ML sucks now what?

You have run your own business before but not as an advisor? im confused, are you part of a team?

Usually people can bring about 50% of the book…In this market would say less, but in your case maybe more.  But they guys at ML will paint you as too young to make it.  If 50% comes can you do 10K a month going forward?

I have discussed with several friends who are also indy osj’s that if I could do it over I would have gladly given up a reasonable percentage (10-15% as a ballpark) to an OSJ just to put that aspect of the task off for 12-18 months while I focussed on moving my book over and getting the pipeline filling operations back up to speed.

Just food for thought.

As a ws guy i would not advise a move here…seems like the jig is up. With a rollover business i would go RIA with Schwab

[quote=mlgone]Thats what I was thinking Hyman.  Make the transition smoother.  Still better than a 36% payout.  But infrastructer is what worries me in this Madolff world.  ML is easy to sell out of but selling “XYZ Investments” isn’t.  What firm do you like for managed business?[/quote]

I am with LPL and I’m happy with them.

Last time I checked, they haven’t needed to ask for government handouts to stay in business, nor have they sold themselves to a bank out of desperation.  I think if you present FACTS to people they will be more comfortable with “XYZ Investments” than you might think.

There are other good firms out there, I just happen to think I’m already with the best.

[quote=mlgone]Allright people I realize that ML has blown it.  [/quote]

I was thinking about this type of thoughyprocess last night.  Has ML really blown it? (Don’t answer that)  More specifically, has the ML Global Wealth Management really blown it?

I tell my clients that the order of my priorities are:
My family
My clients
My firm

I also express to them that if things go bad at ML and that they would be better off with me at someplace else rather than with me at ML, they will hear from me but I’ll be calling from someplace else.  I then follow that up with, at this time, besides for big moving bonuses or higher payouts (which only go to me) and maybe not having to explain what the bad press about ML, no other place has demonstrated why my clients would be better off with me there rather than with me at ML.

Besides for the emotions that people feel with all of the bad press that ML has been getting, have things gotten worse for clients at ML?

–WM

Edwards and Jones warned us about ML

Edwards and Jones warned us about ML

you on the Kool Aid too?

[quote=WealthManager]

[quote=mlgone]Allright people I realize that ML has blown it.  [/quote]

I was thinking about this type of thoughyprocess last night.  Has ML really blown it? (Don’t answer that)  More specifically, has the ML Global Wealth Management really blown it?

I tell my clients that the order of my priorities are:
My family
My clients
My firm

I also express to them that if things go bad at ML and that they would be better off with me at someplace else rather than with me at ML, they will hear from me but I’ll be calling from someplace else.  I then follow that up with, at this time, besides for big moving bonuses or higher payouts (which only go to me) and maybe not having to explain what the bad press about ML, no other place has demonstrated why my clients would be better off with me there rather than with me at ML.

Besides for the emotions that people feel with all of the bad press that ML has been getting, have things gotten worse for clients at ML?

–WM
[/quote]

I think that needing a multibillion dollar government rescue package and ultimately being acquired by a white knight is a little more than ‘bad press’ for clients.  Once BAC starts(continues) taking apart the management infrastructure that was Merrill, it will get worse.

curious why you think it will get worse?    From my seat ML had to be rescued and was not transparent about the condition of the company…   So, if the same ML managers are run out of town that ran the company into the ground how can it get worse?

Define worse for me?      2 CEO’s gone -    no expense managment   – and a 15B loss in the 4th quarter …  I guess BAC caused that?

I think that needing a multibillion dollar government rescue package and ultimately being acquired by a white knight is a little more than ‘bad press’ for clients.  Once BAC starts(continues) taking apart the management infrastructure that was Merrill, it will get worse.

I don’t see how the rescue package is bad for clients other than the fact that it’s being paid with using their tax dollars.

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

I’m keeping a close eye on changes to the management infrastructure.  So far there has been little/none that will affect the client.

Yes, I drank a bit of the kool aid, but isn’t it a high probability that having access to BoA’s resources will be an additional benefit for ML clients?

So far, the only clients that have been negatively affected are the small ones that we don’t get paid on.

--WM

Yes, I drank a bit of the kool aid, but isn’t it a high probability that having access to BoA’s resources will be an additional benefit for ML clients? 

--WM

Usually people can bring about 50% of the book.

[quote=HymanRoth]
I think that needing a multibillion dollar government rescue package and ultimately being acquired by a white knight is a little more than ‘bad press’ for clients.  Once BAC starts(continues) taking apart the management infrastructure that was Merrill, it will get worse.

I don’t see how the rescue package is bad for clients other than the fact that it’s being paid with using their tax dollars.

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

I’m keeping a close eye on changes to the management infrastructure.  So far there has been little/none that will affect the client.

Yes, I drank a bit of the kool aid, but isn’t it a high probability that having access to BoA’s resources will be an additional benefit for ML clients?

So far, the only clients that have been negatively affected are the small ones that we don’t get paid on.

--WM

[quote=HymanRoth]
I think that needing a multibillion dollar government rescue package and ultimately being acquired by a white knight is a little more than ‘bad press’ for clients.  Once BAC starts(continues) taking apart the management infrastructure that was Merrill, it will get worse.

I don’t see how the rescue package is bad for clients other than the fact that it’s being paid with using their tax dollars.

I’m keeping a close eye on changes to the management infrastructure.  So far there has been little/none that will affect the client.

Yes, I drank a bit of the kool aid, but isn’t it a high probability that having access to BoA’s resources will be an additional benefit for ML clients?

So far, the only clients that have been negatively affected are the small ones that we don’t get paid on.

--WM

Pretty funny and accurate comment from Tom Brown:

The post is a rag, but here’s another beauty from that fine literay work:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01132009/business/bonus_pool_is_back_149888.htm

The ML bashing is ridiculous.  ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There's a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

[quote=Sellout21]ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There’s a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love’em or hate’em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  
[/quote]
Maybe your analogy would carry water if the Yankees drove themselves to the edge of insolvency and were forced to sell themselves in desperation to the hated Red Sox.  If there’s any envy involved here, it’s not flowing in the direction you think.  The world as you knew it, and the ML you once knew, is no more. 

Just keep telling yourself whatever you want, sellout, if that makes you feel better.  You can face reality or join the other ostriches with their heads planted firmly in the sand.

Either way, it don’t make me no never mind.

[quote=Sellout21]

The ML bashing is ridiculous.  ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There's a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

If everyone was so unhappy and there are so many better options - why are we not seeing the mass exodus?  Some people have left, but not even remotely close to what would have been expected.  I’m sure there will be more to leave, but by the time a FA could transition and hopefully get 60% of his book at the new firm, the dust will have settled and people will be talking about how ML/BOA are well on their way to recovery.  

[quote=Sellout21]If everyone was so unhappy and there are so many better options - why are we not seeing the mass exodus?  Some people have left, but not even remotely close to what would have been expected.  I’m sure there will be more to leave, but by the time a FA could transition and hopefully get 60% of his book at the new firm, the dust will have settled and people will be talking about how ML/BOA are well on their way to recovery.  

you need to wake up…there is ZERO difference in the major brokerage houses in the products that they can provide to clients…if you’re a consults guy at ML, you’ll be an Access guy at UBS, and hire a manager at SB or MS…



no difference in checking/debit cards, mutual fund selection and programs, annuities, life insurance, fee-based advisory accounts, etc. NADA!



the services offered to clients are becoming commoditized…and don’t think that trend WON’T continue when they are all owned by big banks now…

I don't know if your statement is totally true, but ML also has the most assets, most brokers, most trainees, and most offices.  Look at it from a % standpoint and I guarantee ML isn't leading in these categories.  Who cares about trainees anyway...they just take up space and cost the firm money.  9 out of 10 never hit their hurdles and graduate from the training program on their own.  We need less nonqualified people giving investment advice, not more.

[quote=Sellout21]ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There’s a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love’em or hate’em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.   [/quote]
Maybe your analogy would carry water if the Yankees drove themselves to the edge of insolvency and were forced to sell themselves in desperation to the hated Red Sox.  If there’s any envy involved here, it’s not flowing in the direction you think.  The world as you knew it, and the ML you once knew, is no more. 

I’m a recent UBS guy after 7 years at ML and there are some big differences. Technology at ML is light years ahead. I might throw my consultworks out the window one day.   WTMP was great compared to the UBS technology. The back office and service center take forever at UBS to answer the phone. I hate calling for specific product questions and not having anyone answer.



On the other hand…not as many options in Access relative to Consults but with MAC you have many more options. The Regional Consulting Center is an advantage. I like the idea of bouncing asset allocation ideas off of a team. I believe the PBIG teams overall are stronger than the PWA teams at UBS. But one PBIG team left ML in my region and joined UBS. I’ll put him up against anyone other than one PBIG in Atlanta.



The financial planning software is better at UBS vs. ML. I did not like wealth outlook and used financeware. FGA is better than wealth outlook and more thorough than financeware but sometimes the simplicity of financeware I appreciated.



If you do annuities, the payouts are drastically different. An L share at ML is 2.25% upfront w/ 80 bps trail. At UBS it is 3.5% upfront w/ 100 bps trail.



Just wanted to put out some observations on the differences between UBS and ML.



70% of our book has moved in 3 months. We lost some we’d like to keep but we also have some who would talk to us now that we are not at ML.



And yes, you could say I sold out for the bonus money. But I am now 32 without a mortgage and have 500k in the bank (I know I still have a contract). I’ll give the indy’s a few more years to catch up on the high net worth market before looking at that option.

[quote=Sellout21]I don’t know if your statement is totally true, but ML also has the most assets, most brokers, most trainees, and most offices.  [/quote]
Those are the metrics you think matter?!  Who is the biggest?  Incredible.   Have you been living in a cave for the last half a year or so?? 

Try selling that load of load of rubbish to your clients tomorrow.  They might have bought that line once upon a time.   This isn’t limited to ML, but ML is surely a poster child of this mess.  The fairy tale is over, and no one lived happily ever after.

Leftml - all good points, thanks for the feedback.  The annuity payout at ML is horrifying, but it definitely forces you to be selling annuities to clients for the right reasons, not just for the big ticket.  I'm with you on the independent route - give it a few years.

Morphius - yes, regardless of what your wife says - size does matter.  I'm just kidding, but you set yourself up for that one.

[quote=Sellout21]Morphius - yes, regardless of what your wife says - size does matter.  I’m just kidding, but you set yourself up for that one.[/quote]
I gotta give you credit for that one, even if it was a bit of misdirection.  Touche! 

I’d rather have a good laugh than a boring old argument any day! 

[quote=Sellout21]

The ML bashing is ridiculous.  ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There’s a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love’em or hate’em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

Hank - where do I find those equity index annuities in the WSJ? 

[quote=Sellout21]

The ML bashing is ridiculous.  ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There’s a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love’em or hate’em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

Hyman - You tell me how much of your paycheck is going to be taxed extra to cover ML bonuses?  I'm going to say probably zero, but at most I owe you a small cup of gas station coffee.  But keeping using that line about hard working Americans, it's a good scare tactic.

[quote=Sellout21]Hank - where do I find those equity index annuities in the WSJ?  [/quote]


On the same page where you find Merrill’s ticker symbol.

[quote=Sellout21]

Hyman - You tell me how much of your paycheck is going to be taxed extra to cover ML bonuses?  I’m going to say probably zero, but at most I owe you a small cup of gas station coffee.  But keeping using that line about hard working Americans, it’s a good scare tactic.

[quote=Hank Moody] [quote=Sellout21]Hank - where do I find those equity index annuities in the WSJ?  [/quote]


On the same page where you find Merrill’s ticker symbol.

[quote=6160]

[quote=Hank Moody] [quote=Sellout21]Hank - where do I find those equity index annuities in the WSJ?  [/quote]


On the same page where you find Merrill’s ticker symbol.

[quote=Sellout21]

  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

Human Nature - we bitch when things get hard. I’m frustrated where I’m at, but then I wonder, why would it be better somewhere else? ML has traditionally been considered #1 in the industry, but the last few months have tarnished that reputation - for now. But I can’t figure out why MS, WS, UBS or any other firm is better right now other than they do a better job of staying off the front page of the WSJ.



This is America. Two months out of the news, a 5% bump in the market, and a little good weather and before you know it, no one will even remember the crash of ‘08. Everyone wants the big retention package or the bonus to move, but in the end, is moving really good for your clients?



Those that truly want to serve their clients’ best interest would forego any bonus and take the risk and go Indy. Now that’s gutsy, but speaks volumes about one’s desire to serve their clients. Because, let’s face it, jumping ship to another wirehouse is easy and virtually risk free. You get a big fat check, you inconvenience the Hell out of your clients, but in a month or two, you’re back to normal.



If you’re complaining about where you’re at now, you’ll find a reason to complain about where you jump to soon enough. If you go indy, the only one you can complain to is yourself - how long you gonna listen to that?

Going Indy is the best option.  BAC will in time start to withhold the ML guys trails.  They will have two grids, transaction and trails like they do now at BAI.  They will force you to turn over, no i mean refer, your clients to a banking specialist to sell mortgages and bank products.  Merrill was a great firm.  However, they will not be for long.  Most of the senior management is gone.  Replaced with BAI and BAC guys that do not respect advisors or brokerage business.  The whole industry is in trouble with BAC in charge.

[quote=Soothsayer][quote=Sellout21]

  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

[quote=B24][quote=Soothsayer][quote=Sellout21]

  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

All-Star
1998 *
1999 *
2000 (SS)
2001 *
2002 *
2004 (SS)
2006 (SS)
2007 (SS)
2008 (SS)

Awards
1996-AL-ROY
2000-ML-AS MVP
2000-AL-Babe Ruth Award
2000-ML-WS MVP
2006-AL-Hank Aaron Award

Gold Gloves
2004-AL--SS
2005-AL--SS
2006-AL--SS
All Multiple Winners

Silver Sluggers
2006-AL--SS
2007-AL--SS
2008-AL--SS
All Multiple Winners

MVP (YrLg-Rk-Shr)
1997-AL-24-0.01
1998-AL-3-0.46
1999-AL-6-0.45
2000-AL-10-0.11
2001-AL-10-0.11
2003-AL-21-0.03
2004-AL-13-0.03
2005-AL-10-0.06
2006-AL-2-0.78
2007-AL-11-0.04
Car-83-2.08 shares

Batting Average
1998 AL-.324-5
1999 AL-.349-2
2000 AL-.339-5
2001 AL-.311-9
2003 AL-.324-3
2005 AL-.309-6
2006 AL-.344-2
2007 AL-.322-9
Act-.316-5
Car-.316-70

On-base %
1999 AL-.438-3
2000 AL-.416-9
2003 AL-.393-10
2005 AL-.389-6
2006 AL-.417-4
Act-.387-18

OPS
1999 AL-.989-5

Games
1997 AL-159-4
1999 AL-158-8
2002 AL-157-9
2005 AL-159-10
Act-1985-19

At Bats
1997 AL-654-3
1998 AL-626-6
1999 AL-627-6
2002 AL-644-4
2004 AL-643-4
2005 AL-654-3
2006 AL-623-9
2007 AL-639-4
Act-8025-11

Plate Appearances (approx.)
1997 AL-748-1
1999 AL-739-1
2002 AL-730-2
2004 AL-721-5
2005 AL-752-1
2006 AL-715-5
2007 AL-714-4
Act-9093-11

Runs
1997 AL-116-4
1998 AL-127-1
1999 AL-134-2
2000 AL-119-6
2001 AL-110-5
2002 AL-124-3
2004 AL-111-6
2005 AL-122-2
2006 AL-118-2
Act-1467-8
Car-1467-72

I see more legacy ML executives and senior bankers left the firm today but no corporate email good byes. And now there are rumors that BAC is asking for more TARP funds combined with the market telling common and preferred holders what they think their true value is.

Yes, I think they are relieved to be out while according to our stock price we are going down. Soon to be a government run bank, I can’t believe it!

Merrill Stynch is now being run by none other than the pimp known as Dan Sontag.  Big Dan has gotten a raise and probably a big check, and he is leading his loyal subject to the slaughter.  Dan Sontag is Ken Lewis’s whore.  You cant trust a damn word either of them says. 

So, I’m going to go out on a limb here, Ed, and say you’re probably not likely to invite either Dan or Ken over for a beer any time soon?

[quote=jkl1v1n6][quote=B24][quote=Soothsayer][quote=Sellout21]

  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love'em or hate'em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

All-Star
1998 *
1999 *
2000 (SS)
2001 *
2002 *
2004 (SS)
2006 (SS)
2007 (SS)
2008 (SS)

Awards
1996-AL-ROY
2000-ML-AS MVP
2000-AL-Babe Ruth Award
2000-ML-WS MVP
2006-AL-Hank Aaron Award

Gold Gloves
2004-AL--SS
2005-AL--SS
2006-AL--SS
All Multiple Winners

Silver Sluggers
2006-AL--SS
2007-AL--SS
2008-AL--SS
All Multiple Winners

MVP (YrLg-Rk-Shr)
1997-AL-24-0.01
1998-AL-3-0.46
1999-AL-6-0.45
2000-AL-10-0.11
2001-AL-10-0.11
2003-AL-21-0.03
2004-AL-13-0.03
2005-AL-10-0.06
2006-AL-2-0.78
2007-AL-11-0.04
Car-83-2.08 shares

Batting Average
1998 AL-.324-5
1999 AL-.349-2
2000 AL-.339-5
2001 AL-.311-9
2003 AL-.324-3
2005 AL-.309-6
2006 AL-.344-2
2007 AL-.322-9
Act-.316-5
Car-.316-70

On-base %
1999 AL-.438-3
2000 AL-.416-9
2003 AL-.393-10
2005 AL-.389-6
2006 AL-.417-4
Act-.387-18

OPS
1999 AL-.989-5

Games
1997 AL-159-4
1999 AL-158-8
2002 AL-157-9
2005 AL-159-10
Act-1985-19

At Bats
1997 AL-654-3
1998 AL-626-6
1999 AL-627-6
2002 AL-644-4
2004 AL-643-4
2005 AL-654-3
2006 AL-623-9
2007 AL-639-4
Act-8025-11

Plate Appearances (approx.)
1997 AL-748-1
1999 AL-739-1
2002 AL-730-2
2004 AL-721-5
2005 AL-752-1
2006 AL-715-5
2007 AL-714-4
Act-9093-11

Runs
1997 AL-116-4
1998 AL-127-1
1999 AL-134-2
2000 AL-119-6
2001 AL-110-5
2002 AL-124-3
2004 AL-111-6
2005 AL-122-2
2006 AL-118-2
Act-1467-8
Car-1467-72

Oops on the cut and paste.  Anyway, Jeter is an outstanding ballplayer, and gets even better in the clutch.  That being said, for several years during his career he was the 4th best shortstop in the American League behind A-Rod, Nomar, and Tejada.  A-Rod moved to third, Nomar can’t stay healthy, and we found out that Tejada is old enough to be a grandfather.  In my lifetime, I would rate Barry Larkin as the best shortstop that I remember.  Robin Yount, Alan Trammell, and Cal Ripken would also be in that conversation along with Jeter.  Omar Vizquel might be the most exciting and acrobatic, but couldn’t hit a lick for most of his career.  I just don’t think the guy hung the moon like so many of the Yankee fanatics.  Jorge Posada has been the most under-appreciated guy on that team for years.  A switc -hitting catcher with power from both sides of the plate and an above average defender is a better find than a pretty-boy shortstop anyday.

Most MLinchers really like Dana Sontag.  He shoots staight.  Ken Lewis, on the other hand, along with Moynihan, do not ever speak straight.  The new ML FA’s / BofA “Client Facing Associates” are in for a rude awakening.

The ML bashing is ridiculous.  ML sets the precedent for everything that happens in the brokerage world, good and bad.  There’s a reason why ML has the most assets under management as well as the highest average producer in the biz.  They are the Yankees of MLB - you either love’em or hate’em, but the haters out there generally stems from envy.  

Earp - you pushed it a little. THey have a very good platform now that they have outsourced it all. They mostly have Stockholm Syndrome. THey have been told (I was there too) how wonderful the Bull is that it has become absolute truth. But Big Dave is not coming back. THey lost more money in the past year than the firm has made in its existence, combined. It is a tragedy - but the fact is that wall street fell into massive group think and here are the results. Someone said recently when explaining how he knew to short MER at 80, he said he could see a Wall Street disaster coming and where there is a disaster, Merrill has a way of being in the middle of it.

THey have a very good platform now that they have outsourced it all.