Edward Jones-Pushing Advisory & Performance
It seems that Jones is trying to have it both ways. They are spending tremendous amounts of money on the new “Advisory Solutions” investment platform. As a Jones advisor I say it’s about time that this platform was made available.
But at the same time they are coming out with a new performance program that would actually reduce the segment that an advisor was in if his performance fell. Personally my branch is healthier that it has ever been. I have seen a net increase in assets and clients through the down market. Over the past few months I have busier than I have ever been. The problem is that Jones is continuing to use the traditional measurement of my branch's health....the perfomance chart. It appears to me that Jones is trying to have it both ways. No one else at Jones knows how to handle it either. I have heard suggestions like, "do your first 20K in A-shares then use the fee based stuff"or "use A shares then convert them down the road" and many other variations of doing something to create a commission for the moment with the intent of using fee based for that same client later on. Some of these suggestions have come from regional leadership or from individuals at the home office. In my have never been at another firm but the way we have rolled this oput seems half thought out. What happens elsewhere?The client always comes first…after the first 20K…
I am sure Spiff will spin it so that we can hear the other side. Clearly broker4hire must be disgruntled... Sound familiar?Over 90% of the money going into AS is from existing accounts. We got the lecture at Summer Regionals from some heavy-hitting super-vets on how they are converting existing accounts to it at a rate of 1-2 accounts a day. I asked one of them at a break how much new money was going in, and his answer was ZERO. Even my wholesalers are laughing at what we are doing.
that firm is a joke
Tell me why it’s a bad idea to move a client that bought A-Share American Funds 5-7 years ago to switch to Advisory Solutions. Also, Jones provides REFUNDS to clients that switch to Advisory Solutions when it impacts them fee wise. Not just your horsesh*t answer JONES IS A JOKE. Why is Advisory Solutions a bad idea for them??
If they came to you I’d bet everything I own that you’d stick that nice new shiny transfer in a WRAP account. F U
I think your lying about the “first 20k” in A-shares. If not, you have an obligation to report this person.
I probably would sell a wrap, but not after having sold an A share. And Jones is a joke for so many other reasons.
So, what you are saying is you never adjust your clients holdings? Never adjust your strategy? However, if you inherit a clients holdings it’s open season? Interesting.
BTW: you never answered my question, why is it a bad idea? Especially considering the client will get a fee refund?
did the clients circumstance change or did yours? btw, Jones is a joke
You tell me, why would a wrap account benefit your NEW client and not my existing?
Please don’t call Jones a joke, it’ll ruin my night.
More Fee base! More $$ for the partners!!! Yeah
[quote=voltmoie] /// F UI think your lying about the “first 20k” in A-shares. If not, you have an obligation to report this person.
[/quote]
Actually I thought of you when I read this line. It’s not about putting the first $20K of a client’s money into AS; it’s the first 20K GDC. Which in fact is what you’ve purported to do, and I think it’s a good thing.
Other people talking about EDJ’s AS haven’t been exposed to it. Compared to what I see out there, this program is far, far better than the competition. I’ve looked at what others have to offer, at the due diligence involved, the rebalancing and the manner in which clients are handled.
Our plan is better, and even as myself being a potentially outbound Jones guy I find others calling this company a “joke” as being completely unprofessional, and unworthy of direct rebuttal.
By the end of September, I will have five clients on it. By October, 15. I have a list of clients with more than $50K, that have been clients for a reasonable time and who haven’t paid any recent commissions on the account. If they are concentrated in mutual funds, this is a better deal for them. Period. End of discussion.
Automatic rebalancing is NOT good, especially for non-qualifiied money. Most of my clients have non-qualified money.
As for selling A-shares and then putting someone in advisory - it is better than switching someone out of American Funds and into Franklin a few years later, but still a little suspect.
If A-shares are “in your client’s best interest”, then why would you put them in Advisory after selling them A-shares. Has the Jones philosophy changed? No.
I hate to say it, but in this case Windy/Ronnie is acting the most ethical. He doesn’t see it that Advisory is better than A-shares. He is still sticking with Jones philosophy (no matter how changed it is).
Lock - I agree with a lot of what you say, but I personally don’t think that AS is such a good plan. You say it’s cheap, but all-in it’s still pretty expensive. Plus, the models are flawed (at least when I was there).
AS is set up the way it is for one reason - to limit liability of the home office. I don’t think it’s a BAD plan - but it could be better. And the whole philosophy of getting people in A-shares and then converting them - hogwash. These long-term brokers that are now wrapping their 100, 200, and 300 million dollar books. If they thought wrapping the money was in the clients’ best interests, why did they not leave?
[quote=broker4hire] “use A shares then convert them down the road” and many other variations of doing something to create a commission for the moment with the intent of using fee based for that same client later on. Some of these suggestions have come from regional leadership or from individuals at the home office.
[/quote]
wow.
your a branch manager?
JD Powers awards?
[quote=Moraen] Automatic rebalancing is NOT good, especially for non-qualifiied money. Most of my clients have non-qualified money.
As for selling A-shares and then putting someone in advisory - it is better than switching someone out of American Funds and into Franklin a few years later, but still a little suspect.
If A-shares are “in your client’s best interest”, then why would you put them in Advisory after selling them A-shares. Has the Jones philosophy changed? No.
I hate to say it, but in this case Windy/Ronnie is acting the most ethical. He doesn’t see it that Advisory is better than A-shares. He is still sticking with Jones philosophy (no matter how changed it is).
Lock - I agree with a lot of what you say, but I personally don’t think that AS is such a good plan. You say it’s cheap, but all-in it’s still pretty expensive. Plus, the models are flawed (at least when I was there).
AS is set up the way it is for one reason - to limit liability of the home office. I don’t think it’s a BAD plan - but it could be better. And the whole philosophy of getting people in A-shares and then converting them - hogwash. These long-term brokers that are now wrapping their 100, 200, and 300 million dollar books. If they thought wrapping the money was in the clients’ best interests, why did they not leave?[/quote]
wtf
Im having a 1984 acid flashback
[quote=LockEDJ] Compared to what I see out there, this program is far, far better than the competition. I’ve looked at what others have to offer, at the due diligence involved, the rebalancing and the manner in which clients are handled.
Our plan is better, and even as myself being a potentially outbound Jones guy I find others calling this company a “joke” as being completely unprofessional, and unworthy of direct rebuttal.
[/quote]
Your firm is like Waco or sceinctology or something
Wait till you get debriefed in the real world
you will understand
[quote=A b] [quote=broker4hire] “use A shares then convert them down the road” and many other variations of doing something to create a commission for the moment with the intent of using fee based for that same client later on. Some of these suggestions have come from regional leadership or from individuals at the home office.
wow.
your a branch manager?
JD Powers awards? [/quote] This has caught a lot of people off guard. They don't know what to do. They want us to use Advisory and cheer us on for putting $1 billion in every eight days, but they ultimately want us to do it without our production dropping below $18k p/mo. In normal circustances..no problem. But I have to admit that I have been a little closer than I am comfortable with to that line throughout this market...and that is with A-shares. Now that Advisory is a large part of my business that number has dropped to about $16K to $17k p/month. And that is only because it has been VERY busy in the muni, VA and fixed annuity side. No one is giving me any hassles yet...but I know that if I continue down this path they will. At this point I would like to get my production up some. Do I lower myself? Do I use A-shares for a client when I feel that Advisory is a better fit for them? Do I just not tell some clients about the wrap model and only tell them about A-shares?
Here is the bottom line. Either you are committed to the fee based model or you are committed to the A share model. You really can’t have it both ways. I converted my book over 7 years ago to fee based and almost never do an “upfront” sales charge. The only exception is that I did 2 trades where we hit the million dollar breakpoint, but even then I think by having diversified money managers is far better than one fund family. When will
American funds be the next Putnam? The comment that was made that Jones has the best fee based model is simply amazing. You have never looked at one other program if you truly believe that. The Jones fee based model is truly behind the times and there are far better available in the marketplace. Go kick some tires at other firms and it will become apparent that you have been drinking the Kool-Aid far too long.I have no moral dilemma. If the client has over 50k in qualified money they are either going into AS or a B-share VA with an income rider. I think AS for qualified is terrific but dangerous for NQ.
I’d also be able to sleep just fine at night if I were a vet were moving my existing clients into AS. ML, MSSB, Wachovia did the same thing when their wrap programs hit.
The fee recovery system put into place by Jones safegaurds the clients from taking a hit. You can argue the merits of AS all you want but from the ethical end, get real.
Well I certainly DO have a problem with the mass conversion of existing accounts to AS. I’ve been with Jones over 10 years, and I’ve heard almost 10 years of lectures of how “evil” these accounts are. Now that Weddle thinks of it, they’re suddenly great? We used to be trained how to sell AGAINST these things.
So did all the vets who are now converting existing accounts feel like they were selling inferior products back then? Were they too stupid to understand other firms' wrap products at the time? If they are so great, then why is almost every penny going in these things OLD MONEY?????Do you have any proof that ALMOST every penny going into AS is old money? Other than the 100ft view from your office? If so, give us the FFAACCTTSS not your BS opinion.
Why do you live in the past? Microsoft used to think the internet had no commercial application outside of ISP. Guess their employees should quit now because they continue to make a push into that industry. Times change, adjust and move on. Seems like Jones is doing that … why are you not?
The figures came from the GP at our Summer Regional (told over dinner). Told us over 90% is old money. My “BS opinion”? Grow up. I’m assuming you are under 30.
Put down the Kool Aid if you think Jones is trying to "change" and "adjust" to the future. They've uncovered a new income stream. Don't worry - I used to buy into everything they did as well ... you'll outgrow it.[quote=SayNo2KoolAid]Well I certainly DO have a problem with the mass conversion of existing accounts to AS. I’ve been with Jones over 10 years, and I’ve heard almost 10 years of lectures of how “evil” these accounts are. Now that Weddle thinks of it, they’re suddenly great? We used to be trained how to sell AGAINST these things.
So did all the vets who are now converting existing accounts feel like they were selling inferior products back then? Were they too stupid to understand other firms' wrap products at the time? If they are so great, then why is almost every penny going in these things OLD MONEY?????[/quote] I haven't been around quite as long as you but I do see the fallacy in using one fund family for 75% of your mutual fund business. That may not be you, but that is the firm average. Try this simple exercise. Go back and look at the Barron's rankings of mutual fund families. They have been doing this report since 1996 so we have some a short term history. While their method may not be perfect it certainly gives us a good idea of how the fortunes of mutual fund companies rise and fall. Specifically look at the 5 & 10 year rankings. There are a couple that are still in the top 10 that were in that place then....but only a handful. Ten years from now...who knows? Maybe these vets are seeing that the advisory program offers very, very few of the "preferred funds". Maybe they are seeing that large cap value underperformed mid cap and small cap last year. Maybe they are wanting to offer a higher level of diversity to their clients. Maybe their position resembles that of John Maynard Keynes. "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" I have no problem in converting current clients if this program is right for them. I do have a problem in using A-shares now and converting them later. The only group that can afford to really put new money into this platform are the vets that can get 20-30k into it from current money pretty quick and then not worry about the commission from new money because their month will be ok. The main issue that I have is that Jones expects our production to stay up but they want us to use this as well. I feel like walking into Weddle's office and yelling at the top of my freakin lungs "WTF are you thinking!!!"In volt’s defense, I think he is over 30.
However, the vets who are converting their books to AS are a big problem. The reason is as others have pointed out. Where were these vets two years ago? Answer: They were saying wrap programs were all bad.
And now that Jones has one - well it must be great because Jones designed it!
Give me a break. Look. I no longer have hate-filled Jonesitis, but you have to look at it clearly. If A-shares are the best two years ago, what’s changed?
Jones will tell you nothing right? It’s never “different”. Except when they want to make an extra buck.
And you didn’t answer my question …
Why are they great now, but were evil 3 years ago? If they are so great, why isn't the new money going in them? Over 90% is very telling .. WHY IS IT NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR NEW MONEY?[quote=broker4hire] [quote=SayNo2KoolAid]Well I certainly DO have a problem with the mass conversion of existing accounts to AS. I’ve been with Jones over 10 years, and I’ve heard almost 10 years of lectures of how “evil” these accounts are. Now that Weddle thinks of it, they’re suddenly great? We used to be trained how to sell AGAINST these things.
So did all the vets who are now converting existing accounts feel like they were selling inferior products back then? Were they too stupid to understand other firms’ wrap products at the time? If they are so great, then why is almost every penny going in these things OLD MONEY???[/quote]
I haven’t been around quite as long as you but I do see the fallacy in using one fund family for 75% of your mutual fund business. That may not be you, but that is the firm average.
Try this simple exercise. Go back and look at the Barron’s rankings of mutual fund families. They have been doing this report since 1996 so we have some a short term history. While their method may not be perfect it certainly gives us a good idea of how the fortunes of mutual fund companies rise and fall. Specifically look at the 5 & 10 year rankings. There are a couple that are still in the top 10 that were in that place then…but only a handful. Ten years from now…who knows?
Maybe these vets are seeing that the advisory program offers very, very few of the “preferred funds”. Maybe they are seeing that large cap value underperformed mid cap and small cap last year. Maybe they are wanting to offer a higher level of diversity to their clients. Maybe their position resembles that of John Maynard Keynes. “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
I have no problem in converting current clients if this program is right for them. I do have a problem in using A-shares now and converting them later.
The only group that can afford to really put new money into this platform are the vets that can get 20-30k into it from current money pretty quick and then not worry about the commission from new money because their month will be ok.
The main issue that I have is that Jones expects our production to stay up but they want us to use this as well. I feel like walking into Weddle’s office and yelling at the top of my freakin lungs “WTF are you thinking!!!”[/quote]
What facts have changed? And I don’t understand how you can be a Keynsian at Jones. You might get fired for that.
Thats a great question. I'm glad you asked.
(1)Three years ago we did not have it available. (2)My new money IS going into it. (thus the 16k months) (3)See #2[quote=broker4hire]
Thats a great question. I’m glad you asked.
(1)Three years ago we did not have it available.
(2)My new money IS going into it. (thus the 16k months)
(3)See #2 [/quote]
Ah, so we get to it. They were evil three years ago because JONES did not have them. Now it all makes sense!
I’M NOT SAYING WRAP ACCOUNTS ARE BAD.
I'm just saying that when it's nearly all old money, you have to be blind not to see what's happening. If this product is appropriate for old money it's appropriate for new money. If we are barely using it for new money (when it IS great for old money), then we are putting our new clients into an inferior product to earn a much larger commission, and we should be ashamed. But if we are doing the right thing for our new clients by putting them in A shares, then we are churning our older clients, and we should also be ashamed. We can't have this both ways.What facts have changed? And I don't understand how you can be a Keynsian at Jones. You might get fired for that.[/quote] The only fact that I can see that has changed is that we are told from day one to use the preferred funds. Now with vast knowledge and wealth of experience I realize that a .25% trail is not enough. I want at least 1.25%. That appears to be the only answer that many "haters" will believe. So there it is. As to being a Keynsian. The last time I brought up the word Keynsian at a meeting someone told me to delete those emails....it was a scam.
[/quote] What facts have changed? And I don’t understand how you can be a Keynsian at Jones. You might get fired for that.
The only fact that I can see that has changed is that we are told from day one to use the preferred funds. Now with vast knowledge and wealth of experience I realize that a .25% trail is not enough. I want at least 1.25%. That appears to be the only answer that many “haters” will believe. So there it is.
As to being a Keynsian. The last time I brought up the word Keynsian at a meeting someone told me to delete those emails…it was a scam. [/quote]
Not hating, but Jones has been doing this quite a while, and a lot of vets have been doing it a while too. Before I left, they were talking about AS. My regional leader at the time talked about how he was going to take his $270 million and put it all in AS. Nice pay day, but what the hell?
[quote=SayNo2KoolAid]The figures came from the GP at our Summer Regional (told over dinner). Told us over 90% is old money. My “BS opinion”? Grow up. I’m assuming you are under 30.
Put down the Kool Aid if you think Jones is trying to "change" and "adjust" to the future. They've uncovered a new income stream. Don't worry - I used to buy into everything they did as well ... you'll outgrow it.[/quote]I'm over 30, not a kool-aid drinker, and I'm not going to stand by and watch people pass their "opinions" off as facts. So bust out those real figures buddy.
Best part about this argument is if Jones didn't have Advisory Solutions you same clowns would be bitching about us not have a fee based product.
Those were as specific as I was given. Didn’t ask him for $$ amounts (didn’t care). Call the AS team in St. Louis tomorrow and ask them!
Funny - I didn't "bitch" about not having a fee based product for the past 13 years! And if you are really over 30, try corresponding like one. "FU" and "horsesh*t" comments make you sound like a teenager. As I previously stated, you'll tire of Kool Aid and grow up one day.Here’s an example of something I heard before I left. “We still believe A-shares are in the best interest of our clients, Advisory Solutions is another arrow in our quiver”.
And volt - the same people defending AS and saying it was a good thing, were the same people talking about how bad they were for clients. “Wrap” was always said in a derisive and condescending tone, as if it were the worst thing possible for a client. We all learned to sell against it.
You weren’t there at the time, so I’m not sure you have a frame of reference as to what some of the vets were talking about.
[
You weren’t there at the time, so I’m not sure you have a frame of reference as to what some of the vets were talking about.[/quote]
[quote=AGEMAN]
So that is the only fee based platform Jones has is one mutual fund platform. Do they allow you to choose the funds, or is it only company models??[/quote]
I don't want to sound condescending, but how does this program make the advisor any different than a 401(k) rep visiting an employer, meeting w/the employees for 10 minutes each and doing a risk questionnaire before determining "Employee A, you're risk tolerance appears to be Moderately Aggressive. Therefore, you should invest in the Moderately Aggressive model within the company-selected funds."[quote=broker4hire]
Thats a great question. I'm glad you asked.
(1)Three years ago we did not have it available. (2)My new money IS going into it. (thus the 16k months) (3)See #2[/quote] broker4, Nice Hamburger bud! Hahah[quote=Moraen]
You weren’t there at the time, so I’m not sure you have a frame of reference as to what some of the vets were talking about.[/quote]
I certainly do. I have ears, they have voices. We’ve used both to
discuss this.
We can use this exact logic for all the ex-Jones posters
going forward if you’d like. They have NO FRAME of reference to make
any comment on what the firm is currently doing, which includes you SOOOOOOOO, I think all Non-Jones employees should not post anything about this going forward. Fair?
[quote=voltmoie]
[quote=Moraen]
You weren’t there at the time, so I’m not sure you have a frame of reference as to what some of the vets were talking about.[/quote]I certainly do. I have ears, they have voices. We’ve used both to
discuss this. We can use this exact logic for all the ex-Jones posters
going forward if you’d like. They have NO FRAME of reference to make
any comment on what the firm is currently doing, which includes you SOOOOOOOO, I think all Non-Jones employees should not post anything about this going forward. Fair?[/quote]
Actually, that is fair. However, because I was there I have a frame of reference when you guys talk about what is going on now.
For instance, if you say all of the sudden that you guys have started using financial planning software based off of MoneyGuidePro, I can understand that and say, “Wow, because that Sungard crap was garbage, they must really be putting the advisors first here.”.
Because you don’t actually know what it was like BEFORE, and didn’t experience it, you can’t. I can talk about what it was like before compared to what current Jones people talk about. And by the way, you’ll never hear me say, “I talked to a buddy I have at Jones (I only have one left) and he told me blah blah blah”. I will say, “Volt, if that’s what they are doing then that is blah blah blah”. And if nothing has changed, then I can also comment on that.
Since you don’t know what it was like BEFORE AS was implemented (read: You’ve always had it available), then you can’t comment on what it was like before.
I was there before and after it was implemented. Has it changed? You bet. That’s why I always ask questions like, “Hey LockEDJ, is that including all mutual fund expenses as well?”.
Just sayin’.
Your right, i did go through the same process of converting to fee based.
(excpect Tawne Katane was on the hood of a car in that White Snake video and Doug Plank was playing Safety for the Bears ).
A fee base based advisory business is the only way to do the right thing for people all the time and leverage your time to get off always having to get new business constantly every freaking month
Sure its ok to convert as long as there are no monster cap gains.
The BEST way to run your advisory business is through a wrap fee that you run your self. (gpm, pim,pmp, pia whatever).
Your firm is in a time warp. seriously
[quote=Moraen] …
Lock - I agree with a lot of what you say, but I personally don’t think that AS is such a good plan. You say it’s cheap, but all-in it’s still pretty expensive. Plus, the models are flawed (at least when I was there).
…[/quote]
I’m not all the way out of Jones, but my looking tells me that to get a solution with the due diligence of third parties gets to be pretty darn expensive. We can present ours anywhere from 1.35 to 70 bps. I look at the costs of working with someone like Lockwood or a SMA and think woosh, that’s a whole lotta bps. If you want someone to manage money for you for around 1.25% and the FA is outsourcing it … well, I dunno.
Could it be better? Perhaps but I don’t think so within the framework of Jones. After all, how can you introduce alternative investments into the AS world and not make them available in some form outside AS? Insofar as liability goes, one of the FAs has pointed out that we’ve moved to a point now where the Jones FA is at greater risk than before. Interesting ideas.
Tired. Happy both the Bills and Jets won today.
G’nite,
Alex
I thought this might turn into a conversation about the merits of Advisory and it has but my questions have gone unanswered. Let me re-phrase them.
If you could afford to go without a paycheck or much of one do you think it would be worth it to do nothing but wrap accounts for a year? Even if your firm may fire you for lack of performance? And yes, Jones would. (Remember they still want it both ways) For the first time I feel restricted by Jones. I have never felt that the parameters they put around the way I operate my practice have had much of an impact on me.....until now.Your questions are spot on which is why it really only works to go full advisory fee based when you are Indy and don’t have to worry about hitting a monthly production goal as long as you are viable over time. Jones is conflicted as hell and they are once again putting the guys in the middle of the pack in a dilemma.
[quote=LockEDJ] [quote=Moraen] …
Lock - I agree with a lot of what you say, but I personally don’t think that AS is such a good plan. You say it’s cheap, but all-in it’s still pretty expensive. Plus, the models are flawed (at least when I was there).
…[/quote]
I’m not all the way out of Jones, but my looking tells me that to get a solution with the due diligence of third parties gets to be pretty darn expensive. We can present ours anywhere from 1.35 to 70 bps. I look at the costs of working with someone like Lockwood or a SMA and think woosh, that’s a whole lotta bps. If you want someone to manage money for you for around 1.25% and the FA is outsourcing it … well, I dunno.
Could it be better? Perhaps but I don’t think so within the framework of Jones. After all, how can you introduce alternative investments into the AS world and not make them available in some form outside AS? Insofar as liability goes, one of the FAs has pointed out that we’ve moved to a point now where the Jones FA is at greater risk than before. Interesting ideas.
Tired. Happy both the Bills and Jets won today.
G’nite,
Alex[/quote]
Lock .70 to 1.35 ALL-IN? Does that include any mutual fund expenses?
No.[quote=LockEDJ] [quote=Moraen] …
Lock - I agree with a lot of what you say, but I personally don’t think that AS is such a good plan. You say it’s cheap, but all-in it’s still pretty expensive. Plus, the models are flawed (at least when I was there).
…[/quote]
I’m not all the way out of Jones, but my looking tells me that to get a solution with the due diligence of third parties gets to be pretty darn expensive. We can present ours anywhere from 1.35 to 70 bps. I look at the costs of working with someone like Lockwood or a SMA and think woosh, that’s a whole lotta bps. If you want someone to manage money for you for around 1.25% and the FA is outsourcing it … well, I dunno.
Could it be better? Perhaps but I don’t think so within the framework of Jones. After all, how can you introduce alternative investments into the AS world and not make them available in some form outside AS? Insofar as liability goes, one of the FAs has pointed out that we’ve moved to a point now where the Jones FA is at greater risk than before. Interesting ideas.
Tired. Happy both the Bills and Jets won today.
G’nite,
Alex[/quote]
Lock .70 to 1.35 ALL-IN? Does that include any mutual fund expenses?
Hold on, Morean … miscommunication. Chalk one up under the category, “Don’t post while you are tired.”
No, I meant that the AS can be pushed out to clients as low as 70 bps. We don't have Lockwood, but I see the administration fees a BD puts around them + the fees from Lockwood + the advisor's take, and I that seems incredibly expensive. My point being, the Jones AS offers due diligence and third party administration at generally above 1; what I see from BDs that offer due diligence and third party admin seems to be closer to 2. I'm very willing to be corrected on the percentages. Don't tell me about your own due diligence or you're great manner of dividing and conquering the market; most FAs are and should remain salesmen. Let's match an apple with an apple, and I do believe the Jones AS is inexpensive. Educate me on how I am wrong. FWIW, for one of my clients, in a classic 70-30 AS solution, has experienced a 19% return YTD net of fees. I have no issue with those returns, so to say their solutions are flawed ... I think you have a hard time. This is substantially better than let's say the S&P Growth Allocation offered through iShares (in fact, it's better than any asset allocation offered through iShares on a YTD basis.) With due respect, A.[quote=LockEDJ] Hold on, Morean … miscommunication. Chalk one up under the category, “Don’t post while you are tired.”
No, I meant that the AS can be pushed out to clients as low as 70 bps. We don’t have Lockwood, but I see the administration fees a BD puts around them + the fees from Lockwood + the advisor’s take, and I that seems incredibly expensive. My point being, the Jones AS offers due diligence and third party administration at generally above 1; what I see from BDs that offer due diligence and third party admin seems to be closer to 2.
I’m very willing to be corrected on the percentages. Don’t tell me about your own due diligence or you’re great manner of dividing and conquering the market; most FAs are and should remain salesmen. Let’s match an apple with an apple, and I do believe the Jones AS is inexpensive. Educate me on how I am wrong.
FWIW, for one of my clients, in a classic 70-30 AS solution, has experienced a 19% return YTD net of fees. I have no issue with those returns, so to say their solutions are flawed … I think you have a hard time. This is substantially better than let’s say the S&P Growth Allocation offered through iShares (in fact, it’s better than any asset allocation offered through iShares on a YTD basis.)
With due respect,
A.[/quote]
19% seems a little on the low side YTD, but if you say it’s working, then I believe you. Who sits on the Advisory Solutions board? Are they Jones people? That’s who it would be when I left. These are the same people who were saying Lehman wasn’t going bankrupt, yes?
Guys, this conversation is getting a little silly.
Bottom line, Jones rolled out their first advisory platform one year ago. As with all things "Jones", they will start out slow and make modifications as they go. I know they already have another several models that they are rolling out by year-end, and will likely make more modifications as we go forward. They are working on addressing the whole "production goals" thing as it relates to AS, as to make it more attractive for new assets. My belief is that they WANTED existing assets going into it first, so they they could basically test out the concept with more seasoned veterans before letting the whole firm go hog-wild. As far as the rigidity of the platform, I believe that Jones is doing this to cover their fiduciary a$$es, and make sure they tightly control it in the beginning. My guess is that they become more flexible as time goies on. I bet at some point they allow individual securities. Now, this will likely start out as the "model portfolio" and some sort of pre-constructed bond ladder or something, but again, baby steps. Jones is never at the cutting edge. We should just accept it for what it is right now, and understand that it will improve as time goes on.I am a Jones guy and I can’t believe anyone would sit here and say that it is fine to move money into the AS from old A share money unless they are willing to say that their philosophy has changed.
I also do not think Ejones is a joke, however about 30% of their brokers are. Are we really this ignorant to call each other names or argue back with JD Power award and we manage money!!! Anyway this is a huge problem at Jones. If I am not a bad broker who is taking old money and converting it, then like others on here I am only doing it with new money. I have not found a way to make it work yet and the idea of putting 20K in a 5% load and the rest in AS is SICKENING. And non defensable. EX: I put 375 in AS and had a horrible June 9K gross. My RL called and asked "what happened, did I take the month off? ha ha.. ". Lastly, we SHOULD all know by now that one way is not always the best. For some people AS is good, for some people load funds are good, for some situations VAs are good, for some C shares are good. If you are saying I ONLY do XYZ then you are probably not all that good at financial advise.[quote=LockEDJ]FWIW, for one of my clients, in a classic 70-30 AS solution, has experienced a 19% return YTD net of fees. I have no issue with those returns, so to say their solutions are flawed … I think you have a hard time. This is substantially better than let’s say the S&P Growth Allocation offered through iShares (in fact, it’s better than any asset allocation offered through iShares on a YTD basis.)
With due respect, A.[/quote] Uggghhh...19%...here's my company's 100% proprietary moderate aggressive allocation fund, in a 66/34 model. FWIW, no one here uses the fund because its a joke, unless the client is opening up a roth or something w/$2,000, and its still up 23%. A lazy sloth could put together a moderately aggressive portfolio this year that has earned at least 25%. http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAXMAXyep, investment management should be left to professionals. Does the Edward Jones Investment Policy Committee still made up of 0 CFAs, 1 dude with an MBA and 7 former INVESTMENT REPRESENTATIVES housed out of the mutual fund catered HQ? What a joke, when I was there “asset allocation” asset classes were dubbed Income, Growth and Income, Growth and Aggressive Growth. Did Dave Ramsey set that up? I can see why DR would, he’s talking to millions of people on free radio, but EDJ? A rep is supposed to select the underlying funds in those categories while understanding risk?
It should be cheap, its made up of uneducated jokers that eat mutual fund food from HQ (not so dissimilar from other companies).
Well ... you got me there . At least it's not me doing the pickin' and grinnin'. I'm curious though as to whether or not anyone sees this as an expensive solution.…Who sits on the Advisory Solutions board? Are they Jones people? That’s who it would be when I left. These are the same people who were saying Lehman wasn’t going bankrupt, yes?
You know the answer to that because you've asked it before, make your point that it sucks and move on.
Lock .70 to 1.35 ALL-IN? Does that include any mutual fund expenses?
[quote=Moraen] Lock .70 to 1.35 ALL-IN? Does that include any mutual fund expenses?
You know the answer to that because you’ve asked it before, make your point that it sucks and move on.[/quote]
Actually, I was asking the question to your point about me not being there. Things could have changed since the last time someone answered it. After all, I am not at Jones any more.
My point is not that it sucks, just that it is disingenuous to say that you are charging between .7 to 1.35 bps. The client is paying more than that. Just like when people would sell A-shares. “You only pay this ONE-TIME Advisory fee of 3.5%, then it’s free!”. I lost track of how many times I heard people say that.
Full disclosure is recommended. Also, I believe I said it could be better. Not that it is a horrible platform. There are better available.
[quote=GoodTimes] yep, investment management should be left to professionals. Does the Edward Jones Investment Policy Committee still made up of 0 CFAs, 1 dude with an MBA and 7 former INVESTMENT REPRESENTATIVES housed out of the mutual fund catered HQ? What a joke, when I was there “asset allocation” asset classes were dubbed Income, Growth and Income, Growth and Aggressive Growth. Did Dave Ramsey set that up? I can see why DR would, he’s talking to millions of people on free radio, but EDJ? A rep is supposed to select the underlying funds in those categories while understanding risk? It should be cheap, its made up of uneducated jokers that eat mutual fund food from HQ (not so dissimilar from other companies).
[/quote]
Ouch!
[quote=Moraen] [quote=voltmoie] [quote=Moraen] Lock .70 to 1.35 ALL-IN? Does that include any mutual fund expenses?[/quote]
You know the answer to that because you've asked it before, make your point that it sucks and move on.[/quote]
Actually, I was asking the question to your point about me not being there. Things could have changed since the last time someone answered it. After all, I am not at Jones any more.
My point is not that it sucks, just that it is disingenuous to say that you are charging between .7 to 1.35 bps. The client is paying more than that. Just like when people would sell A-shares. "You only pay this ONE-TIME Advisory fee of 3.5%, then it's free!". I lost track of how many times I heard people say that.
Full disclosure is recommended. Also, I believe I said it could be better. Not that it is a horrible platform. There are better available. [/quote] For some reason I thought you were baiting Lock to answer the question the way you wanted so you could make your point. My bad! It's what Jone's has to offer, provides a good value, and is better than slapping people in American Funds. You would agree yes? Clients don't like it, they can go elsewhere - but we both know it's more than about just the "best platform" I'd also argue it's a great platform for the Jones sales force. I'd be scared as hell if some of these guys were handeling a true wrap account.
[quote=voltmoie]
7 of them are CFA's. The Investment Policy Committee makes allocation/strategic decisions. Then there are additional people from Equity Research, Product Review, and Investment Advisory departments. There's a lot of input from a lot of different areas.yep, investment management should be left to professionals. Does the Edward Jones Investment Policy Committee still made up of 0 CFAs, 1 dude with an MBA and 7 former INVESTMENT REPRESENTATIVES housed out of the mutual fund catered HQ? What a joke, when I was there “asset allocation” asset classes were dubbed Income, Growth and Income, Growth and Aggressive Growth. Did Dave Ramsey set that up? I can see why DR would, he’s talking to millions of people on free radio, but EDJ? A rep is supposed to select the underlying funds in those categories while understanding risk?
It should be cheap, its made up of uneducated jokers that eat mutual fund food from HQ (not so dissimilar from other companies).
B24, seriously. These are Jones employees we are talking about. They suck. They are stupid. Geeeez, you should know this by now.
I agree. I was planning on interviewing with them until I read all this stuff: "Awful, awful awful!!!! I have been bounced to three different advisors in the last 4 years and neither was worth anything. I have lost over 30k. The only thing E.J advisors advise is to invest in what makes THEM more money, not the client. I could have done a better job myself with my eyes closed. I only heard from the advisor when he needed to sell one of my stocks or mutual funds so he could make more money or qualify for a trip contest E.J was having. THIS IS A VERY UNETHICAL COMPANY.B24, seriously. These are Jones employees we are talking about. They suck. They are stupid. Geeeez, you should know this by now.
The advisors are just SALES PERSONNEL! This was a very expensive lesson for me.
RUN FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT AWAY FROM THIS COMPANY." "Edward Jones is a horrible company...the Financial Advisors use their fake smile and play the "best friends" game and act as if they want to become part of the family with all of their wealthy Clients...yes, the ones with alot of money, their top clients that they know they will continue to make some good commission off of and bring money into the company...the others can all bite the dust...The Financial Advisors are what the company focuses on, if you are in any other position, you are nothing, and I mean nothing, not important and not appreciated or so it seems from what myself and my husband have noticed in the past (with the support people) before deciding to leave and go elsewhere where we are treated properly and satisfied...the poor workers that are not F.A.'s do all the work and barely make anything while the F.A.'s reap all the rewards...I felt so sorry for the lady up front...barely making ends meet, driving an old car, and couldn't afford medical benefits as one hard working lady told us while we would wait for so long to meet with the F.A., always running behind schedule and making others wait...See you have the F.A. with the big home, fancy car, weekly golf games and playing on the computer in his office claiming to be busy at times when he was in contact with other F.A.'s and betting on sports...fantasy football ring a bell al you F.A.'s out there? lol...every time I called to speak to the F.A., I had to deal with the gatekeeper or front office person and I always got the same response "Mr. L is in conference with a client or on a phone conference" may I take a message or assist you with something?... or some crap they seem to tell these people up front to say...they are lazy every day for half the day, strolling in late and these poor support people are the ones doing all the work...we have seen this at 3 different Edward Jones locations...and on one occasion, I couldn't believe I saw this poor woman cleaning the office and running personal errands too? All for a low hourly wage...it's pathetic...without these support people, the F.A.'s would not be able to make it...also, we were upset because whenever we would ask the F.A. about Stocks, the F.A. told myself and my husband, I am sorry but I am not good at picking stocks, always forcing American Funds on everyone...what kind of F.A. should be working for E.J. if they don't know how to pick stocks? It seemed like most clients got the same advice...the F.A. staying away from Stocks and focusing mainly on Mutual Funds...forcing American Funds on the Clients all the time...I guess we had such a bad experience and they do some under handed things in that firm, FINRA and SEC should check out each branch location at least 5 times a year, I am sure they are bound to catch something that they are doing that is against the rules and regulations...All I can say is RUN, AS FAST AS YOU CAN AWAY FROM EDWARD JONES"!!!" http://www.rateitall.com/i-92963-edward-jones.aspx
Wow, for a “client”, this person sure seemed to know an awful lot about what their advisor does every minute of the day. Knows the BOA’s hourly wage, what the BOA drives, that she couldn’t afford benefits, what the FA is doing on his computer, that they “stroll in late every day”, always running behind schedule, …
Give me a break.[quote=RealWorld] I am a Jones guy and I can’t believe anyone would sit here and say that it is fine to move money into the AS from old A share money unless they are willing to say that their philosophy has changed.
I also do not think Ejones is a joke, however about 30% of their brokers are. Are we really this ignorant to call each other names or argue back with JD Power award and we manage money!!!
Anyway this is a huge problem at Jones. If I am not a bad broker who is taking old money and converting it, then like others on here I am only doing it with new money.
I have not found a way to make it work yet and the idea of putting 20K in a 5% load and the rest in AS is SICKENING. And non defensable.
EX: I put 375 in AS and had a horrible June 9K gross. My RL called and asked "what happened, did I take the month off? ha ha… ".
Lastly, we SHOULD all know by now that one way is not always the best. For some people AS is good, for some people load funds are good, for some situations VAs are good, for some C shares are good.
If you are saying I ONLY do XYZ then you are probably not all that good at financial advise.
[/quote]
Great insights. thanks for sharing
[quote=voltmoie]B24, seriously. These are Jones employees we are talking about. They suck. They are stupid. Geeeez, you should know this by now.
I agree. I was planning on interviewing with them until I read all this stuff:
“Awful, awful awful!!! I have been bounced to three different advisors in the last 4 years and neither was worth anything. I have lost over 30k. The only thing E.J advisors advise is to invest in what makes THEM more money, not the client. I could have done a better job myself with my eyes closed. I only heard from the advisor when he needed to sell one of my stocks or mutual funds so he could make more money or qualify for a trip contest E.J was having. THIS IS A VERY UNETHICAL COMPANY. The advisors are just SALES PERSONNEL! This was a very expensive lesson for me.RUN FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT AWAY FROM THIS COMPANY.”
“Edward Jones is a horrible company…the Financial Advisors use their fake smile and play the “best friends” game and act as if they want to become part of the family with all of their wealthy Clients…yes, the ones with alot of money, their top clients that they know they will continue to make some good commission off of and bring money into the company…the others can all bite the dust…The Financial Advisors are what the company focuses on, if you are in any other position, you are nothing, and I mean nothing, not important and not appreciated or so it seems from what myself and my husband have noticed in the past (with the support people) before deciding to leave and go elsewhere where we are treated properly and satisfied…the poor workers that are not F.A.'s do all the work and barely make anything while the F.A.'s reap all the rewards…I felt so sorry for the lady up front…barely making ends meet, driving an old car, and couldn’t afford medical benefits as one hard working lady told us while we would wait for so long to meet with the F.A., always running behind schedule and making others wait…See you have the F.A. with the big home, fancy car, weekly golf games and playing on the computer in his office claiming to be busy at times when he was in contact with other F.A.'s and betting on sports…fantasy football ring a bell al you F.A.'s out there? lol…every time I called to speak to the F.A., I had to deal with the gatekeeper or front office person and I always got the same response “Mr. L is in conference with a client or on a phone conference” may I take a message or assist you with something?.. or some crap they seem to tell these people up front to say…they are lazy every day for half the day, strolling in late and these poor support people are the ones doing all the work…we have seen this at 3 different Edward Jones locations…and on one occasion, I couldn’t believe I saw this poor woman cleaning the office and running personal errands too? All for a low hourly wage…it’s pathetic…without these support people, the F.A.'s would not be able to make it…also, we were upset because whenever we would ask the F.A. about Stocks, the F.A. told myself and my husband, I am sorry but I am not good at picking stocks, always forcing American Funds on everyone…what kind of F.A. should be working for E.J. if they don’t know how to pick stocks? It seemed like most clients got the same advice…the F.A. staying away from Stocks and focusing mainly on Mutual Funds…forcing American Funds on the Clients all the time…I guess we had such a bad experience and they do some under handed things in that firm, FINRA and SEC should check out each branch location at least 5 times a year, I am sure they are bound to catch something that they are doing that is against the rules and regulations…All I can say is RUN, AS FAST AS YOU CAN AWAY FROM EDWARD JONES”!!!"
http://www.rateitall.com/i-92963-edward-jones.aspx
<DIV =reviewFlag>[/quote]
Imposter! Fake! Phony! What else is there to say?
I think I saw the first quote when I googled Jones a couple years back. Its funny that this is what Squash does in his spare time.
Kidding of course Squash.[quote=RealWorld]
D. I don't get on here often and I am a Jones person but your last explanation about only being able to SELL people things is what makes you an obvious broker and not a financial advisor IMO. That makes me a little upset that we work for the same firm. [/quote] You can put whatever title you want on your business card but we know what you are. An investment sales guy. Go start a fee-only practice if you are something else.[quote=RealWorld]
LockEDJ-So gest is that you sold them an A share against selling them a C or a wrap. Made 5% and now moved them to something where you get paid 1% each yr.
[/quote]
If they were sold funds 2 years ago and they still have enough to qualify for AS minimum of $50k, then they would not have paid more than 4.5% up front. They may have hit the $100k breakpoint and paid 3.5%. It may be hard for some to believe, but some of our clients actually hit the $250k breakpt and only pay 2.5%.
In the previous examples, we are talking gross cost, not that the broker “Made 5%”. The dealer concession on those are 3.75, 2.75, and 2 respectively. In any case, 5% is incorrect.
If you are going to argue a point based on incorrect facts, I’ll assume your conclusion is also incorrect.
[quote=RealWorld]
Hulk-It amazes me the length that ANYONE would go to , to defend this.
First good point on 5% to the broker.
OK so it was 4.75 4.50 or even as low as 2 however you are missing the point when you talk about dealer concession.
I don’t think that you should look at this as what is the dealer concession. The only fact that FINRA or any client should look at is the charge that they pay. Which most likely between 4.75-3.50 for most money going from mutual funds to a managed mutual fund account.
Here is the point… If you as a financial advisor thought that owning a lot of fund families (the best of the best) was the best way to invest LockEDJ would have bought the client C share mutual funds instead of A share.
So basically LockEDJ had to have a change in philosophy if he really thinks it is in his clients best interest to have rebalancing now when he didn’t think owning multiple fund families was the right thing when he made 4.75 or 2.5 or whatever the charge was?
So from my perspective he either did a complete 180 in terms of mutual fund buying philosophy or he is only thinking of himself when he charges the client an annual fee after getting them to pay one up front for the (long term savings) that he “supposedly” wanted them so badly to get a few years ago.
Change of philosophy or churning
I don’t get the middle ground maybe you could point it out. This is why I am not using it but I can not see any of your points to how this benefits your clients. And if you don’t care about that then I am sad I share the same name on my door as you and maybe I should go independent as hotair suggests.
Correct/Incorrect? [/quote]
All advisors should be independent.
[quote=RealWorld]
LockEDJ- I am glad that my post left you muttering. This is your conscience telling you that you have a serious conflict on interest on your hands. A. First off - even with commission rescinded that doesn't mean that the client gets all their commission back. That is just the yearly average commission if they have not held them for what 3 yrs? So gest is that you sold them an A share against selling them a C or a wrap. Made 5% and now moved them to something where you get paid 1% each yr. What I said was that if your philosophy did not change you were at a conflict of interest. Meaning if you did not have an epihemy that Wrap funds and rebalancing was better than you are already doing - Then you were doing this for you and not for your client. I think that is obvious. B. I did not look for a fight here, so thanks for being a little salty, that smells a little like defensive to me. C. Having a Strategy (not format) and sticking to it is the ONLY way to consistently beat the market and help your clients. When you change your strategy for a reason other than the benefit of your clients, you become no better than the country companies annuity salesman. D. I don't get on here often and I am a Jones person but your last explanation about only being able to SELL people things is what makes you an obvious broker and not a financial advisor IMO. That makes me a little upset that we work for the same firm. [/quote] Sorry to upset you; and I don't want to get into a spitting contest with another Jones guy. I've been told that I have a SALES job. As a successful recruiter, I've been told time and again to tell recruits this is a SALES job. You can't be an Advisor until you SELL something; and all the advising in the world is about SELLING more. Tell me that your region does it differently, or for that matter, any other Jones FA can chime in. Perhaps you should be upset at your firm, and not me. Because while we're on the topic of what is told to newbies, please do tell me how selling one BAC/Lehman bond to every person you've just met coincides with your philosophy of doing what is right for the client? How is that being ... a financial advisor ... when the prospect says yes? On the friggin phone to some pasty kid 1500 miles away, that's jumping for joy because he gets to put his name on the board and maybe leave with this groovy t-shirt? Here is what I was told: We don't sell B shares, and we certainly don't sell C shares. If you do, you'll have FS all over you. Now go out and sell. So maybe mine is not an epiphany and what I said holds water. Don't project to me your disgust. Because I have plenty enough to go towards people that look down on FAs for doing exactly as they are told. Tell me something; you want your clients to make the most they can with their money, yes? And the best way to do that is to charge them as little as possible and that's why you've always used A shares. Then, you know that when they buy A shares, that they could possibly get the best possible cost by buying all bond funds. Right? Later, you could rebalance into equity from the bond funds. So why don't you do that? Acch. I didn't want to get into a spitting contest and that's what I've done. Let it be said that I look into my heart with every transaction and do what is best for my client. I've seen plenty from transfers in from other Jones reps that show you may have a point in being disgusted, and I know you want what is best for clients ... just like me.you need to have some sort of understanding of the WHOLE industry to recomend what is RIGHT for the client whether it is fee based or commish stock bonds or mutual funds all firms r the same DO WHATS RIGHT! for client and they will be happy to pay fee or comish
Let me give you a slightly different perspective.
Edward Jones commissioned a study a couple of years ago and surveyed several thousand clients. A little over 1/2 of CURRENT Edward Jones clients would prefer an advisory platform. These numbers make sense to me, as many clients feel there are fewer conflicts of interests associated with a multi-manager platform with no revenue sharing and automatic rebalancing. With clients that I know have expressed interest in an advisory platform before the AS rollout, I have since had annual reviews and run the new platform by them. Of the 40 or so clients that I have put the AS in front of, all but one changed over. Am I ripping off clients that have had only one or two fund families in their old portfolio? I don't think so. If they have an American fund portfolio, where am I going to add small cap or mid cap? How about real estate or commodities? What about a good domestic bond fund? Yes, the cost is around 1% more annually, but the client prefers this type of account. I have long been using "best of breed" C-share portfolios under 250k. Yes, I do get a compliance wire on anything over 50k, but I have talked to our FS people, and explained my strategy. Answering an FSPEND or compliance wire is not a bad thing, they simply want a paper trail if the client ever sends in a complaint. When you must worry is when you send in a response into compliance and they don't like the answer. That has never happened to me on a C-share (have over 14 million in C's by the way). I also have several clients that would prefer to deduct their management fees. So I have rotated a few of my C-share portfolios into AS. Makes sense to me. As far as new money, I have been adding about 50-60% of my new clients that are owning mutual funds into advisory. This pretty much is in line with what is most likely the number that would prefer fee based advising based on the recent survey. So far I've brought my AS assets up to around 15 million. I also feel that every account I have used AS for has been appropriate. I've got a master's degree and a CFP. That doesn't make any difference if I'm not treating the client right. The AS platform is not without it's limitations though.... I have been adding several custom models lately. It makes me nervous when the net inflows into our cookie-cutter models are literally making up around 30% of the assets of some of these funds. When Edward Jones has to call on Bond Fund of America to make sure they have enough liquidity to get out of our position, that trend could create some prohibitively large moves out of some of these funds as the platform gets larger. They need to open the platform up to more funds, and allow some manual overrides of some of the percentages in each asset class. Long story short, it's not the perfect model, but they are working on it. Is it appropriate for everyone? No. Does it compensate the advisor justly for the work we do? Yes. By the way, I have hear Jim Weddle personally say that if an advisor is dropping significant advisory trades, but drops below standard, there will be absolutely no disciplinary actions.[quote=LockEDJ][quote=RealWorld]
Here is what I was told: We don't sell B shares, and we certainly don't sell C shares. If you do, you'll have FS all over you. Now go out and sell. [/quote] What? What if you have a client that has a 2-3 year time horizon and doesn't want to simply park money in CD's?[quote=3rdyrp2][quote=LockEDJ][quote=RealWorld]
Here is what I was told: We don't sell B shares, and we certainly don't sell C shares. If you do, you'll have FS all over you. Now go out and sell. [/quote] What? What if you have a client that has a 2-3 year time horizon and doesn't want to simply park money in CD's? [/quote] He's wrong. I put almost every client under 100K into C shares. I've discussed with FSD, and they have no problem with it. The only B shares I have were transferred in/inherited.[quote=LockEDJ][quote=RealWorld]
LockEDJ- I am glad that my post left you muttering. This is your conscience telling you that you have a serious conflict on interest on your hands. A. First off - even with commission rescinded that doesn't mean that the client gets all their commission back. That is just the yearly average commission if they have not held them for what 3 yrs? So gest is that you sold them an A share against selling them a C or a wrap. Made 5% and now moved them to something where you get paid 1% each yr. What I said was that if your philosophy did not change you were at a conflict of interest. Meaning if you did not have an epihemy that Wrap funds and rebalancing was better than you are already doing - Then you were doing this for you and not for your client. I think that is obvious. B. I did not look for a fight here, so thanks for being a little salty, that smells a little like defensive to me. C. Having a Strategy (not format) and sticking to it is the ONLY way to consistently beat the market and help your clients. When you change your strategy for a reason other than the benefit of your clients, you become no better than the country companies annuity salesman. D. I don't get on here often and I am a Jones person but your last explanation about only being able to SELL people things is what makes you an obvious broker and not a financial advisor IMO. That makes me a little upset that we work for the same firm. [/quote] Sorry to upset you; and I don't want to get into a spitting contest with another Jones guy. I've been told that I have a SALES job. As a successful recruiter, I've been told time and again to tell recruits this is a SALES job. You can't be an Advisor until you SELL something; and all the advising in the world is about SELLING more. Tell me that your region does it differently, or for that matter, any other Jones FA can chime in. Perhaps you should be upset at your firm, and not me. Because while we're on the topic of what is told to newbies, please do tell me how selling one BAC/Lehman bond to every person you've just met coincides with your philosophy of doing what is right for the client? How is that being ... a financial advisor ... when the prospect says yes? On the friggin phone to some pasty kid 1500 miles away, that's jumping for joy because he gets to put his name on the board and maybe leave with this groovy t-shirt? Here is what I was told: We don't sell B shares, and we certainly don't sell C shares. If you do, you'll have FS all over you. Now go out and sell. So maybe mine is not an epiphany and what I said holds water. Don't project to me your disgust. Because I have plenty enough to go towards people that look down on FAs for doing exactly as they are told. Tell me something; you want your clients to make the most they can with their money, yes? And the best way to do that is to charge them as little as possible and that's why you've always used A shares. Then, you know that when they buy A shares, that they could possibly get the best possible cost by buying all bond funds. Right? Later, you could rebalance into equity from the bond funds. So why don't you do that? Acch. I didn't want to get into a spitting contest and that's what I've done. Let it be said that I look into my heart with every transaction and do what is best for my client. I've seen plenty from transfers in from other Jones reps that show you may have a point in being disgusted, and I know you want what is best for clients ... just like me. [/quote] I don't know anyone who told newbies to sell a Lehman or BAC bond. Seriously. We used to have them in inventory and in hindsit that was a mistake but I NEVER was forced to sell a client into a specific product. I also was never forced to purchase a certain share class for a client. I can't believe anyone would tell you that "we don't sell B shares and certainly not C shares here". I as well as other can attest that we sell many C shares and a few B shares even though I hate them. As long as there is a logical reason that BENEFITS the CLIENT, you will be fine. Are you sure someone actually did these things to you? There is certainly sales in this job but we also have liscenses and responsibilities. In those responsibilities includes not making decisions with your client's money only to benefit your pocketbook. I can't help it Lock, I am on full tilt with you here.I’m glad you agree with me. This is a sales job. And I don’t believe anywhere I abdicated my responsibilities to my clients, and I’m sure you aren’t inferring that I did. Right?
Insofar as newbies, this is what happens at every PDP class. Perhaps you’ve forgotten what happens at St. Louis, and it’s time for a veteran like yourself to go there and contribute your time. But you’re given a choice on two items, and you call all day on people you’ve never met products that might have no relevance in their lives.
Re: C shares - Perhaps I misworded. Never told that we were forbidden to sell either B or C. Let’s say heavily dissuaded. But I am curious, exactly how much C share business is on your books from when you were in your first two years? I wonder quite frankly if this isn’t selective memory but if not, bully for you.
I asked this before so I repeat … have you ever considered why, if you are selling A shares to benefit the client on the basis of long term cost, you don’t simply sell him all bond funds initially? Are you making a decision there that realistically only benefits your pocket book? Seems like it to me and you certainly know this to be true. You have a responsibility to act as a prudent man might do on his own behalf.
In those responsibilities includes not making decisions with your client’s money only to benefit your pocketbook, well only you benefit by not buying in all at Bond fund prices.
[quote=LockEDJ]I’m glad you agree with me. This is a sales job. And I don’t believe anywhere I abdicated my responsibilities to my clients, and I’m sure you aren’t inferring that I did. Right?
Insofar as newbies, this is what happens at every PDP class. Perhaps you’ve forgotten what happens at St. Louis, and it’s time for a veteran like yourself to go there and contribute your time. But you’re given a choice on two items, and you call all day on people you’ve never met products that might have no relevance in their lives.
Re: C shares - Perhaps I misworded. Never told that we were forbidden to sell either B or C. Let’s say heavily dissuaded. But I am curious, exactly how much C share business is on your books from when you were in your first two years? I wonder quite frankly if this isn’t selective memory but if not, bully for you.
I asked this before so I repeat … have you ever considered why, if you are selling A shares to benefit the client on the basis of long term cost, you don’t simply sell him all bond funds initially? Are you making a decision there that realistically only benefits your pocket book? Seems like it to me and you certainly know this to be true. You have a responsibility to act as a prudent man might do on his own behalf.
In those responsibilities includes not making decisions with your client’s money only to benefit your pocketbook, well only you benefit by not buying in all at Bond fund prices.
[/quote]
Come on man, you are not the dollar tree of financial advisors. I’m trying to get PAID and help my clients meet their goals in the process. I didn’t take this job to run a charity. 7 times out of 10 if you truly lay out the facts the client is going to pick a C share over an A share … and I’m not talking the 6 year speech. I think you need to give Putnum as a rick of choosing an A share and then see what they say.
Plus, in a down market I think there is a great case to be made for selecting B shares over A. I want every dollar in the game I can get - especially after the hit most people took. ( no idea if we are really in a down market anymore)
Volt, first off … no doubt. I don’t apologize to anyone for getting paid to do my job.
The man questions if I’m doing things to benefit only my pocket book. I’m questioning the same of him.
Volt,
Right on on both counts. Studies have shown that, left to their own devices, the average investor only captures a small portion of the return available to them. If the only thing we ever do for people is help them capture that difference, we're worth plenty. I'm not saying that costs don't matter, but if 1 will get you 7, that's a great deal for the clients. And, IMHO, a big reason EJ wanted me to sell A shares was so that, if I left the business, EJ wouldn't end up having to settle with clients because of "non-disclosure". It was always about GP liability, never about what was "best for the client". Some HO dork came to my office once to explain that I would "capture more assets" if I always did A shares. I smiled at him, thought "what a GP tool", and totally ignored him (but I DID eat the lunch he bought!). B and C shares exist for a reason, and I use them when appropriate.As long as people sell variable annuities, there will be B-shares
When they come out with guaranteed income for life benefits for mutual funds regardless of market performance, I will drop annuities in a heart beat.
At one point LPL was talking about it with our fee platforms...but with all the uncertainty I think the insurance sponsor saw too much downside possiblity. Supposedly, its still on the table for discussion...As a side note...
I was at Jones when they instituted A share annuities. At the time, they reduced commission on B share annuities to 35% from 40%. Is that still the case? 1/3 of my book is annuities for one sole reason, guaranteed income...I have never recommended B share, have some on the books, but find the hybrid L or C to be more suitable if liquidity is an issue.LockEDJ- You are seriously lost. I do question you.
1. Only an idiot would say that selling A shares to someone and then moving them into a Wrap is comparable to while selling mutual funds not moving ALL the dollars into fixed income at 3.75%. Only an IDIOT. Literally. Commissions are supposed to be fair. When you sell A shares and then change them to 1.35% annual without changing how you think business should be done (as Volt identified by his B share example) YOU ARE CHURNING. PERIOD. 2. You said you were forced to sell Lehman bonds. You weren't. Yes at PDP you call people to do business with you. You are forced to call people. (like that is a bad thing) If you call on a bond and then find it is unsuitable you are supposed to sell them something else. 3. I did sell a lot of A shares and still do. However I sell A shares when the are appropriate. (long term holdings, a buy and hold person). I did not turn around after charging them a load and switch them to a 1.35% annual because people who liked/needed to move in the market from fund to fund were already in C shares. 4. I know that you moved your clients to AS to benefit your pocketbook. I am not inferring anything. I am flat out saying it. And how I know is based on your answers here. I think that kind of business tactics will end up with you selling vaccums door to door in about 7 months. You are that 30% at Jones.I disagree. If you run a hypo on virtual any mutual fund you will see that the overall performance of a B-share is smaller than an A-share. C-shares I understand the reasoning, B-shares I don't.[quote=LockEDJ]I’m glad you agree with me. This is a sales job. And I don’t believe anywhere I abdicated my responsibilities to my clients, and I’m sure you aren’t inferring that I did. Right?
Insofar as newbies, this is what happens at every PDP class. Perhaps you’ve forgotten what happens at St. Louis, and it’s time for a veteran like yourself to go there and contribute your time. But you’re given a choice on two items, and you call all day on people you’ve never met products that might have no relevance in their lives.
Re: C shares - Perhaps I misworded. Never told that we were forbidden to sell either B or C. Let’s say heavily dissuaded. But I am curious, exactly how much C share business is on your books from when you were in your first two years? I wonder quite frankly if this isn’t selective memory but if not, bully for you.
I asked this before so I repeat … have you ever considered why, if you are selling A shares to benefit the client on the basis of long term cost, you don’t simply sell him all bond funds initially? Are you making a decision there that realistically only benefits your pocket book? Seems like it to me and you certainly know this to be true. You have a responsibility to act as a prudent man might do on his own behalf.
In those responsibilities includes not making decisions with your client’s money only to benefit your pocketbook, well only you benefit by not buying in all at Bond fund prices.
[/quote]
Come on man, you are not the dollar tree of financial advisors. I’m trying to get PAID and help my clients meet their goals in the process. I didn’t take this job to run a charity. 7 times out of 10 if you truly lay out the facts the client is going to pick a C share over an A share … and I’m not talking the 6 year speech. I think you need to give Putnum as a rick of choosing an A share and then see what they say.
Plus, in a down market I think there is a great case to be made for selecting B shares over A. I want every dollar in the game I can get - especially after the hit most people took. ( no idea if we are really in a down market anymore)
C-shares I understand the reasoning, B-shares I don’t.
You don't understand the B share reasoning? It's 4 hidden points. Nothing more to understand.
In obviously no particular order …
4. As to your allegations of “knowing” my book, well, I have only one AS. I have another proposal right now; in both cases, the client held their A share mutual funds for a long time (in excess of 6 years) in qualified accounts and had purchased them from another FA. I seriously don’t see how that suggests churning, and believe me I made sure our HQ agreed with me before proceeding. If your problem is with St. Louis, then fine. Don’t make it about me or individual advisors that follow the company line.
2. As to not being forced … well, I’ll bet you have some interesting ideas as to what it means when someone says no (Volt may feel free to insert random lewd joke here). When a newbie FA in my class objected (gasp, horrors!) that the bond selected that day might not be appropriate, he was given two options … one of which was to make their way to the airport. Of course, that’s not being forced.
This is not being made up for the benefit of anyone here. This is factual, it happened in my classroom and frankly I don’t give a crap if you believe it or not, but only an idiot would dismiss it as inconceivable. At any rate, it seems pretty discordant with your ideas of selecting individual solutions to clients.
3. I have no idea what you are talking about here.
1. I’m assuming this is your half-assed response to my question, which again, you never answered. Would a prudent man knowingly pay more for a product than they had to? How is not initially investing into bond funds so terribly different than using four A share mutual funds for a purchase with $100k and avoiding breakpoints? Why are you avoiding the question?
The subtle issue I am trying to make to you, and you blithely seem to be avoiding, is that every day and with every decision a financial advisor needs to rationalize what he is doing. Any FA can justify his acts - or find a way to vilify another. I try to believe we’re all on the up and up. You, it seems, would prefer to find jerks behind every statement.
***********
It seems you’d like me to come to some sort of cathartic revelation regarding fee-based business. Sorry, the skies didn’t clear and a thunderbolt didn’t shoot through for me. Edward Jones made available to me a better way for my clients. I believe it is an inexpensive way for them to operate and have said so over and again here. For some of my clients, it works and I will continue to make it available to them and only in situations where St. Louis sees fit.
As my last point, I don’t need to sling mud at you, but you feel the need to do so at someone that in all actuality hasn’t the accounts you so fiercely think I’ve been harming. In so doing and in a public forum, you denigrate the very company you seem proud of. Congratulations and good luck. Edward Jones really needs more self-righteous knuckleheads like you. Welcome to ignore.
This is strictly forbidden and you can get in pretty big trouble by doing this.Then, you know that when they buy A shares, that they could possibly get the best possible cost by buying all bond funds. Right? Later, you could rebalance into equity from the bond funds. So why don’t you do that?
EDJLock - You are clearly a moron and a bad broker
This thread is seriously flawed…
This is strictly forbidden and you can get in pretty big trouble by doing this.[/quote] Riiiiiiiiiiight! I had a wholesaler tell us to do this in front of our compliance officer. me "lets stick that 500k in this fund while we wait a few days to see what the market will do, best part is there is no sales charge. Then I'll call you Monday and if North Korea has not set off a bomb we'll make those moves we talked about" client "okay" Next ...okay, I've not done that yet but that's how I envision it :)[quote=LockEDJ]Then, you know that when they buy A shares, that they could possibly get the best possible cost by buying all bond funds. Right? Later, you could rebalance into equity from the bond funds. So why don’t you do that?
This is strictly forbidden and you can get in pretty big trouble by doing this.[/quote] Riiiiiiiiiiight! I had a wholesaler tell us to do this in front of our compliance officer. me "lets stick that 500k in this fund while we wait a few days to see what the market will do, best part is there is no sales charge. Then I'll call you Monday and if North Korea has not set off a bomb we'll make those moves we talked about" client "okay" Next ...okay, I've not done that yet but that's how I envision it :)[/quote] Voltmoie, You are wrong 3rdyrrp2 is right. Envision it how you want. It does not matter if it "benefits" the client in your mind or not. Violate the spirit, letter, or intent of a regulation and it is the same. Prospectus aren't written for you to find a way around. They are written so there is a legal, documented standard to follow. PS: I could care less what your wholesaler said and who they said it to.[quote=3rdyrp2][quote=LockEDJ]Then, you know that when they buy A shares, that they could possibly get the best possible cost by buying all bond funds. Right? Later, you could rebalance into equity from the bond funds. So why don’t you do that?
3rd and ytrewq are correct. That said, I do remember the growth leader at a regional meeting telling us to do that a few years back.
[quote=ytrewq]
Voltmoie, You are wrong 3rdyrrp2 is right. Envision it how you want. It does not matter if it "benefits" the client in your mind or not. Violate the spirit, letter, or intent of a regulation and it is the same. Prospectus aren't written for you to find a way around. They are written so there is a legal, documented standard to follow. PS: I could care less what your wholesaler said and who they said it to.[/quote]Pretty much like I could care less what guys I don't know write on message boards
[quote=voltmoie] [quote=ytrewq]
Voltmoie, You are wrong 3rdyrrp2 is right. Envision it how you want. It does not matter if it "benefits" the client in your mind or not. Violate the spirit, letter, or intent of a regulation and it is the same. Prospectus aren't written for you to find a way around. They are written so there is a legal, documented standard to follow. PS: I could care less what your wholesaler said and who they said it to.[/quote]Pretty much like I could care less what guys I don't know write on message boards
[/quote] I only responded in this "tone" because of your reponse to 3rdyrrp2. Riiiiiight!!! wasn't necessary. Neither was my "care less" quote. I think all of us on this board could benefit from advice from each other. We just get caught up in one upping and insulting each other instead. Been guilty of it myself plenty of times.
I find it ironic that an EDJ "growth" leader is showing advisors at a regional meeting a way to reduce their income. Albeit an illegal way to reduce it as well.3rd and ytrewq are correct. That said, I do remember the growth leader at a regional meeting telling us to do that a few years back.
As a former Jones rep of 15 years, recently turned Indy, I will tell you that this behavior is definitely ill thought out and two faced, like many recent policies and changes in the firm. Not to mention being manipulative and deceitful to clients who have put their trust in you. It is no secret that Jones reps are playing with their new toy (the Advisory Solutions) with money churned from perfectly good American Funds and the like. What happened to the good old “buy and hold” and taking the high road of watching out for the client in regard to fees and expenses? This is not the firm I hired on with and is a disgrace to the memory of Ted Jones. Get a clue.
[quote=Moraen]3rd and ytrewq are correct. That said, I do remember the growth leader at a regional meeting telling us to do that a few years back.
I find it ironic that an EDJ “growth” leader is showing advisors at a regional meeting a way to reduce their income. Albeit an illegal way to reduce it as well.[/quote]
Actually, it wasn’t sell them a bond fund. It was, sell them a an equity fund and then convert it to a bond fund.
Regardless of how well thought of that growth leader may be, you will be the one that has to justify what you did for the client. I always found it rather odd that at Jones I had no E & O coverage. As long as you did "things" the way that you should, then they would go to bat for you. I was always amazed at the things I heard come out of the mouths of other folks that were on the leadership team with me when I was at Jones....... On a positive side, one of the alltime best was a rep at Jones that did a lot of fixed income and would never do a corporate and did only AAA. The rep did all GNMA's pretty much with a little bit of agencies. I imagine those clients have appreciated that advice. I bet the rep has had a bunch returning from those GNMA to reinvest....3rd and ytrewq are correct. That said, I do remember the growth leader at a regional meeting telling us to do that a few years back.
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/whats-firms/edward-jones-pushing-advisory-performance