Umm…why would we do that?  If you aren’t a Jones guy, why would we give up proprietary info just so you can try to steal a good account from another Jones guy? 

Well, actually the fee structure should not be discrete.  It should be disclosed in the form ADV part II filed with the SEC.  I could inquire to receive it, but was hoping that someone with insight could provide it.  Thanks anyway.

OK, fair enough.  How big is the account you are looking at? Also, is it an equity only, fixed only, or mixed portfolio?  Do you know if they are receiving a discount or not?  Give me that info and I can get you in the ballpark.  

It is a DB plan, roughly 2 million.  It has underperformed the blended benchmark, and that is the reason they have issued an RFP.  I would just find another asset manager of equal or lesser price.  Fees are a deciding factor for them.

Forget to mention… it is a mixed portfolio of 80% equity and 20% FI.  I did not inquire if any discounts were received.  Thanks so much for your help.

Hey I’ve got an 80/20 total cost of 1.4% that has shreaded the benchmark.  PM the clients name and I will call them.

I heard that for the first two years clients wouldnt have to pay a fee because Edward Jones feels that the clients shouldn't have to pay a fee if they are selling mutual funds or other products held within an Edward Jones account. "Because the client has already paid fee's."

[quote=StlPlanner]It is a DB plan, roughly 2 million.  It has underperformed the blended benchmark, and that is the reason they have issued an RFP.  I would just find another asset manager of equal or lesser price.  Fees are a deciding factor for them.[/quote]
First, your comment about the fee structure being disclosed on their ADV is not necessarily the same as saying that this information will tell you the specific fee this particular client is paying, as most (not all, but most) ADVs will state their fee structure and also state that fees can be negotiated. 

Be that as it may, and regardless of what someone with the prospect company may have told you, I’d caution you about fixating too much on the fees.  Of course they will tell you that fees are very important, but that is often another way of saying, “we’re not happy now and fees are the pretty much the only thing I can clearly see and understand other than performance numbers.”  It’s up to you to tactfully guide them to the realization that, of course, fees are important, but not the most important thing. 

Clearly fees have to be competitive, but it’s up to you to also lead them to understand that it is not ONLY about fees.  Cite any endless stream of examples about cases in everyone’s everyday lives where we all choose to purchase things that are NOT necessarily the lowest cost alternative.  For example, if their employer could find someone to do THEIR jobs for less, does that necessarily mean that is the wisest thing to do - or is their more to the equation than simply cost?  Does experience and competence matter, or not?

The truth is you often get what you pay for.  If someone charges next to nothing to manage your money, maybe there is a reason they can’t compete when charging market rates.

If you don’t do this, two things will happen:  (1) you’ll have to be the lowest cost alternative to “win” the business, which will probably not leave you much profit in the deal; and (2) you’ll eventually be replaced by someone willing to charge less, since it’s always only been about fees. 

Good luck.