Take your AGE blankies to bed-or leave

Isn’t it Wells Fargo Advisors?

i don’t think you have to worry about that you and the other 5 guys that are staying will be left alone soon lol

[quote=JayMc]       Leave Wachovia Securties or STFU





        Im so sick of your whining



           

               Pussies.          







[/quote]



This coming from the pansy that wrote poems when the market was falling. It is amazing how tough you got once it bounced.

[quote=JayMc]       Leave Wachovia Securties or STFU


        Im so sick of your whining

           
               Pussies.          



[/quote]

This coming from the pansy that wrote poems when the market was falling. It is amazing how tough you got once it bounced.

I will bitch all I want, but thanks for your opinion anyway.  If you knew what AGE was like before WS destroyed it, you would express an opinion also.  Whether I choose to stay or go does not limit my right to share my disdain.  Not all of us Jay are self proclaimed sell outs or whores.

Nicely said Sam Houston

I will bitch all I want, but thanks for your opinion anyway. If you knew what AGE was like before WS destroyed it, you would express an opinion also. Whether I choose to stay or go does not limit my right to share my disdain. Not all of us Jay are self proclaimed sell outs or whores.

Oh no!  I have been called a name by an interweb hero that couldn’t pass a 2nd grade grammar test.  I may have to rethink my life now.

[quote=Sam Houston] I will bitch all I want, but thanks for your opinion anyway. If you knew what AGE was like before WS destroyed it, you would express an opinion also. Whether I choose to stay or go does not limit my right to share my disdain. Not all of us Jay are self proclaimed sell outs or whores.

age was a foolish acquisition that killed the best firm on the street.  why don’t you all just leave already?

[quote=go_huskies]age was a foolish acquisition that killed the best firm on the street.  why don’t you all just leave already?

bagby sold age after he inflated the productivity of the age brokers. he pulled the wool over dl’s eyes, and laughed all the way to the bank.

Please tell me what has changed for the worse since the AGE merger for the WS guys.  Bagby did not inflate the production #'s, they were posted for all to see monthly.  WS always talked about revenue per broker, not production.  With all the fees, exceptions to the grid, and additional haircuts, I can see how the revenue per broker was much higher.

the back office completely collapsed once it moved/combined with age in st louis.  the richmond crew was a bit slow, but the st louis operation is staffed by short bus drop outs.

Thanks to AGE…WS is running the show.  We had competant people in the home office, but they all got moved to a different department where they had no idea what was going on.  This firm has been destroyed by the 14 layers of upper management of WS. 

[quote=go_huskies]

So both sides agree. Wachovia Securities, in its present form sucks.

[quote=go_huskies]bagby sold age after he inflated the productivity of the age brokers. he pulled the wool over dl’s eyes, and laughed all the way to the bank.

Morgan Stanley should scrap $3 billion bonuses: senator





Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:01am EDT Email | Print | Share | Reprints | Single Page [-] Text [+]

By Jonathan Stempel



NEW YORK (Reuters) - Morgan Stanley (MS.N) should be barred from paying as much as $3 billion to entice brokers to stay when the company and Citigroup Inc (C.N) merge their brokerage operations, U.S. Senator Robert Menendez said.



In a Tuesday letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, urged the government to use “every legal means available” to stop the payouts as long as Morgan Stanley receives support from taxpayers.



“These payouts constitute misuse of taxpayer money,” Menendez wrote. "Some on Wall Street don’t understand that they, more than anyone, cannot be permitted to carry on with business as usual. These times demand shared sacrifice."



The senator said the payouts, like bonuses paid at troubled insurer American International Group Inc (AIG.N), are “essentially the same form of extra compensation” and are "not fully necessary to retain executives in this tough financial market."



Morgan Stanley has taken $10 billion and Citigroup $45 billion from the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).



Christy Pollak, a Morgan Stanley spokeswoman, said each award is “not a bonus,” but is a nine-year “forgivable loan” that must be paid back if a broker leaves sooner.



“The program is necessary because our financial advisers are being poached by competitors,” Pollak said. The cost is covered by operating revenue of the joint venture and not government TARP money."



About 6,500 of the venture’s 20,000 brokers are expected to be eligible for awards, which would be made in 2010 and 2012.



Retention awards are paid to keep brokers from defecting after a company is bought. Financial companies getting taxpayer money are facing heavy pressure from Congress and regulators to limit pay.



“If you want this venture to succeed, then this type of award is necessary,” said Danny Sarch, founder of recruiting firm Leitner Sarch Consultants Ltd in White Plains, New York. "If the awards are cut back, they will have dramatically more attrition than they would otherwise. The rest of the industry would have a field day in recruiting."



Under the payout plan, brokers who generate at least $1.75 million in revenue a year may get awards equal to 105 percent of their annual production, a person familiar with the plan said last month. The person was not authorized to publicly discuss details of the plan.



Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N), which bought Wachovia Corp at the end of 2008, said last month it will not issue retention awards to about 14,600 brokers from Wachovia’s brokerage arm, Wachovia Securities.



Morgan Stanley is paying Citigroup $2.7 billion for an initial 51 percent stake in their venture, and may take full control after five years. A closing is expected this summer.



A Treasury Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment.



(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel, editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Jeffrey Benkoe)





wow.     anyone thinking about taking a check should probably jump.   we are under siege.   wont be any deal excpet with commies (ubs)



i guess this crap will make d*** head Stumhp and MF WFC look smart

the firm indeed is terrible in it’s current form.  it was much, much better before the age acquisition. 

[quote=go_huskies]the firm indeed is terrible in it’s current form.  it was much, much better before the age acquisition. 

then leave sam houston

You first.

[quote=go_huskies]the firm indeed is terrible in it’s current form.  it was much, much better before the age acquisition. 

Fifteen of us in our old legacy AGE office left and it was the best move ever for my group. Everyone scattered to SF, Hilliard Lyons and RJ.  We all gave WS the benefit of the doubt at first but their talk became empty promises.  WS had good intentions but it was evident they only knew how to grow through acquisitions and not much organically.  So much for the “melding” of the best of both firms and making a new and much better firm. Just sound bites.  It’s a shame, it really could have been a great firm.  Good idea, horibble execution. 

As an outsider (I never worked for Wachovia or AG Edwards) I will say that what AG Edwards once had was special and it seems to be lost.  I help build our company, which is an independent, and I gave up calling on AG Edwards reps because they were happy and rarely saw a need to change.  They were not getting screwed the way Merrill producers doing under $400 a year are, being thrown in the penalty box and the branch managers seemed to provide a certain level of independence to the producers.  Their payouts were better than most firms and the employee satisfaction was much higher.  I think AG Edwards would have exploded in size in this current environment if they had not merged with Wachovia. 

I havent logged on this board in years. Back then - its was to EDJ vent. They look great compared to the cluster f*&^ ag legacy is going thru. Here’s what they did today. They sent client out statements showing the WFC convertion statements first. Then - midmonth a couple days later they sent the old AGE statements (On Wach letterhead) showing all zero balances on all the accounts. It actually showed the funds leaving from the AGE/Wach conversion. But bottom line what the clients are holding in their hand is a statement showing all values at zero.

[quote=uptick2]I havent logged on this board in years. Back then - its was to EDJ vent. They look great compared to the cluster f*&^ ag legacy is going thru. Here’s what they did today. They sent client out statements showing the WFC convertion statements first. Then - midmonth a couple days later they sent the old AGE statements (On Wach letterhead) showing all zero balances on all the accounts. It actually showed the funds leaving from the AGE/Wach conversion. But bottom line what the clients are holding in their hand is a statement showing all values at zero.

Is being paid an upfront to move also considered a bonus? They mention retention and bonus but I havent heard about upfront? 

[quote=uptick2]I havent logged on this board in years. Back then - its was to EDJ vent. They look great compared to the cluster f*&^ ag legacy is going thru. Here’s what they did today. They sent client out statements showing the WFC convertion statements first. Then - midmonth a couple days later they sent the old AGE statements (On Wach letterhead) showing all zero balances on all the accounts. It actually showed the funds leaving from the AGE/Wach conversion. But bottom line what the clients are holding in their hand is a statement showing all values at zero.

[quote=Sam Houston]Oh no!  I have been called a name by an interweb hero that couldn’t pass a 2nd grade grammar test.  I may have to rethink my life now.[/quote]

simply one of the best posts i’ve read to date in these forums

[quote=kermit]

[quote=Sam Houston]Oh no!  I have been called a name by an interweb hero that couldn’t pass a 2nd grade grammar test.  I may have to rethink my life now.[/quote]

simply one of the best posts i’ve read to date in these forums
[/quote]

Except for the fact that they don’t have grammar tests in second grade.

Hanging out with second graders Bobby?

[quote=nestegg]

[quote=uptick2]I havent logged on this board in years. Back then - its was to EDJ vent. They look great compared to the cluster f*&^ ag legacy is going thru. Here’s what they did today. They sent client out statements showing the WFC convertion statements first. Then - midmonth a couple days later they sent the old AGE statements (On Wach letterhead) showing all zero balances on all the accounts. It actually showed the funds leaving from the AGE/Wach conversion. But bottom line what the clients are holding in their hand is a statement showing all values at zero.

And if you had bothered to read any of the information in the Pieces of the Pie that has been coming your way since, oh, OCTOBER, you (and your clients) would have been well prepared for the 2 statement eventuality. Quit whining, quit bitching, and get on with it. If you’re so miserable, then leave. Otherwise, DEAL WITH IT! The information was out there, you could have sent your clients a letter in early FEBRUARY, from YOU, that told them what was coming (aside from the five notifications they received without your involvement). A little personal responsibility is a good thing.

It would have been fine if they got two statements but at least 100 plus of my clients just got the one that said 0 and the activity section says transferred out, that’s the issue, not just two statements.

[quote=Redpen]It would have been fine if they got two statements but at least 100 plus of my clients just got the one that said 0 and the activity section says transferred out, that’s the issue, not just two statements.[/quote]

Well the Wachovia ones were sent a week before the AGE one. So i guess the USPS must have eaten them Or maybe your clients didn’t know what they got.

[quote=Redpen]It would have been fine if they got two statements but at least 100 plus of my clients just got the one that said 0 and the activity section says transferred out, that’s the issue, not just two statements.[/quote]

Well the Wachovia ones were sent a week before the AGE one. So i guess the USPS must have eaten them Or maybe your clients didn’t know what they got.

Isn’t it Wells Fargo Advisors?