Morgan Stanley

Based on the fact that within the past 4 hours that 3 brokers at MS called our directors office looking to set up a meeting, I would say that MS will continue to shed brokers to the other wires… Can anybody say HSBC Morgan Stanley??? What about B of A Morgan Stanley???

I wouldn't say that a spin-off of the retail arm is out of the question and brokers would be wise to look at their options. Having said that, I doubt it matters much to the average rep what the sign out front says, so long as it's reputable.

blamston, who are you with?

merrill… And the directors assistant just told me that the 3 brokers averaged about 7 years and about 600K in rolling 12, so these guys arent rooks trying to jump ship, they are decent producers looking to get off the titanic…

Rambo

So supposed someone says yeah forget MS, go th SB. Are you going to base your career decision on an anonymous post on a forum? How is Purcell resigning sometime over the next nine months going to effect you? No one can honestly answer that question for you.

[quote=blarmston]merrill.... And the directors assistant just told me that the 3 brokers averaged about 7 years and about 600K in rolling 12, so these guys arent rooks trying to jump ship, they are decent producers looking to get off the titanic...[/quote]

The "Titanic" line is a gross overstatement. After all, it isn't as if ML hasn't had high-profile personnel turn-over themselves in the past. Having said that, if they find their clients are talking more about Pursell than about doing business, and if ML's offering a nice check, this would be great timing to jump. It surely gives them a reason they can easily justify to clients they want to move with them.

You may be right about the titanic analogy… I have respect for MS and some of their brokers. 2 of my buddies are there so I have a decent understanding of what goes on at least in their branch… Of course, people are always jumping ship and going to other firms… I agree with you in that if they are being offered nice deals that this is an ideal time to move books… when you drill down to our small part of the world, and the fact that these brokers actively called in without being courted, it may signify a greater national trend… Of course I am just speculating…

[quote=blarmston].. when you drill down to our small part of the world, and the fact that these brokers actively called in without being courted, it may signify a greater national trend.... Of course I am just speculating....[/quote]

I think you could be right. Even if there's really no "there" there with the change in CEO at MS, it's still a nice catalyst to use with clients to move for the nice check to a good firm.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Its a very opportunistic time for MS brokers with established practices and loyal clients to make a move… Those who are upset for some reason at MS may want to consider a change of scenery… And of course those fat transition packages…

[quote=blarmston]Its a very opportunistic time for MS brokers with
established practices and loyal clients to make a move… Those who
are upset for some reason at MS may want to consider a change of
scenery… And of course those fat transition packages…[/quote]



It is a very opportunistic time for ANYBODY at ANY company to make a
move.  From all firms–not just from Morgan Stanley.  It is a
good time to leave Merrill, too. 



Quite frankly, I have no idea why there would be any sort of mass
exodus from Morgan Stanley because an embattled CEO has agreed to step
down.  It’s not relevant to anything and is nothing more than
hype.  It seems very silly to me the way they are carrying on.



If those Morgan reps want to leave, that’s fine.  I hope their
motivation ISN’T this BS involving Purcell, but rather considerations
for their careers, their clients, and their own financial well-being.



I have no idea why anyone would say “Titanic” in the same sentence with Morgan Stanley.  Silly.

[quote=Rambo]

Help me out here!

I'm about to sign with MS under their "rising star" package.  The news came out today about Purcell.  Should I punt the idea and go to Smith Barney?

Thanks, Rambo

I've spoken with inquisitive before on a number of issues within the industry.  I am a recruiter and work for several national firms.  I'll be honest, I called several of the people I have good relationships with at MS - since the news yesterday, I've probably visited with 10 or so.  No one is really alarmed since it was something they expected at some point.  He had announced that he was planning on retiring by 2008 anyway.  If the search takes longer, that period will only be cut by two years and he'll be out by next March.

Many of the brokers I've spoken with range in LOS and production and were proud of the fact that their CEO (while he had his struggles) jumped on the grenade for the sake of the firm, whether they liked him or not.

That said, there wasn't much he could change from the media's viewpoint.  Now was the best time for him to save face and move on. 

These are simply some of the things I have heard out there. 

I have no idea why anyone would say "Titanic" in the same sentence with Morgan Stanley.  Silly.
inquisitive,while i feel that 95% of your posts contain great viewpoints and wisdom, i gotta say that you may be wound too tight at times... i quickly backed away from my titanic comment and admitted that i find ms to be a reputable firm- one of the best....

Maybe NOW would be the best time to stay at Morgan Stanley. Imagine all these brokers leaving. And what happens when a broker leaves? He/She has to try and transfer their book to the new firm.

By staying at MS, a broker may have a shot at retaining the leaving broker's clients, depending on how they're divied up, of course. Even if 80% of the clients transfer, that could leave some juicy ones in the remaining 20% who didn't.

Dob- thats a good point… We all know that as soon as a rep leaves the office for the last time, by the time they make it to the car the managers have the reamining brokers dialing his clients… I heard that the average broker with LOS 10 years or more has approx 40% of their book made up of orphaned accounts from failed brokers… Has anyone heard this stat before??? Or is it simply broker urban myth??? Example- guy in our branch ( LOS 16, 700K, approx. 230MM in AUM) says that about 60% of his book has been gained from leaving brokers over the years… It makes sense…

[quote=doberman]

Maybe NOW would be the best time to stay at Morgan Stanley. Imagine all these brokers leaving. And what happens when a broker leaves? He/She has to try and transfer their book to the new firm.[/quote]

Transferring client assets for a successful, high-producing rep is never a problem.  They didn't get successful by accident.  It's only the marginal ones that have to worry.  And even then, they can still take most.

[quote=blarmstrom]
inquisitive,while i feel that 95% of your posts contain great viewpoints and wisdom, i gotta say that you may be wound too tight at times... i quickly backed away from my titanic comment and admitted that i find ms to be a reputable firm- one of the best....
[/quote]

Wound too tight?  Why you little *&^^%% I'l rip your *&^%% head off!!!  Nah, just kidding! 

I get so sick and tired of all the negativity in the media.  Everything is oh-so terrible.  Job numbers can be great, corporate profits are great, everything can be going great, then you get this one little thing that isn't as great and the media jumps all over it and grinds it into the ground.

This Purcell business really is no big deal.  Especially not compared to all the tainted research scandals of a few years back.  That storm passed and, to my amazement, the industry was left unscathed.

[quote=blarmstrom]
Dob- thats a good point.... We all know that as soon as a rep leaves the office for the last time, by the time they make it to the car the managers have the reamining brokers dialing his clients... [/quote]
That much is true.

[quote=blarmstrom]
I heard that the average broker with LOS 10 years or more has approx 40% of their book made up of orphaned accounts from failed brokers... Has anyone heard this stat before???? Or is it simply broker urban myth???? Example- guy in our branch ( LOS 16, 700K, approx. 230MM in AUM) says that about 60% of his book has been gained from leaving brokers over the years.... It makes sense......[/quote]
Actually, that makes little sense to me.  If those accounts were so great the original reps wouldn't have washed-out in the first place.  Those typically aren't high quality accounts.

High producers, even at the $700k range, aren't successful because they scavenged some accounts off the carcass of a failed rep.  I couldn't imagine someone building his career off the failure of others!  Perhaps there may be one or two here and there, but not most.

I was recently made an offer by another firm to leave MS.  I spoke with a more senior broker, he recommended staying based on the old saying, keep your seat, get accounts.

Inqui- This broker told me that when a guy would leave, some accounts would be placed in his name. He would then contact them to mine for other assets, opportunities, etc. Admittedly he said that only 10-20% of those orphaned would ever get serviced and be considered true clients of his. So what he did was ferret out the service to junior guys to ‘mine for diamonds’ and split whatever business was found with them. This has happened consistently for about the past 12-13 years for this guy… MUST BE NICE…I agree that most accounts left behind may be cr$p, but its a nice way to get “free assets” and increase total AUM when brokers leave firms…

I am working with a MS broker who just inherited $8M when a large producer left for Merrill a few months back.  This person is less than 5 years in and found themselves with a 25% increase in business from one person.  Not a bad deal if you ask me!

[quote=BrokerRecruit]

I am working with a MS broker who just
inherited $8M when a large producer left for Merrill a few months
back.  This person is less than 5 years in and found themselves
with a 25% increase in business from one person.  Not a bad deal
if you ask me![/quote]

If that producer is large, that $8M he left behind is something he probably wouldn't even notice.

If you are working with the MS guy, he must be considering moving.  And if so, I can't imagine he'd think he could take that $8M when the other guy couldn't.

A few months may not be enough time to see if he can actually hold on to the account.  The clients may give him a few more months and go somewhere else.  I've seen that happen.

[quote=blarmston]Inqui- This broker told me that when a guy would
leave, some accounts would be placed in his name. He would then contact
them to mine for other assets, opportunities, etc. Admittedly he said
that only 10-20% of those orphaned would ever get serviced and be
considered true clients of his. So what he did was ferret out the
service to junior guys to ‘mine for diamonds’ and split whatever
business was found with them. This has happened consistently for about
the past 12-13 years for this guy… MUST BE NICE…I agree that most
accounts left behind may be cr$p, but its a nice way to get “free
assets” and increase total AUM when brokers leave firms…[/quote]



Even a big office with 100 guys–they couldn’t have more than a few
failures a year.  I can see someone making a few bucks off of
failed reps, but the bulk of his production? 



It’s a shame that one guy knows how to work the clients for referrals
and such when the original could have done the same thing and kept his
job.



Falling into money is always nice.  Every now and then I hear a
story of some chance meeting that turns into a large income stream and
wish it would happen to me!

Falling into money is always nice.  Every now and then I hear a story of some chance meeting that turns into a large income stream and wish it would happen to me!

----------------------------------------------------

Speaking of chance meeting, I had only been a broker for a few weeks and was assigned to be the "Broker of the Day", when a $170,000 new account walked thru the door. Of course, this was 15 years ago when $170,000 meant something! 

Inq,

I have advised the FA to wait until the dust settles with those accounts, so that it doesn't set of a red flag that they are taking the money and running.  They aren't at the offer stage yet, and it has been explained to the hiring BM.  They're both all for it.  A few month difference could mean an extra $50k or so for the FA and more assets for the BM to add to the branch.

For the person that mentioned going to Smith Barney or to Morgan, go to Smith Barney, it’s managed money capability and mortgages and bond inventory are excellent and it is a top notch oranization.  Nothing wrong with Morgan but I believe you will like Smith Barney better.  You all know what your good at, if you are eager and know how to bring in business go hunt, if you can’t do it or don’t want to do it, start kissin ass and hope you get handed accounts, I got into this business b/c I enjoy the hunt and the challenge, if you want to sit around and get handed accounts go to a bank, there is nothing wrong with either way it’s just about knowing who you are.

[quote=stanwbrown]

[quote=blarmston]merrill… And the directors
assistant just told me that the 3 brokers averaged about 7 years and
about 600K in rolling 12, so these guys arent rooks trying to jump
ship, they are decent producers looking to get off the
titanic…[/quote]

The "Titanic" line is a gross overstatement. After all, it isn't as if ML hasn't had high-profile personnel turn-over themselves in the past. Having said that, if they find their clients are talking more about Pursell than about doing business, and if ML's offering a nice check, this would be great timing to jump. It surely gives them a reason they can easily justify to clients they want to move with them.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you work(ed) at Morgan Stanley. So I’d like your opinion on this:

I have been offered a position with MS as a FA trainee. I have no
experience in the financial services arena but am very qualified and
motivated to excel in the position.

Is this a good time to join MS? I expect an offer from AGE in the next
couple of days, but the offer at MS is to start soon. Any advice?

Thanks in advance.

[quote=inquisitive][quote=blarmston]Its a very opportunistic time for MS brokers with
established practices and loyal clients to make a move… Those who
are upset for some reason at MS may want to consider a change of
scenery… And of course those fat transition packages…[/quote]



It is a very opportunistic time for ANYBODY at ANY company to make a
move.  From all firms–not just from Morgan Stanley.  It is a
good time to leave Merrill, too. 



Quite frankly, I have no idea why there would be any sort of mass
exodus from Morgan Stanley because an embattled CEO has agreed to step
down.  It’s not relevant to anything and is nothing more than
hype.  It seems very silly to me the way they are carrying on.



If those Morgan reps want to leave, that’s fine.  I hope their
motivation ISN’T this BS involving Purcell, but rather considerations
for their careers, their clients, and their own financial well-being.



I have no idea why anyone would say “Titanic” in the same sentence with Morgan Stanley.  Silly.





[/quote]



Inquisitive,



Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you work(ed) at Morgan Stanley. So I’d like your opinion on this:

I have been offered a position with MS as a FA trainee. I have no
experience in the financial services arena but am very qualified and
motivated to excel in the position.

Is this a good time to join MS? I expect an offer from AGE in the next
couple of days, but the offer at MS is to start soon. Any advice?

Thanks in advance.

[quote=doberman]

Maybe NOW would be the best time to stay at Morgan Stanley. Imagine all these brokers leaving. And what happens when a broker leaves? He/She has to try and transfer their book to the new firm.

By staying at MS, a broker may have a shot at retaining the leaving broker's clients, depending on how they're divied up, of course. Even if 80% of the clients transfer, that could leave some juicy ones in the remaining 20% who didn't.

Thanks in advance.