ML Brokers Pissed about BofA Coup
hot off the presses... saw on Business Insider dated 6/3
ML Brokers Pissed about Huge Changes at the firm
Huge changes are planned for Bank of America's Merrill Lynch. The head of the legendary 16,000 person brokerage unit--often referred to as "the thundering herd"--is being ousted in favor of a Bank of America insider, according to a person familiar with the matter. Changes in the way brokers are compensated will likely make pay less transparent and less reliable.
Many brokers are still unaware of the planned changes, which have not been announced internally or to the public. It is always possible that last minute maneuvers could result in Sontag keeping his position or the compensation changes being halted.
Dan Sontag, a thirty year veteran of Merrill Lynch who now heads it Global Wealth & Investment Management unit, will leave the firm shortly, sources says. He was elevated to the top position at Merrill's brokerage after the departure of Bob McCann following the merger with Bank of America. His replacement is likely to be Keith Banks, who ran the BofA wealth management business prior to the merger. Banks was essentially demoted and placed under Sontag following the merger, a move many believed was aimed at reassuring Merrill brokers that they would be treated well in the new corporate structure.
Rumors that Sontag, who worked closely with McCann for years and was seen as an ally of the Merrill financial advisers, will be replaced by Banks, who is viewed as an ally of the Bank of America executives, is already roiling the financial advisers.
"There's a theory that the financial advisers have nowhere else to go," a person familiar with the situation said. "This is wrong. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney and Goldman are hiring. The FAs are all going to leave."
Perhaps more important than the managerial reshuffle are the changes planned to the way financial advisers are compensated. At Merrill Lynch, the FAs were paid according to what is called an "eat what you kill" basis. Brokers accumulated points for selling products to customers and bringing more money under management of Merrill. Each month, brokers were paid based on these points. It was a highly transparent form of compensation that brokers had come to rely upon.
The new system would pay the FAs closer to the way investment bankers are paid, with a small annual salary and a larger end of year bonus. The bonus, however, may be limited by government restrictions on pay at firms operating with TARP funding. It is thought that the controversial retention bonuses Bank of America promised brokers, promises which predated the TARP pay restrictions, may be exempt from these limits.
The change in pay is described as "revolutionary" by insiders. For years, many Merrill FAs have viewed themselves as partners with the firm, almost outside consultants who share revenue from their clients with the firm in exchange for use of the Merrill brand and back-office services. Under the new compensation structure, they will be treated much more like ordinary employees.
"This is really pissing people off," said one insider. "These guys all across the country are basically being told they are being turned into branch offices of Bank of America."
Sorry, but my heart will never bleed for a ML rep! Most of them have ego’s the size of Texas. Makes you want to puke when you would talk to them.
There has been a lot of crap that hit the fan over the last two years but the day ML was sold, to me that was a great dayBurton - thanks for sharing. I wonder who’s next?
In other news, cats are mad at dogs for chasing them.
[quote=Greenbacks]Sorry, but my heart will never bleed for a ML rep! Most of them have ego’s the size of Texas. Makes you want to puke when you would talk to them.
There has been a lot of crap that hit the fan over the last two years but the day ML was sold, to me that was a great day [/quote]Not a ML rep - yet - but you are an a-hole. Were you picked on as a kid??
[quote=Chazzy] [quote=Greenbacks]Sorry, but my heart will never bleed for a ML rep! Most of them have ego’s the size of Texas. Makes you want to puke when you would talk to them.
There has been a lot of crap that hit the fan over the last two years but the day ML was sold, to me that was a great day [/quote]Not a ML rep - yet - but you are an a-hole. Were you picked on as a kid??
[/quote] He's right. ML brokers are the most arrogant sob's and they deserve everything that they get.
I think the most screwed advisors in the whole ML and B of A world are the legacy BAI FAs…paid like bank advisors but now working in a wirehouse world, cuts everywhere, leads gone, etc. Missing about 10-15 bps on the grid just for being on the wrong side of the deal right now.
Bank of America hires top economist, strategy chief <div ="byline"> <abbr title="2009-06-01T04:37:00-0700" ="timedate">Mon Jun 1, 7:37 am ET</abbr> </div><!-- end .byline --> <p>NEW YORK (Reuters) –
Bank of America Corp’s (<span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_0”>BAC.N) corporate and <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_1”>investment banking unit has hired Ethan Harris as head of <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_2”>North America economics
and David Bianco as head of U.S. equity strategy, two of the
highest-profile appointments since the acquisition of Merrill Lynch
& Co.
Harris joins <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_3”>Banc of America Securities-Merrill Lynch Research from <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_4”>Barclays Plc’s (BARC.L) <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_5”>Barclays Capital
unit, where along with Dean Maki he was chief U.S. economist and head
of U.S. economic research. Maki will retain those roles, Barclays said
in a separate statement.
Harris had since 2003 been chief U.S. economist at <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_6”>Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (<span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_7”>LEHMQ.PK)
before that company went bankrupt and Barclays bought some of its
operations. Before joining Lehman in 1996, Harris worked at the <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_8”>Federal Reserve Bank of New York and at JPMorgan (<span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_9”>JPM.N).
Bianco joins from <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_10”>UBS AG
(UBSN.VX), where he had been chief U.S. equity portfolio strategist and
head of U.S. valuation and accounting research. Before joining UBS, he
worked at <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_11”>Deutsche Bank AG (<span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_12”>DBKGn.DE) and <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_13”>Credit Suisse First Boston (CSGN.VX).
Harris will join <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_14”>Bank of America in September, and Bianco in July. Both will report to Adam Quinton, head of <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_15”>global macro research. Reuters had reported Harris’ hiring.
The hirings come as Bank of America integrates <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_16”>Merrill Lynch, which it acquired on January 1. Several top executives had since left, including chief <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_17”>North American economist David Rosenberg, who departed in March for Canadian <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_18”>wealth management company <span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_19”>Gluskin Sheff & Associates Inc (<span =“yshortcuts” id=“lw_1243856386_20”>GS.TO).
On May 11, Kenneth Lewis, Bank of America’s chief executive, said on a
conference call that “we have lost some people that we did not want to
lose” at Merrill. “On the other hand, business is really good.”
[quote=Alice Cooper][quote=Chazzy] [quote=Greenbacks]Sorry, but my heart will never bleed for a ML rep! Most of them have ego’s the size of Texas. Makes you want to puke when you would talk to them.
There has been a lot of crap that hit the fan over the last two years but the day ML was sold, to me that was a great day [/quote]Not a ML rep - yet - but you are an a-hole. Were you picked on as a kid??
[/quote] He's right. ML brokers are the most arrogant sob's and they deserve everything that they get. [/quote]
I add you to the a-hole list then too
The domino’s are beginning to fall…it was such a wonderful industry for such a long time…
Anyone read this.
Bank Of America Denies Our Merrill Shakeup Story (BAC)
http://shar.es/bfQ4
It amazes me how many of you love to stereotype people based on poor experiences you may have had with someone.
In every industry and occupation, there are “arrogant snobs.” I’m a ML advisor, and yes, are there some arrogant people I work with - sure, but how is that different than any other firm? I’ve interacted with PLENTY of arrogant SB, MS, UBS, etc. advisors with egos a mile long. It doesn’t mean I’ll characterize everyone at their firm in that mold - it just simply means that PERSON is someone I’d rather not deal with or model myself or business after.
How hard of a concept is this to understand?
And BTW, anyone who believes this article from this moron at Clusterstock deserves to take the bait. This is nothing but rumor on his part and the mere fact that he takes a preemptive “cover your *ss” statement like, “the situation may change due to late maneuvering…” makes me think he has even less credibility. This guy is an Internet blogger that doesn’t even come close to understanding the ML comp structure. There is no such thing as “points” for compensation at ML… it’s simply Production Credits and how you’re paid on them relative to your grid - same as any other firm.
Also, did it ever occur to this wacko that if BofA was to make such dramatic changes to essentially the “crown jewel” of the entire merger transaction (namely, ML’s wealth management unit and even more importantly, it’s advisors), that most of the top producers would just simply walk?
I believe that article is false and B of A is going to release a statement to its employees denying that rumor today.
However, if you are ML, I can assure you that your compensation plan will change as a result of the merger. It may not happen right away and it won’t be salary + bonus, but it will change to where you are going to have to hit certain “bank product buckets” in order to receive your full comp. Trail/fee holdbacks are typical.
For those of you that think threatening to leave will change their minds, don’t hold your breath. So far, lots of big producers at both ML and BAI have jumped ship and management has not responded. It’s frustrating, but B of A has always cut pay when it acquired a firm in the past. As have, always will.
I can say so far that it seems the ML guys are getting more of the benefits from the merger than are the BAI guys. I hear they are getting high balance leads and CD maturity leads to call on. Now, I know most of those leads are prospects that have been worked in the past, but leads are leads.
On a side note, I know many ML guys that are fine and can’t say that they have egos. Let’s face it, as Advisors in general, we are all competitive and this business can make us A$$holes from time to time. It’s better that we stick together as in industry and keep a positive image for our clients. Worse thing you can do is bad mouth another broker or company during these tough times.
Omar, you are correct. I saw the response above and pasted the text here. I have no dog in this hunt to be clear. This back and forth is a riot!
John Carney<span =“pipe”>|<span =“date”>Jun. 3, 2009, 5:07 PM<span =“pipe”>|12<div =“icon-print”>Print<div =“tags”>
Tags:
Wall Street, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/financial-services" target="_blank">Financial Services</a>, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/merrill-lynch" target="_blank">Merrill Lynch</a>, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/bank-of-america" target="_blank">Bank of America</a> </div><br><br>Bank of America (BAC) sent out an internal email to employees today
warning them that a false story was circulating about Merrill Lynch.
The email memo went out to employees across America around 1 P.M.
today, warning employees to be wary of a story about the firm that the
memo said was “fictitious.”
We have a feeling that this was Merrill's way of trying to calm its employees' worries over our story about the impending departure of brokerage head Dan Sontag and changes to compensation. Earlier today Merrill Lynch declined our offer to give the firm space for on the record comments denying any specific details of our story.
Now spokeswoman Selena Morris claims the story isn't true, according to TheStreet.com's Dan Freed. "It's completely without merit," Morris tells Freed. She apparently declined to offer specifics to Freed either, so its hard to tell which part of the story she is denying.
We stand by our story, and we are confident in the accuracy of our reporting and our sources. As we noted in our original story, the planned management shakeup and changes to compensation could be undone by "last minute maneuvers." One possibility is that the firm will scramble to cover for itself after seeing the reaction to our publication of the management and compensation plans. If anything, we're hearing that the turmoil at the firm is only increasing, with big time financial advisers contemplating leaving.
Sontag could not be reached directly.
What a dumb story. Clearly its sensationalism on behalf of the author. Every one take notice, if its happens at ML it will happen to other firms within two years.
The rumor about potential compensation changes at ML/BofA down the road is really not isolated to that company. For years foreign owned firm’s have had heated boardroom brawls over US broker comp. HSBC’s US wealth management for example has talked about implementing the Euro compensation model as it is in the UK and other markets. The have not because of how distasteful and anti business it would be. They’d loose the entire sales force. FAs in the UK, Germany and other countries are paid much more like bankers. Base + bonuses on gross rev, + bonuses for growth, etc. If you don’t grow, about 1/3rd of your variable comp could be bye bye in a given year. With near draconian intervention and control from the current White house, there’s a great deal of pressure to amend compensation. There’s a strong gravitational pull to ‘level’ off what an FA can earn so to speak. Even more reason I think independence will continue to be THE route to go.
Let’s face it, FAs are paid FAR more than they should be for the actual work performed.
This fleecing of the public can't continue forever.Does that mean doctors, dentists, CPAs, and attorneys are overpaid too? I only see my doctor when I'm sick and he charges me or my insurance a few hundred dollars for 15 minutes. I see my dentist for about 10 minutes all year long but he still charges me or my insurance a couple of hundred dollars for his services. My CPA buddy tells people to use quickbooks and uses a more advanced version of turbo tax to do taxes. He charges a few hundred dollars to do a tax return. I paid my attorney over $1000 to do a simple will a few years ago. Haven't spoken with him since.
So, what's your barometer for getting paid far more than we should for the actual work performed?You ask a question most of us here would find laughable… but common sense and free markets are as vanishing amidst this overwrought government intrusion upon virtually every large American enterprise in and effort to take care of us all like babies. Ask the same question in a year after Obama has his way with congress with this push for socialized medicine. Ask your Dentist or doctor how comfortable he or she is with the future free market earning potential. I have 2 in my family who are freaking out. Moreover, half of us here are probably working for tarped up firms or at least did in the last year. Unless you’re building cars in America, who else has lost or given up more control over their business than our industry?? Boards and CEOs are making far fewer key decisions than they used to on things that affect comp. I don’t like any talk of tampering with my ability to eat what I hunt either. But, let’s admit this, the environment is not the same today as it was even a year ago. It’s not crazy to think the model will continue to evolve at the banks/wires just as it did in many ways over the last decades if you look back 10, 20, 30 years. My Dad’s ‘good old days’ as a broker are chock full of stories and realities that no longer exist for us in the biz.
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
Does that mean doctors, dentists, CPAs, and attorneys are overpaid too? I only see my doctor when I'm sick and he charges me or my insurance a few hundred dollars for 15 minutes. I see my dentist for about 10 minutes all year long but he still charges me or my insurance a couple of hundred dollars for his services. My CPA buddy tells people to use quickbooks and uses a more advanced version of turbo tax to do taxes. He charges a few hundred dollars to do a tax return. I paid my attorney over $1000 to do a simple will a few years ago. Haven't spoken with him since.
So, what's your barometer for getting paid far more than we should for the actual work performed?[/quote] You're comparing apples to asphalt, Spiff. Come on, man.I too was wondering how you compare Doctors, Dentists and CPA’s with used car salespeople.
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
Does that mean doctors, dentists, CPAs, and attorneys are overpaid too? I only see my doctor when I’m sick and he charges me or my insurance a few hundred dollars for 15 minutes. I see my dentist for about 10 minutes all year long but he still charges me or my insurance a couple of hundred dollars for his services. My CPA buddy tells people to use quickbooks and uses a more advanced version of turbo tax to do taxes. He charges a few hundred dollars to do a tax return. I paid my attorney over $1000 to do a simple will a few years ago. Haven’t spoken with him since.
So, what's your barometer for getting paid far more than we should for the actual work performed?[/quote]Spiff, you only see the dentist for 5 minutes a year?! Don't you get your teeth cleaned twice a year like you're supposed to? Geez, next you'll tell me you don't go in for a semiannual portfolio checkup!
By the way, the reason your doctor charges you 400 bucks a pop is because the insurance covers it. If it came out of our pocket, doctors would make far less, imo. Most of them are no more skilled than your typical auto mechanic, after all.
Many Changes are coming. October is doomsday for BAI FA’s that are less then $400k production. Anyone left will be moved onto ML platform then on Jan 1 everybody will be paid a salary + bonus like the PWM advisors.
today my director fowarded an email that was probably sent to all the directors firm wide regarding the article in business insider. a senior fa from the mid west wrote ken lewis asking if indeed dan santog was leaving the firm… lewis remarked saying that was not true and trash.
[quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
Does that mean doctors, dentists, CPAs, and attorneys are overpaid too? I only see my doctor when I’m sick and he charges me or my insurance a few hundred dollars for 15 minutes. I see my dentist for about 10 minutes all year long but he still charges me or my insurance a couple of hundred dollars for his services. My CPA buddy tells people to use quickbooks and uses a more advanced version of turbo tax to do taxes. He charges a few hundred dollars to do a tax return. I paid my attorney over $1000 to do a simple will a few years ago. Haven’t spoken with him since.
So, what's your barometer for getting paid far more than we should for the actual work performed?[/quote]Spiff, you only see the dentist for 5 minutes a year?! Don't you get your teeth cleaned twice a year like you're supposed to? Geez, next you'll tell me you don't go in for a semiannual portfolio checkup!
By the way, the reason your doctor charges you 400 bucks a pop is because the insurance covers it. If it came out of our pocket, doctors would make far less, imo. Most of them are no more skilled than your typical auto mechanic, after all.
yeah, most auto mechanics go to med school and residency for ten years. what a moron
[/quote]
Do we really believe what Ken Lewis says these days? I sure hope this salary things is false because it will spread industry wide. Then again fee based brokerage which has become so prevelant to our industry is basically a salary without bonous so maybe it isn't such a bad thing. And when markets decline like they have we don't take such a haircut. Then again we can't make more when the markets are rising. I guess salary isn't such a great idea.
Gauntlet, what’s that based on?
Hey, Draper.
Mechanic/doctor – same basic concept. Check the oil, steering fluid, all gauges, run a computer diagnostic/check blood pressure, send blood work to the lab – in each case, follow checklist to figure out problem.
Also, for every mechanic who screws up your car, there is a doctor who kills you because he missed something on the checklist.
Thankyouverymuchhaveagreatday.
gauntlet’s lying…sub 300k maybe
Borker Boy,
Are you f-ing serious? FA’s, in most cases, work for peanuts initially to build their book of business.
Their first year or so in the business they live under constant scrutiny that they may not make the cut and get fired (90% attrition when starting out).
Then, after “making it” to the point where you’re not worried about management just simply cutting you for not making your asset hurdles, you end up starting out off salary, probably making less than your assistant.
It takes a good 3-5 years to get your business up to a point of making any real money. I can’t think of many professions where people put so much on the line to do what we do to finally make a good living.
[quote=tmoney47] today my director fowarded an email that was probably sent to all the directors firm wide regarding the article in business insider. a senior fa from the mid west wrote ken lewis asking if indeed dan santog was leaving the firm… lewis remarked saying that was not true and trash.
tmoney - got the same e-mail as well.
Amazing how these “journalists” can get away with posting such false information and actually get paid for what they do.
[quote=buyandhold]Hey, Draper.
Mechanic/doctor – same basic concept. Check the oil, steering fluid, all gauges, run a computer diagnostic/check blood pressure, send blood work to the lab – in each case, follow checklist to figure out problem.
Also, for every mechanic who screws up your car, there is a doctor who kills you because he missed something on the checklist.
Thankyouverymuchhaveagreatday.
[/quote]
I don’t think you really understand what doctors do.
I agree, I don't work for ML, but at SB. You get arrogant snobs in all types of firms, I have meet plenty of Indy's that thought there stuff didn't stink too. I think most of the bad items on wirehouses posted on this board are from people who are Indy's trying to justify their exisitence or some who was booting for not cutting it. I swear I think some of them have a inferiority complex.It amazes me how many of you love to stereotype people based on poor experiences you may have had with someone.
In every industry and occupation, there are “arrogant snobs.” I’m a ML advisor, and yes, are there some arrogant people I work with - sure, but how is that different than any other firm? I’ve interacted with PLENTY of arrogant SB, MS, UBS, etc. advisors with egos a mile long. It doesn’t mean I’ll characterize everyone at their firm in that mold - it just simply means that PERSON is someone I’d rather not deal with or model myself or business after.
How hard of a concept is this to understand?
And BTW, anyone who believes this article from this moron at Clusterstock deserves to take the bait. This is nothing but rumor on his part and the mere fact that he takes a preemptive “cover your *ss” statement like, “the situation may change due to late maneuvering…” makes me think he has even less credibility. This guy is an Internet blogger that doesn’t even come close to understanding the ML comp structure. There is no such thing as “points” for compensation at ML… it’s simply Production Credits and how you’re paid on them relative to your grid - same as any other firm.
Also, did it ever occur to this wacko that if BofA was to make such dramatic changes to essentially the “crown jewel” of the entire merger transaction (namely, ML’s wealth management unit and even more importantly, it’s advisors), that most of the top producers would just simply walk?
[quote=Don Draper]
[quote=buyandhold]Hey, Draper.Mechanic/doctor – same basic concept. Check the oil, steering fluid, all gauges, run a computer diagnostic/check blood pressure, send blood work to the lab – in each case, follow checklist to figure out problem.Also, for every mechanic who screws up your car, there is a doctor who kills you because he missed something on the checklist.Thankyouverymuchhaveagreatday.
[/quote]I don’t think you really understand what doctors do.[/quote]
I have to agree with Don.
The human body is infinitely more complex than a vehicle. Damn, haven’t you ever seen House?
Also, the reason you pay your doctor so much has nothing to do with whether insurance will pay it. It’s basic economics. Why do we pay more for some things and not others? Scarcity. A physician passes difficult exams under pretty intense circumstances. They have the ability to do what others do not. Mechanics follow a different path, one that many more have the ability to do.
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
Well said, Morean. Economics 101 in two paragraphs. Brilliant.
[quote=Moraen]
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
[/quote]
Coach K gets X Million per year
1) Because you can’t pay the producers – the players – so there is money available to throw at him.
2, the big reason) The people who write the checks at Duke have a hard-on for basketball. There is no economic reason to pay Coach K that kind of money. Studies have shown that there is no economic benefit to winning college basketball games for a university. It’s a net zero revenue producer.
[quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Moraen]
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
[/quote]Coach K gets X Million per year 1) Because you can’t pay the producers – the players – so there is money available to throw at him.2, the big reason) The people who write the checks at Duke have a hard-on for basketball. There is no economic reason to pay Coach K that kind of money. Studies have shown that there is no economic benefit to winning college basketball games for a university. It’s a net zero revenue producer. [/quote]
Untrue. If there were thousands of Coach K’s, basketball coaches would get paid less. Think about it, if you are a booster would you pay more for Coach K, when you could pay less for Coach Y? Not likely.
[quote=Moraen] [quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Moraen]
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
[/quote]Coach K gets X Million per year 1) Because you can’t pay the producers – the players – so there is money available to throw at him.2, the big reason) The people who write the checks at Duke have a hard-on for basketball. There is no economic reason to pay Coach K that kind of money. Studies have shown that there is no economic benefit to winning college basketball games for a university. It’s a net zero revenue producer. [/quote]
Untrue. If there were thousands of Coach K’s, basketball coaches would get paid less. Think about it, if you are a booster would you pay more for Coach K, when you could pay less for Coach Y? Not likely.[/quote]
I’ll try to find some studies that back me up.
As to the Coach K/Coach Y argument – if I could make $1 million a year paying for Coach K to win a title, or $1 million a year paying for Coach Y to finish .500, then there is no economic benefit to paying Coach K more. In fact, that money is wasted, since it could be used to create economic benefit elsewhere.
You have to remember that college athletics is revenue neutral and simply don’t generate revenue for the colleges.
[quote=iceco1d]B&H,
You should read your example again I think. [/quote]Yeah, I was typing faster than I was thinking. Not sure I made the point I wanted to make anyway.
One thing I was wrong is that some college basketball programs do produce revenue. That revenue has to be kept within the athletic department (that's where I got the revenue neutral statement, which is wrong.)
The most profitable college programs, according to a Forbes article, are Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke ... the big names. Obviously Coach K made Duke what it is, so in that sense he is worth what he is paid. Kentucky is profitable because of its tradition and the work that others have done, so you probably wouldn't want to pay the coach there as much. Kentucky wins largely because it is Kentucky and has such a great tradition and infrastructure.
[quote=buyandhold]
[quote=iceco1d]B&H,
You should read your example again I think. [/quote]Yeah, I was typing faster than I was thinking. Not sure I made the point I wanted to make anyway.One thing I was wrong is that some college basketball programs do produce revenue. That revenue has to be kept within the athletic department (that’s where I got the revenue neutral statement, which is wrong.)The most profitable college programs, according to a Forbes article, are Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke … the big names. Obviously Coach K made Duke what it is, so in that sense he is worth what he is paid. Kentucky is profitable because of its tradition and the work that others have done, so you probably wouldn’t want to pay the coach there as much. Kentucky wins largely because it is Kentucky and has such a great tradition and infrastructure. [/quote]
At some point, if they are not paying for a coach that wins games at Kentucky that well, attendance will fall, or boosters will get upset, and not contribute. Recruitment will go down, top prospects will go to other places, etc.
Seriously, it’s about scarcity. If Coach K didn’t win games, they would stop paying him so much (and fire him). It’s “what have you done for me today?” thing. By the way, I’ve met him and he’s a lot taller than he looks on TV.
I call bs on Coach K being taller than he looks, next you’ll say that Duke players don’t flop on defense. Kentucky will be winning again soon, now that they have Calipari and his rule bending ways. How do you land the #1, #2, #22, and #23 recruits in the land and two other highly recruited players.
[quote=jkl1v1n6] I call bs on Coach K being taller than he looks, next you'll say that Duke players don't flop on defense. Kentucky will be winning again soon, now that they have Calipari and his rule bending ways. How do you land the #1, #2, #22, and #23 recruits in the land and two other highly recruited players. [/quote]
Unfortunately, I don't really know that much about basketball, so I have no idea what you are talking about. I was looking at it from a purely academic standpoint. I figured something where I had no bias was the best thing to talk about.
Wow did this thread head off course or what
Look at the advertisement at the top of this page, I think Rep magazine is looking at the wrong end of the Bull! If you are a ML rep you got shoved up the other end of the Bull. Hope you like it in there.[quote=Greenbacks]Wow did this thread head off course or what
Look at the advertisement at the top of this page, I think Rep magazine is looking at the wrong end of the Bull! If you are a ML rep you got shoved up the other end of the Bull. Hope you like it in there. [/quote] Yeah, we get it, Greenbacks. You hate wirehouses. JFC, talk about a one-trick pony.If you think ML FAs are the only ones who are arrogant and selfish. Think again.
Numbers don't lie. Go look at the number of threads/posts on the FA Forum home page that revolve around the actual client experience vs. babbling nonsense by the majority of FAs here. It is 1905 vs 60. I worked at ML for 7 years. I learned more and was around some of the most talented brokers in the industry. It was one of the most profitable and best experiences of my life. I will even go as far as to say that it completetly changed my life. The culture at that time was second to none. I was fortunate and graduated early from PDP all on my own. It was hard, but worth it.What was the topic again?
Coach K’s elevator shoes.
[quote=Behavioral_FA] If you think ML FAs are the only ones who are arrogant and selfish. Think again.
Numbers don’t lie. Go look at the number of threads/posts on the FA Forum home page that revolve around the actual client experience vs. babbling nonsense by the majority of FAs here.
It is 1905 vs 60.
I worked at ML for 7 years. I learned more and was around some of the most talented brokers in the industry. It was one of the most profitable and best experiences of my life. I will even go as far as to say that it completetly changed my life. The culture at that time was second to none. I was fortunate and graduated early from PDP all on my own. It was hard, but worth it.[/quote]
There is arrogance, and then there is arrogance. I think you don’t understand what these forums are about. These boards are for advisors to talk about what they want. This particular set of threads is about “What’s up at firms”. My guess is that if you looked under the “Clients” area, then the numbers would be less skewed.
[quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Moraen]
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
[/quote]Coach K gets X Million per year 1) Because you can’t pay the producers – the players – so there is money available to throw at him.2, the big reason) The people who write the checks at Duke have a hard-on for basketball. There is no economic reason to pay Coach K that kind of money. Studies have shown that there is no economic benefit to winning college basketball games for a university. It’s a net zero revenue producer. [/quote]
How is there no economic reason for paying Coach K what he makes? Do you have any idea how much revenue Duke’s mens basketball program generates for the university. I’d venture an educated guess that it’s north of $20 million a year. Coach K’s presence as Duke’s coach is every bit a reason for that.
Now, I’m the first to admit that professional athletes are extremely overpaid, but the fact is, they justify their enormous pay per the revenue they generate for their respective organizations. This is capitalism, plain and simple.
Advisors are no different. Most advisors generate 1.5 to 2 + times the revenue at their firms than what they make in compensation. It’s merely pay for performance.
[quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Moraen] [quote=buyandhold]
[quote=Moraen]
A great example is college coaches v. professors. Why does Mike Alphabet soup from Duke get paid more than a brilliant economics professor from the same school? He has the ability to do what others do not. Win basketball games.
[/quote]Coach K gets X Million per year 1) Because you can’t pay the producers – the players – so there is money available to throw at him.2, the big reason) The people who write the checks at Duke have a hard-on for basketball. There is no economic reason to pay Coach K that kind of money. Studies have shown that there is no economic benefit to winning college basketball games for a university. It’s a net zero revenue producer. [/quote]
Untrue. If there were thousands of Coach K’s, basketball coaches would get paid less. Think about it, if you are a booster would you pay more for Coach K, when you could pay less for Coach Y? Not likely.[/quote]I’ll try to find some studies that back me up. As to the Coach K/Coach Y argument – if I could make $1 million a year paying for Coach K to win a title, or $1 million a year paying for Coach Y to finish .500, then there is no economic benefit to paying Coach K more. In fact, that money is wasted, since it could be used to create economic benefit elsewhere.You have to remember that college athletics is revenue neutral and simply don’t generate revenue for the colleges.[/quote]
Okay, to support my other post, here is a link to a study done on Duke athletics and the revenue all of the programs generate:
http://www.math.duke.edu/~hain/athletics/
How you make a comment that college athletics is “revenue neutral” is mind-boggling. Why would any school with any iota of business sense continue to fund a program that makes no money?
And coming from another school that has a premier basketball program myself, trust me, there is a BIG difference between having support (read: increasing revenue) for a .500 program and one that wins national titles. BIG DIFFERENCE, and it’s not even close.
Show me a program with 5-10 years of .500 performance and I’ll show you one with an apathetic fan base that gets zero television exposure.
Some highlights from an NCAA study:
• For every additional dollar spent on daily operations in football and men's basketball, schools typically realize only an additional dollar in revenue.
• Spending changes have no impact on win-loss records, alumni donations or incoming students' academic standing.
• Of the 117 Division I-A programs, 40% reported an operating profit in 2001. But without state and school subsidies, only 6% made money.
So, schools like Ohio State and Texas MAKE a lot of money in college football, but they spend the most, on facilities and training tables. The last blurb is a killer. Without outside money (and also without the tax deduction for giving money to State U) college athletics is not only revenue neutral, it's revenue deficient.
You want a program with 5-10 years of .500 performance an an apathetic fan base -- Northwestern. And Rice. Great academic schools, similar to Duke except they don't have Coach K. Now, granted, Duke's students and alumni have an intangible benefit watching their team win, but that's it.
[quote=buyandhold]
<p =“inside-copy”>Some highlights from an NCAA study:
operations in football and men’s basketball, schools typically realize
only an additional dollar in revenue.
<p =“inside-copy”>• Spending changes have no impact on win-loss records, alumni donations or incoming students’ academic standing.
<p =“inside-copy”>• Of the 117 Division I-A programs, 40% reported
an operating profit in 2001. But without state and school subsidies,
only 6% made money.<p =“inside-copy”>So, schools like Ohio State and Texas MAKE a lot of money in college football, but they spend the most, on facilities and training tables. The last blurb is a killer. Without outside money (and also without the tax deduction for giving money to State U) college athletics is not only revenue neutral, it’s revenue deficient.<p =“inside-copy”>You want a program with 5-10 years of .500 performance an an apathetic fan base – Northwestern. And Rice. Great academic schools, similar to Duke except they don’t have Coach K. Now, granted, Duke’s students and alumni have an intangible benefit watching their team win, but that’s it.<p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”>[/quote]
We are not talking strictly about spending. We are talking about what the coaches are paid. Coach K is a great coach (I’m assuming this - I’m not sure, but they keep asking him to be the Olympics coach don’t they?) and so gets paid as a great coach.
Duke is not a State school. They are an Ivy League private school. They make a ton of money. They are in that six percent. I bet if they other 94% could get a Coach K (and pay him what Duke pays him), they would be making that kind of jack too.
Do you really expect every school to make as much as Duke, or UNC (which also makes money without state subsidies, even though they are a state school) or Kentucky or Florida State? If they had the money to pay for Coach K, they’d do it in a heartbeat.
How many coaches get asked to coach the USA Olympic team?
The original issue was physicians. Physicians get paid because they have a skill that is in demand. How many physicians pass the MCAT v. how many become brain or heart surgeons? Not many, right?
Advisors - how many pass the series 7 vs. how many become million dollar producers?
What do Coach K, Brain surgeons and million-dollar financial advisors all have in common? They can do something that nobody else can, which is why they make what they do.
[quote=Wildcat02]Borker Boy,
Are you f-ing serious? FA’s, in most cases, work for peanuts initially to build their book of business.
Their first year or so in the business they live under constant scrutiny that they may not make the cut and get fired (90% attrition when starting out).
Then, after “making it” to the point where you’re not worried about management just simply cutting you for not making your asset hurdles, you end up starting out off salary, probably making less than your assistant.
It takes a good 3-5 years to get your business up to a point of making any real money. I can’t think of many professions where people put so much on the line to do what we do to finally make a good living.[/quote]
Well let’s see. A med student spends how many years in med school? They acquire how much more in debt? They work how long as an intern? How many hours at how much pay? Then specialists spend how many more years training in their field before the big dollars roll in?
Seriously, you should think a little bit before writing. I’ve got clients who are doctors earning $50k per year during fellowship training and they are 30 years old. Yeah, nobody works 3-5 years at their profession before the real money show up.
[quote=Moraen] [quote=Behavioral_FA] If you think ML FAs are the only ones who are arrogant and selfish. Think again.
Numbers don't lie. Go look at the number of threads/posts on the FA Forum home page that revolve around the actual client experience vs. babbling nonsense by the majority of FAs here.
It is 1905 vs 60.
I worked at ML for 7 years. I learned more and was around some of the most talented brokers in the industry. It was one of the most profitable and best experiences of my life. I will even go as far as to say that it completetly changed my life. The culture at that time was second to none. I was fortunate and graduated early from PDP all on my own. It was hard, but worth it.[/quote]
There is arrogance, and then there is arrogance. I think you don't understand what these forums are about. These boards are for advisors to talk about what they want. This particular set of threads is about "What's up at firms". My guess is that if you looked under the "Clients" area, then the numbers would be less skewed.[/quote] I was making a point reagarding a mindest and attitude overall. Obviously, you didn't understand. I can't help it if you are not very smart.
You weren’t making a point. You got your feelings hurt because you worked at ML, and people were bashing them. By the way, those arrogant SOB’s are some of the best advisors in the business.
You were trying to bring in numbers from threads and posts and skew them in your favor. You also said that they don’t lie. Which is true, the numbers themselves don’t lie, but you certainly arranged them to be misleading. Hardly objective.
You are right, you can’t help it IF I’m not very smart.
Anyone watching or see Ken Lewis grilled up like an Omaha steak? For all the bluster by these congressmen/women, this is such a tail chase! Does this stuff matter or hurt the brand or are people just immune after a year of it?
Television cameras should be outlawed within 15 miles of the Capitol.
[quote=buyandhold]
<p =“inside-copy”>Some highlights from an NCAA study:
operations in football and men’s basketball, schools typically realize
only an additional dollar in revenue.
<p =“inside-copy”>• Spending changes have no impact on win-loss records, alumni donations or incoming students’ academic standing.
<p =“inside-copy”>• Of the 117 Division I-A programs, 40% reported
an operating profit in 2001. But without state and school subsidies,
only 6% made money.<p =“inside-copy”>So, schools like Ohio State and Texas MAKE a lot of money in college football, but they spend the most, on facilities and training tables. The last blurb is a killer. Without outside money (and also without the tax deduction for giving money to State U) college athletics is not only revenue neutral, it’s revenue deficient.<p =“inside-copy”>You want a program with 5-10 years of .500 performance an an apathetic fan base – Northwestern. And Rice. Great academic schools, similar to Duke except they don’t have Coach K. Now, granted, Duke’s students and alumni have an intangible benefit watching their team win, but that’s it.<p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”><p =“inside-copy”>[/quote]
buyandhold - can’t argue with those stats, but I think one thing you need to take away is that they are average figures. You simply can’t compare the value that high profile coaches have on high profile college athletic programs. They are typically the programs that turn in large profits for the school each year. The stats you point out I’m sure include all of the outlier schools who have a small or lower profile sports program.
Wow…Keith Banks is an empty suit D Bag! He used to head up GWIM. He worked in Mass for a short time and I didn’t know anyone who respected him. If this is the case, we are all screwed!
Yep. You’re screwed.
Pleasetell me Keith Banks is not coming back to replace Dan Sontag…I couldn’t sleep last night…note to ML brokers…we’re in real trouble if this guy get’s the job…he knows less than nothing about our business and has underperformed in every role he has been put in…he MUST have pictures of Ken Lewis in a short black dress!
Banks is the rumor. European retail brokerage model is being considered. This rumor has been out there for months and won't go away. Glad I left. Good luck...
I know I will get slack for this, but NO WAY NEVER HAPPEN. They will never pay salaries to people more than what the CEO makes.
[quote=cutacheck]I know I will get slack for this, but NO WAY NEVER HAPPEN. They will never pay salaries to people more than what the CEO makes. [/quote]
You will get flak for saying “slack” instead of “flak”, retard.
Well, it looks like at least the first part of this original thread (the one about Sontag leaving soon) turned out to be true, after all. I think it is funny how vehemently BofA management denied this “rumor”, calling it “absolute fiction” “completely without merit”, only to have them be proven to be the liars after all. I’m shocked and disappointed to learn that you cannot trust what corporate banking executives say in public comments (and I’m of course being sarcastic with that last sentence).
What's more disturbing is: if the first part of the article at the beginning of this thread turned out to be true, then that increases my view of the credibility of the original source, which means I wonder how long until we find out that the second part (compensation switch to salary + bonus) turns out to be true, as well? Because as someone else said earlier in the thread: if Merrill actually does that, other firms might eventually follow suit.I started this thread and I’ll add to it with at least one of the ‘official’ news articles validating Sontag was on his way out weeks ago and indeed he’s gone. Not tooting my own horn, it just takes keeping one’s antennae up.
OMAR… read your post again.
And this was supposedly just a nasty rumor… read back through the posts here!!!
Merrill wealth management head latest to depart Wealth management chief at Merrill Lynch latest executive to leave Bank of America On Tuesday August 4, 2009, 4:47 pm EDT </div> <!-- ./end of article hd --> <div id="y-article-bd"> <p>NEW YORK (AP) -- The president of global wealth management at Merrill Lynch is the latest executive to leave Bank of America.</p> <p>Daniel
Sontag told managers of Merrill’s financial advisers he is retiring
during a conference call on Tuesday. Sontag, 53, has led the thousands
of Merrill brokers since January, when Merrill was taken over by Bank
of America. He’s been with the brokerage for 32 years.
The news
comes a day after Bank of America announced a series of executive
changes, including the appointment of former Citigroup Finance Chief
Sallie Krawcheck to run its global wealth and investment management
operation. Sontag, who would have reported to Krawcheck, expressed his
support for her and asked his team to support her as she takes the
helm, a source said.
The bank, which received $45 billion in bailout money, is under pressure from the federal government to improve its performance.
</div><!-- ./end of article bd --> <!-- ./ index--col --> <!-- ./end of col3--> <!--./ end of y- --> <br><br><br>Very sad. BofA has castrated the bull.
I'm a BAI guy but I can't believe how piss poor BAC's execs are handling the change of leadership for the advisory platform which is the chief reason merrill was bought. I've been listening to this crap about how seemless the merger is going to be and how fast it is happening over the course of a year, where Citi was never able to integrate Smith Barney,Primerica,Citi Advisor for over 10 years. Hence, it only makes since for Ken Lewis to run off the people from the firm he acquired and hire Sally Krawcheck from CITI, because she was so successful the last time around.
Yup…I stand corrected burtonfinancial…
Could care less at this point though…it’s just rearranging chairs on the deck of the Titanic.
Mr. T (I mean Omar), tell me more about yout Titanic theory. Are you projecting your own pitfalls (maybe small wee-wee), or do you have reason to be upset?
I still remember the blast email AND emergency conference call to refute the article as soon as it came out. Kind of funny looking back on it now. Management has so little credibility left, anyway. And the mid-level BAI managers will soon be replaced with Merrill managers so I'm not sure if they even care what happens.
The danger is having the top Bank of America management in charge of Investments. I've seen how they dismantled Fleet's Quick and Reilly overnight. And that was much easier to integrate than a behemoth like Merrill.I cannot understand how any one who works at a wire or a big bank can believe anything that management says!
How many times do they need to lie to you before you guys get it? I feel sorry for some of you who where forced into these buckets of s#!t companies, but yet some of you still defend them. I do not know why?I’d be interested in hearing opinions on this… seems to me that whatever was left of the old school Merrill culture is going to be decimated under the new regime.
I’m sure there’ll be plenty of comments about this line in the article…“Adding Sallie is stunning,” said Nancy Bush at NAB Research LLC. "She comes with a taint from Citigroup."
By Paul Davis, American Banker August 5, 2009
<p>Sallie Krawcheck had not
been on the job at Bank of America Corp. a full day and outsiders were
already debating how good a fit she will be — and whether anyone knows
what a good fit there is anymore.
BofA made several executive
moves this week, but the hiring of Krawcheck — a former Citigroup Inc.
executive who joined B of A Tuesday to run its wealth management and
brokerage operation — drew the most attention. Observers familiar with
Krawcheck, as well as her current and former employers, said her
selection underscores the cultural change underway at BofA.
Bringing
a former competitor into the corporate suite before they prove
themselves internally runs afoul of long-standing philosophies held by
Kenneth D. Lewis, BofA’s chief executive, and predecessor Hugh McColl
Jr.
“To those who know the industry and Bank of America, this is
a bizarre appointment,” said D. Anthony Plath, a finance professor at
the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Marshall Front,
the chairman of Front Barnett Associates Inc., a Chicago investment
firm, agreed. "This is another chink in Ken’s armor and another
indication that management isn’t as strong in its position as they
would like you to believe. We are migrating from a company where Lewis
ruled with an iron fist."
Observers said the mantra at BofA has
long been “inclusive meritocracy,” where ambitious executives had to
prove themselves to top management by producing profits and repeatedly
showing loyalty to the company.
High-level promotions
traditionally were given to those who came up through BofA’s ranks or
made an impact after joining from an acquired institution. Rarely did
an outsider immediately start in the inner circle, as is the case with
Krawcheck, observers said.
"It would be totally opposite the
culture of Bank of America to bring someone in — particularly from Citi
— to run a major business without having them prove themselves first,"
Plath said. "Who did this? Is it the board or the government? Perhaps
it is a little of both."
Lewis explained the practice in an
American Banker interview last fall, using himself as an example of
someone who joined a predecessor firm in 1969 and earned a chance to
run BofA more than three decades later. “I sensed within the company
that you would be given the opportunity to reach your full potential
and it wouldn’t matter where you went to school or who your parents
were,” he said.
"I was given a chance to live up to my full
potential. That’s one of the reasons we have as one of our goals and
values is to be an inclusive meritocracy. I have been a part of that …
and I owe that to every associate in this company going forward."
Robert
Stickler, a spokesman for BofA, said Tuesday that Krawcheck’s hiring is
consistent with the company’s ideals. “I think the outsiders’
interpretation of inclusive meritocracy is wrong,” he said. "It means
that people within the company are treated fairly in line with the
value they bring. It also means they have a fair chance to go where
their talent and hard work takes them. The concept does not preclude
the company from hiring talented outsiders."
The company said Krawcheck was in meetings and unavailable for an interview.
Stickler
reiterated that the management moves were made by Lewis in consultation
with the board, which has been largely reconstituted in the past seven
months. He said the government was not involved, though the
government’s stress-test process required the company to review
management.
Still, some observers questioned why B of A would
choose Krawcheck, given her association with Citi and former CEO
Charles Prince, who was ousted in late 2007. Lewis has spent months
this year trying to cast his company in a different light from Citi,
though both have received $45 billion in government capital since last
fall. Her hiring runs the risk of drawing more comparisons, some said.
Observers
have mixed views about Krawcheck’s career at Citi, where she ascended
from running the brokerage unit to becoming chief financial officer
under Prince in less than three years. Her career ended on a down note,
first being moved from the top financial post to running wealth
management, then relinquishing that post last fall after reportedly
clashing with Vikram Pandit, who had replaced Prince, over compensating
clients for bad investments in areas such as auction-rate securities.
“Adding Sallie is stunning,” said Nancy Bush at NAB Research LLC. "She comes with a taint from Citigroup."
Many believe her to be skillful at running brokerage operations but shaky when given responsibility in other areas.
“She
is a smart executive but, as CFO, she failed in her job,” said Guarav
Patankar, a managing partner at 360 Global Partners Inc. who worked as
a Citi analyst while Krawcheck was at the company. He placed the blame
mostly on Citi’s management structure at the time, where it was often
unclear, with personalities such as Robert Rubin, Sanford Weill and
Prince around, who was handling strategic direction.
This is rather sad…
Soon there will be nothing left of Merrill…just Bank of America…sad. Even for competitors, there is nobody left. MSSB may not be perfect but no one else is left (UBS will be gone soon)…
Those of us that have been in this business for sometime, knew they were dinosaurs now there time has come.
<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Relics not to be missed.
[quote=Greenbacks]I cannot understand how any one who works at a wire or a big bank can believe anything that management says!
How many times do they need to lie to you before you guys get it? I feel sorry for some of you who where forced into these buckets of s#!t companies, but yet some of you still defend them. I do not know why? [/quote]What are we getting? If you spent anytime in a wirehouse since you were fired out of one, you would probably realize most advisors at the wires don't give a rat's ass what management has to say, it is irrelevant to my daily business or my clients.
Those of us that have been in this business for sometime, knew they were dinosaurs now there time has come.Relics not to be missed.
[quote=Incredible Hulk] [quote=Greenbacks] I cannot believe you do not think a company that holds bonds say 200 million dollars worth in inventory,that it does not effect the company's balance sheet.
Imagine what a small change in interest rates can do to it!
Tell me your stand up company will not push them if they are loosing money.
A realtor does not recieve income from house he has listed, they will not change the realtors balance sheet.
As emploees you guy's look at the company and do not see the effect they have good or bad on the earnings.
When you become an owner (indy) of your own firm you will look at things differently.
[/quote]
That is why we hedge our bond positions.
Are you seriously in charge of your own company?
[/quote]
Greenbacks -
I'm surprised that you feel qualified to make any statement regarding how brokerage firms work with your obvious lack of understanding on something as basic as the bond desk.
When you say, we'll look at things differently when we become an owner, by differently do you mean incorrectly?
Also, as an aside, some and time as you have used them are two separate words. You should also review the proper uses of their/there/they're. It is also losing, not loosing.
FYI- BAI FA’s are going to ML comp structure.
You have no idea what you are talking about. “October is doomsday…?” Now you are just making stuff up.
[quote=Greenbacks]Sorry, but my heart will never bleed for a ML rep! Most of them have ego’s the size of Texas. Makes you want to puke when you would talk to them.
There has been a lot of crap that hit the fan over the last two years but the day ML was sold, to me that was a great day [/quote] What a prick you are. No elaboration required.ken lewis is a drunken pig farmer
You are a very bitter man. I feel sorry for you.
is MER name going away?
wachovia?
Boy this sounds like the A.G. Edwards / Wachovia thread a year ago.
Announcement today that Ken Lewis is stepping down. Who would want to take over that mess?
Tell us something that we don’t already know you moron. Guys like you make this blog lame!
It's good for the BAI brokers.....so far......[quote=Dollar007]FYI- BAI FA’s are going to ML comp structure.[/quote]
Is that good or bad for the BAI brokers?
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/whats-firms/ml-brokers-pissed-about-bofa-coup