Morgan Stanley August 2005 broker layoffs

You could be the first

Nope, but I have heard that several Wealth Advisor teams in my region jumped to Smith Barney & Wachovia soon after because their junior FAs were let go.  I guess the Wealth Advisors were paying their junior FAs a flat salary and a small percentage of the revenue.  They were fired when they  missed the cut.

Glad to see that strategy was so well thought out.  Cut the 200k producer & lose a $2mill team in the process.

[quote=iconsult100]

Nope, but I have heard that several Wealth Advisor teams in my region jumped to Smith Barney & Wachovia soon after because their junior FAs were let go.  I guess the Wealth Advisors were paying their junior FAs a flat salary and a small percentage of the revenue.  They were fired when they  missed the cut.

Glad to see that strategy was so well thought out.  Cut the 200k producer & lose a $2mill team in the process.

[/quote]

I think you were misled. Jr brokers being paid a flat salary were employees not of the firm, but of the Sr broker. They would not have been fired. Jr brokers who were part of a team, but still using their own production number could have been cut, but who's a "jr broker" after more than eight years, using their own production number and still doing under $225k?

Heard layoffs are coming End of February...

Pretty Reliable Region Guy mentioned to me that is the timeframe...Along with Payout cuts under 350,000 and higher over 500,000.

layoff number a bit complicated but around 300K will be the cut level for most.

[quote=fritz]

Heard layoffs are coming End of February...

Pretty Reliable Region Guy mentioned to me that is the timeframe...Along with Payout cuts under 350,000 and higher over 500,000.

layoff number a bit complicated but around 300K will be the cut level for most.

[/quote]

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=iconsult100]

Nope, but I have heard that several Wealth Advisor teams in my region jumped to Smith Barney & Wachovia soon after because their junior FAs were let go.  I guess the Wealth Advisors were paying their junior FAs a flat salary and a small percentage of the revenue.  They were fired when they  missed the cut.

Glad to see that strategy was so well thought out.  Cut the 200k producer & lose a $2mill team in the process.

[/quote]

I think you were misled. Jr brokers being paid a flat salary were employees not of the firm, but of the Sr broker. They would not have been fired. Jr brokers who were part of a team, but still using their own production number could have been cut, but who's a "jr broker" after more than eight years, using their own production number and still doing under $225k?

[/quote]

I use the term Jr Broker loosely.  Many teams use this type of arrangement in order to hit higher breakpoints.  Some call it a "Verticle Team."  It puts more money in the team's pocket.  I don't think I was misled, I heard one case straight from a branch manager.

[quote=fritz]

Heard layoffs are coming End of February...

Pretty Reliable Region Guy mentioned to me that is the timeframe...Along with Payout cuts under 350,000 and higher over 500,000.

layoff number a bit complicated but around 300K will be the cut level for most.

[/quote]

I have been told by several sources.... "No more Cuts, Period.  We're going with the team that is on the field." 

If they cut more people, then my team is walking.  We're not going to work for someone who outright lies to us. 

Things are starting to get really good, management better not screw this up.

[quote=iconsult100][quote=mikebutler222][quote=iconsult100]

Nope, but I have heard that several Wealth Advisor teams in my region jumped to Smith Barney & Wachovia soon after because their junior FAs were let go.  I guess the Wealth Advisors were paying their junior FAs a flat salary and a small percentage of the revenue.  They were fired when they  missed the cut.

Glad to see that strategy was so well thought out.  Cut the 200k producer & lose a $2mill team in the process.

[/quote]

I think you were misled. Jr brokers being paid a flat salary were employees not of the firm, but of the Sr broker. They would not have been fired. Jr brokers who were part of a team, but still using their own production number could have been cut, but who's a "jr broker" after more than eight years, using their own production number and still doing under $225k?

[/quote]

I use the term Jr Broker loosely.  Many teams use this type of arrangement in order to hit higher breakpoints.  Some call it a "Verticle Team."  It puts more money in the team's pocket.  I don't think I was misled, I heard one case straight from a branch manager.

[/quote]

You can't hit higher break points unless there's a production joint number, and that joint number had to have been over $225k, or management wouldn't have allowed it to be formed joint.. Otherwise the guy works under his own number, and could have been let go if his total production was under $225k and he was over LOS 8.

I’ve heard that there will be cuts as well.  With the way Mack would like to position it, there will be great opportunities for senior producers and top quintile individuals and groups to hang a shingle.  When all is said and done, I wouldn’t be surprised if the number was around the 6000 range, with a very solid production/advisor number.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]I've heard that there will be cuts as well.  With the way Mack would like to position it, there will be great opportunities for senior producers and top quintile individuals and groups to hang a shingle.  When all is said and done, I wouldn't be surprised if the number was around the 6000 range, with a very solid production/advisor number.[/quote]

With all due respect to you and the others of the "I've heard there will be more cuts", I'm not saying it's 100% that you're wrong, but, uh HORSE PUCKY. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

After the cuts MS ave. productivity per broker is right up there with ML and SB (and it's closer still when you look at median and mode numbers on production). It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k. And the idea that after all the “We’re dedicated to retail” talk from Mack, repeated as recently as yesterday’s town hall meeting, the firm would cut back their broker force another 40%? Please, someone’s dreaming of the perfect storm for a recruiting environment.

I’m not saying that it will or won’t happen.  If it does, it will probably be on a smaller scale than the last one.  Why would Mack want to rock the boat in such a big way by cutting those that are LOS 8 <$300k.  It doesn’t make sense.  Gorman is kind of a “wild card” at this point from the standpoint that no one is sure what direction he’ll go.  But again, I think it will be a great place to be, so stay put, MB.

         FYI

http://www.investmentnews.com/article.cms?articleId=54123

[quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

Jones

They're always hiring because they suck and they have unbelievable turnover...

[quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

jones newbie - just out of curiosity, do you or anyone else know how many MWD reps went to Jones after the cuts in August? 

[quote=BrokerRecruit]

jones newbie - just out of curiosity, do you or anyone else know how many MWD reps went to Jones after the cuts in August? 

[/quote]

 Great point. BTW, it's MS now. 

Thanks, MB.  Just out of habit, I guess.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

[/quote]

He was involved in that mess?

[quote=joedabrkr][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

[/quote]

He was involved in that mess?

[/quote]

Actually, mikebutler had a huge hand in his own outing. Looks to me like he's still playing the same hand.

No one knows what Gorman will do when he gets there.  The only thing for certain is that management will lie about it until the bitter end. They cannot be trusted.

[quote=Dirk Diggler][quote=joedabrkr][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

[/quote]

He was involved in that mess?

[/quote]

Actually, mikebutler had a huge hand in his own outing. Looks to me like he's still playing the same hand.

[/quote]

LOL, do tell there BDG, let's here the deatils on that one.

[quote=joedabrkr][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

[/quote]

He was involved in that mess?

[/quote]

He was, as was DD, even more directly. Notice he's like a dog with a bone on that one and still itches to play that card.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=Dirk Diggler][quote=joedabrkr][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

 It's simply unimaginable that there would be another round of cuts so soon (btw, didn't we have imaginary cuts in Oct and Nov?) much less that the cut line would be $300k.

[/quote]

Getting a little to close for comfort, eh, stanley?  Don't worry, Jones is always hiring. 

[/quote]

If the cut line were $300k at Jones they'd have to close half their offices (tucked between the Subway sandwich shop and the dry cleaners) and their sales contest trips would be 1/2 empty. (of course that would open up a lot of bandwidth in their 1995 era technology)

You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.

[/quote]

He was involved in that mess?

[/quote]

Actually, mikebutler had a huge hand in his own outing. Looks to me like he's still playing the same hand.

[/quote]

LOL, do tell there BDG, let's here the deatils on that one.

[/quote]

Er, allow me to translate to English  *

"LOL, do tell there, BDG, let's hear the details on that one

* a one time offer, I expect to due a batter jobe profreeding nect tame.

[quote=mikebutler222]You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.[/quote]

What hand?  We all know who outed you - the topgun guy - you said so yourself in the "Me" thread.  So why are you trying to blame me now?

As for the "touchdown" bonds, unfortunately we don't have those (or "touchdown" annuities, for that matter).

[quote=jonesnewbie]

[quote=mikebutler222]You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.[/quote]

What hand?  We all know who outed you - the topgun guy - you said so yourself in the "Me" thread.  So why are you trying to blame me now?

[/quote]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[quote=jonesnewbie]

As for the "touchdown" bonds, unfortunately we don't have those (or "touchdown" annuities, for that matter).

[/quote]

You mean you don't have them NOW, as in you don't have sales contest trips NOW, you have "diversity trips", right?

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie]

[quote=mikebutler222]You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.[/quote]

What hand?  We all know who outed you - the topgun guy - you said so yourself in the "Me" thread.  So why are you trying to blame me now?

[/quote]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[quote=jonesnewbie]

As for the "touchdown" bonds, unfortunately we don't have those (or "touchdown" annuities, for that matter).

[/quote]

You mean you don't have them NOW, as in you don't have sales contest trips NOW, you have "diversity trips", right?

[/quote]

Mike,

What about you? What part did YOU play?

[quote=mikebutler222]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[/quote]

I may have noticed that mikebutler was just the old gasbag stanley in a new wig and glasses, but that's a far cry from giving out your real name and information.

And as for your checkered empolyment record, reread the thread, I wasn't the one saying anything about that. 

[quote=Dirk Diggler][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie]

[quote=mikebutler222]You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.[/quote]

What hand?  We all know who outed you - the topgun guy - you said so yourself in the "Me" thread.  So why are you trying to blame me now?

[/quote]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[quote=jonesnewbie]

As for the "touchdown" bonds, unfortunately we don't have those (or "touchdown" annuities, for that matter).

[/quote]

You mean you don't have them NOW, as in you don't have sales contest trips NOW, you have "diversity trips", right?

[/quote]

Mike,

What about you? What part did YOU play?

[/quote]

None, BDG. You've already asserted this and I asked you to back it up. Here's your second chance.....

[quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[/quote]

I may have noticed that mikebutler was just the old gasbag stanley in a new wig and glasses, but that's a far cry from giving out your real name and information.

And as for your checkered empolyment record, reread the thread, I wasn't the one saying anything about that. 

[/quote]

Gee, and here I was about to say "If I've misunderstood you..." but that "checkered" comment made it clear I don't have to. There's nothing "checkered" about it, I've succeeded everywhere I've ever been, every change I've ever made as been of my own choosing and just as importantly, I've never worked t Jones 

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[/quote]

I may have noticed that mikebutler was just the old gasbag stanley in a new wig and glasses, but that's a far cry from giving out your real name and information.

And as for your checkered empolyment record, reread the thread, I wasn't the one saying anything about that. 

[/quote]

Gee, and here I was about to say "If I've misunderstood you..." but that "checkered" comment made it clear I don't have to. There's nothing "checkered" about it, I've succeeded everywhere I've ever been, every change I've ever made as been of my own choosing and just as importantly, I've never worked t Jones 

[/quote]

I don't care what everybody says, Mike. Seven jobs in the last 10 years, with 3 lasting less than a year, and 2 lasting less than 2 years is NOT checkered.

Obviously, you were quite successful at each.

[quote=Dirk Diggler][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie][quote=mikebutler222]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[/quote]

I may have noticed that mikebutler was just the old gasbag stanley in a new wig and glasses, but that's a far cry from giving out your real name and information.

And as for your checkered empolyment record, reread the thread, I wasn't the one saying anything about that. 

[/quote]

Gee, and here I was about to say "If I've misunderstood you..." but that "checkered" comment made it clear I don't have to. There's nothing "checkered" about it, I've succeeded everywhere I've ever been, every change I've ever made as been of my own choosing and just as importantly, I've never worked t Jones 

[/quote]

I don't care what everybody says, Mike. Seven jobs in the last 10 years, with 3 lasting less than a year, and 2 lasting less than 2 years is NOT checkered.

Obviously, you were quite successful at each.

[/quote]

Obviously I was, (spotless U-4, U-5 and more recruiter calls than I care to take) and just as obviously you're still hiding your CRD. Perhaps if you'd like to continue this, you'll quit hiding behind that skirt.

BTW, it’s seven in 15 years, two lasting just under a year.

[quote=Dirk Diggler][quote=mikebutler222][quote=jonesnewbie]

[quote=mikebutler222]You know, the talk here is friendly and in jest, but given your hand in the outting, I don't have much time for you, little 'fella. Perhaps you'll prove yourself to be a man and "out" yourself as you enjoyed doing so to me. Until then, go back to "door walking" and jamming little old ladies into "touchdown" bonds, “newbie“.[/quote]

What hand?  We all know who outed you - the topgun guy - you said so yourself in the "Me" thread.  So why are you trying to blame me now?

[/quote]

You had a part in it, as the now deleted thread showed. As I recall you were the first to raise the issue, and here you are playing on the "moving thing" again...

[quote=jonesnewbie]

As for the "touchdown" bonds, unfortunately we don't have those (or "touchdown" annuities, for that matter).

[/quote]

You mean you don't have them NOW, as in you don't have sales contest trips NOW, you have "diversity trips", right?

[/quote]

Mike,

What about you? What part did YOU play?

[/quote]

Still waiting for your answer on this one, big boy. BTW, what's that CRD number and if I do a check of insurance agents will I find you haven't had a license for better than a year? Just curious....