovich following Jim Plunkett. In other words, guys who weren't fit to carry the previous guy's jock--on their best day. I'm talking about guys who started their careers at Jones, but left to go elsewhere and have since had huge success. I'll give you a few examples in my trade area: 1st guy left after about 2 years as a scratch strater at Jones. RL treated him like crap because he was a Mormon. Went to LPL. At present he has 3 full time assistants, a 401(k) specialist, and a LTC/Life specialist working in his office. His production last year was somewhere north of $1.25 million. 2nd guy left Jones after 3.5 years producing around $200K. Today he is the lead guy on a team at a wirehouse that does more than $2 million in production. Ironically, he is the majority shareholder in an LLC that owns both the buildings that Jones leases in the same town. One office is currently vacant, and the office he started in 1999 just turned over again (broker went to RJ), and is on the fourth broker since he left. 3rd guy left Jones producing just short of $300K after 4.5 years from scratch. Started his own RIA. Has a few guys working below him now, and just landed a huge institutional account a few weeks back. Production has more than doubled since leaving Jones just more than two years ago. There are more than 15 people in the trade area who left EDJ between 2002 and 2005 who are still in the business having considerable success. Jones has more than 25 offices in the area. The 15 guys outproduce the 25 Jones guys by a wide margin, and are now permanent competition (primarily as independents) for years and years to come. Who does Jones have? A bunch of failed Morgan Stanley, American Express, and various insurance hacks, a couple of big producers' wannabe kids, and some GP pets transplanted to the area to take over open offices--pathetic. That, Spiffy, is called "talent drain." [/quote] Come on Spiff, spin that......I think Sooth and Spiff are embellishing in both directions…
Spiff, the story isn’t that good…
Sooth, the story isn’t that bad…
Just remember that Hill was the “heir apparent” …
Scary, isn’t it?
I look around my old region and the ones that have left EDJ are most definitely outproducing those that either took over their assets or offices. I attribute that to the beating of the hiring drum. The quality of new hires has diminished greatly in the last 5 years in the 2 regions that I have witnessed. The bad news for Jones is that they spend the money to hire them, train them and then within the first 3-6 years they lose them to RJ or LPL. Repeat.Repeat. Repeat.I think Sooth and Spiff are embellishing in both directions…
Spiff, the story isn’t that good…
Sooth, the story isn’t that bad…
lets be real. Spiff is a company man, good for him. He buys the line that jones puts out. he is loyal to his firm and he should be or he needs to go elsewhere. I did catch something on a post of his i am surprised hasnt been brought up. Spiff use to be in IR training. So i am guessing he was a less then successful rep who was brought into the home office, given additional training, then given an office after paying his dues and some LP. Just a guess. But good for him for building on what he was given and making it in the business.
I look around my old region and the ones that have left EDJ are most definitely outproducing those that either took over their assets or offices. I attribute that to the beating of the hiring drum. The quality of new hires has diminished greatly in the last 5 years in the 2 regions that I have witnessed. The bad news for Jones is that they spend the money to hire them, train them and then within the first 3-6 years they lose them to RJ or LPL. Repeat.Repeat. Repeat. [/quote][quote=B24]I think Sooth and Spiff are embellishing in both directions… Spiff, the story isn’t that good… Sooth, the story isn’t that bad…
Actually, some of the 5-10 year advisors have commented that the hiring they see is better than it used to be. They said the mad hiring dash they made in 99 was awful. Hired anyone with a pulse. We have a ton of people in my region in the 7 year range. They feel as if FA’s are coming out much stronger and quicker than past hires. Of course, some of it could be coincidence, who knows. I was not around here 7 years ago, so I really can’t compare.
Yeah, you're guess is wrong. I started in the home office. Then went to the field after just over 5 years. BTW, I'm not offended by your assumption. You just simply assumed incorrectly. Perhaps I misunderstood the "talent drain" reference. I was thinking that you meant Jones lost so many advisors in the time frame referenced that they were struggling to make ends meet. Which is entirely not true. Did Jones lose some advisors? Yep. Just like they are doing now. Just like they always have. This industry is in a constant state of flux. You guys tend to only focus on the people who have left Jones and have gone on to be great producers. I'm gonna venture a guess to say that it happens with other brokerage firms too. I'll bet there were some good producers at ML that became great producers when they went RIA or indy. I'll bet those great producers would have been great producers wherever they worked. In my region, that I can remember off the top of my head, we've had 9 guys leave Jones to go to other brokerage firms. 4 went to LPL, all to the same office. I don't know or care about their production numbers, but I know they didn't take the assets that they were planning on because I know the people who took over their offices. I'm sure they're producing just fine. We had 2 guys go to the bank. One lasted there about 2 weeks and is now out of the business, one is doing better than he was at Jones when he left. He said the world opened up for him after he left Jones. I think he was bored at Jones and didn't want to prospect anymore. One guy went to ML and I have no idea how he's doing. One guy went to MS to a team. He says he's doing fine, but if you ask me I'll tell you I'm doing fine whether I am or not. One guy went to BAC because he liked the fee based model. He's probably producing better than he was at Jones, but I'm not really sure. That's my region's version of talent drain. I've never heard anyone say that any of those guys are lighting it up BECAUSE they left Jones. Time in the biz, natural talent, and a great market have all played into their current success. Maybe I don't know their whole story, but I don't think Jones is any worse for the wear because any of those guys left.lets be real. Spiff is a company man, good for him. He buys the line that jones puts out. he is loyal to his firm and he should be or he needs to go elsewhere. I did catch something on a post of his i am surprised hasnt been brought up. Spiff use to be in IR training. So i am guessing he was a less then successful rep who was brought into the home office, given additional training, then given an office after paying his dues and some LP. Just a guess. But good for him for building on what he was given and making it in the business.
How many Independent guys joined Jones & now are huge producers at Jones?
ONE (1), he also woke up in Vegas married to a bar fly!
That was worth 10 points.......ding,ding,ding we have a winner!!!How many Independent guys joined Jones & now are huge producers at Jones?
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/whats-firms/edwad-jones-fee-based-circa-2001