Valuable Players(NOT)
177 RepliesJump to last post
I just got done looking at an article in a trade magazine. They put the numbers up on 50 of what they consider valuable players in our profession. Several of them caught my attention but one really stood out.
Production 2004 $1.7 million
Projected Production 2005 $1.4 million
AUM $ 23 million
Clients (Victims) 153
Product mix 95% annuities 4% securities 1% mutual funds!
Can you believe this clown
But yet our profession looks upon this guy as a Valuable player
Not to stereo type but this guy is in a Bank and his BD is ING!
Either you are jealous or annuities are too complex for you to understand or BOTH.
Metell— Youre joking right??? 95% of this guy’s recommendatuions are ANNUITIES? C,mon I used to sell VA’s, back when we slung 403B VA’s to everyone… Still then, VA’s comprised about 60% of my business, the rest were wrap accounts, brokerage, funds, etc… This guy is clearly putting everyone in annuitites- that’s a f$cking joke…
Can you imagine the conversation at his/her office?
Prospective Client: What kind of investments do you offer?
Broker: Any kind you want as long as it's an annuity.
Geez, the gross is nice, but the AUM of $23 mil, is that a misprint.
To clarify, I understand that 95% of his production is from annuities, and that they payout higher, but to have 95% of your revenenue and prod. come from that product is a SHAM…
I forsee this joker's commissions continuing to slide due to all the time he's going to be spending in arbitration. At 95% annuities, I think there's a strong likelihood of some unsuitable investments.
This dude's tagline ought to be "One investment fits all!"
[quote=blarmston]Metell--- Youre joking right??? 95% of this guy's recommendatuions are ANNUITIES? C,mon I used to sell VA's, back when we slung 403B VA's to everyone.. Still then, VA's comprised about 60% of my business, the rest were wrap accounts, brokerage, funds, etc.... This guy is clearly putting everyone in annuitites- that's a f$cking joke...[/quote]
Nope. Not kidding.
Some folks on here have their businesses structured similarly.
95% fee based
95% stocks
95% mutual funds
95% whatever
There are numerous VAs with numerous benefits, features, and riders. Similarly there are numerous mutual funds, fee based & wrap accounts, and stocks. Just because somebody chooses to specialize in a product that you clearly don't understand is no reason to assume that they are doing something illegal, immoral, or inappropriate.
What? The doctor that only does brain surgery isn't as good as a family practioner? Something must be wrong...right? Sue him for malpractice.
What? The truck driver that only drives a dedicated route from Atlanta to Miami isn't as good as the guy that takes any regional run? Revoke his driver's license.
You dumbasses don't know how the rep prospects, who his clients are, and how he weeds them out. You ever think that he might prospect for a specific client that suits his product instead of shoe horning everybody into the same product? Nope...you just don't think.
Menotellname,
I think you are the dumbass. Who do you work for? Most companies would fire a fa for a velocity of almost 6%. Do the math.
Sincerely,
Help
P.S. Go for an interview at any ethical company and tell them that you do 1.7 million on 24 million in assets. They will not hire you. Too much risk.
[quote=Help]
Menotellname,
I think you are the dumbass. Who do you work for? Most companies would fire a fa for a velocity of almost 6%. Do the math.
Sincerely,
Help
P.S. Go for an interview at any ethical company and tell them that you do 1.7 million on 24 million in assets. They will not hire you. Too much risk.
[/quote]
Nobody would get fired for a "velocity" of 6% if they are writing primarily annuities. Get you equity influenced mindset out of your ass.
P.S. - I work for one of the 10 largest financial companies in the United States. Thank you very much.
I am not indy either.
Anyway...
How is a VA that has an M&E of 1.19% to 2% (depending on riders and surrender period) any different than a fee based account?
Both are risk management tools. Both offer active management. Both charge fees. Both offer diversification.
Are you trying to imply that you can't get diversification from 50 mutual fund sub accounts in a VA? Do you have your current clients invested in over 50 different mutual funds?
No, but I sure as heck have more than 50 choices...and I'll run rings around your 50 subaccounts any day of the week.
Why don't you quit being so coy and just spill the identity of your employer? I'm not ashamed to tell you that I'm an independent affiliated with LPL...now your turn.
Indyone,
You have great confidence in your abilities. I don't doubt your claim but I doubt your abilities.
LPL is a fine company. I am sure they appreciate all of your hard work.
When comparing maximization of returns or preservation of capital most people find the latter to be more important. If your running rings around anyone your portfolio simply has more risk. Show me any portfolios returns on a risk adjusted basis and if you have a higher return it's likely you have more risk.
My clients care about meeting their goals. What is the best vehicle to help them meet their goals, depends on the client. Va's are not good or bad just another option.
Maybe the guy is INDY....
So when his customers got wacked in 1999 and 2000 he can tell them 7% for next 10 years. Simple and sounds good. Of course there are fees, but baby boomers want security.
The ING product looks pretty good to me. Reguardless 95% is interesting, but maybe his population is all retired school teachers or military officers. Maybe he focuses on Anuities and tells them to put other assets with other brokers?
VA’s are pretty darn good solutions with guaranteed income stream and principal protection vs. managed money. If I were not limited as to my usage of VA’s I would use them more. Hands down.