Edward Jones Experience
79 RepliesJump to last post
If going Independent is how you "step up your game" why do you suppose that the big hitters at the wirehouses don't know that and just stay and stay and stay?
The reality is that the independent channel is a way for mediocrity to goose up its share of the revenue stream. You get to keep more of your gross revenue.
In return you give up the support of a wirehouse, the name recognition, access to IPOs, access to home office experts, very pleasant and upscale surroundings and something that you don't understand until it's gone--you give up the camaraderie of being part of a larger organization. The guys and gals down at the office.
Virtually no stars from the wirehouses leave, and most that do come back.
It is true that a lot of guys leave, and the wires hate to see a few of them go--but most are not really missed because they were not contributing that much to the bottom line.
A question for the forum--other than Joe, have any of you been at one of these firms? AG Edwards, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Smith Barney, Wachovia
NASD, you are correct. I do believe that most people who make changes aren't very successful.
When one is successful, the environment often gets part of the credit. Therefore, top producers tend not to leave.
Just like top wirehouse producers don't leave, I don't see any top LPL brokers giving up their 98% payouts to go to a wirehouse, nor do I see big insurance company producers making changes.
Quite simply, yes. BTW, it's way overrated. Besides what Newbie mentioned, you also get greedy and jealous co-workers--the kind that'll stab you in the back in a heartbeat if it contributes to their agenda. You also get the benefit of becoming a dot on someone's screen. A dot that performs or doesn't perform, kind of like a cog in a wheel. You're never really a name, face, or individual, just a dot that moves up or down. Month to month, quarter to quarter, year to year. And last but not least, and best of all, you get to answer to an empty suit of a manager who might on his best day have half the talent that you have.
If he knew so much and was such an excellent producer in his day, then he would have stayed in production. Oh, and then I almost forgot my favorite part of the guys and gals at the office. The guys and gals who happen to be sons and daughters of former successful brokers. They couldn't carry your jock or anyone else's who is worth a sh*t, but think they are royalty. It's bad enough to put up with the idiots who think that they somehow "navigated" their way through the 90s. It's even worse to put up with their sense of entitlement children who think the world is owed to them because they have a B.S. in marketing.
Men and women leave production for the management track because they are intelligent and realize that there is more to life than gathering assets for a lifetime.
Pissant lower level producers, on the other hand, are convinced that they are stuck in the lower half because others are out to get them.
So they leave. Who cares.
Is getting 95% of $200,000 as good as getting 45% of $750,000?
There are interesting stats that are never released--such as the top 100 producers in the entire country, regardless of who their broker/dealer is.
If there was a million dollar prize for guessing how many of them worked at wirehouses, instead of banks or the indy channel, I'd guess 98 of them.
The top indy producers would be middle-of-the-packers among the wirehouse brokers.
Putsy, it's evident to all, if not to you, that you were someone's idiot kid who wanted to play at stockbroker. Presumably your attitude cost the firm business, so they 'promoted' you to management.
Look at the jobs they gave you to do, for goodness sake. 'Committee work', seeing how tough the various NASD exams were and testing training programs, keeping statistics on anything and everything. Useless nonsense, for a useless employee. If it helps you to believe that your work life had meaning, so be it. But don't kid yourself...everyone on these boards knows you for what you are.
Small wonder Purcell cashiered your worthless ass.
[quote=NASD Newbie]
Pissant lower level producers, on the other hand, are convinced that they are stuck in the lower half because others are out to get them.
[/quote]
This pissant always has made more coin than the empty suit "supervising" him. I just got really tired of splitting my paycheck with said dumbsh*t.
I have no ill will towards Indy's, nor wirehouse advisors. Whatever is best for each individual.
That said, I have to say that so many of the comments that come from Indy's on this board just reek of bitterness. You don't see many wirehouse advisors bashing Indy's.
I could care less what the "suits" make. I concentrate on my own practice. That's all that matters, as far as I'm concerned. Whether the suits make a dollar or a million, it's not going to affect my compensation. Quit the freakin' bashing and focus on ideas that all of us (as financial advisors) can benefit from.
I’ve spoken to many top wirehouse producers and asked them the question, why not go indy? By their comments they all just basically did not have the balls to do it. Plain and simple.
"Is getting 95% of $200,000 as good as getting 45% of $750,000?"
What a great example! We'll just assume that if someone goes independent, their production will drop 73%.
[quote=brothaK]I've spoken to many top wirehouse producers and asked them the question, why not go indy? By their comments they all just basically did not have the balls to do it. Plain and simple. [/quote]
Where did you find these "many top wirehouse producers?" What do you consider to be a top producer?
The reason they don't do it is because they know that in order to duplicate their day-to-day working experience. If you're sitting in the corner office, with a view of the Hudson, two or three sales assistants hovering about, while planning what to wear on the awards trip to Venice in a couple of weeks you realize that your world is better than your buddy who is sitting in his spartan office, with his part time Mrs. Wiggins coming in to catch up on his correspondence.
It doesn't make sense to conclude that only those who are on the verge of washing out have "the balls" to abandon one of the best careers in the world.
It's like saying a senior partner in a law firm would be smart to walk away and open is own one-man shop and hope to find some business by listening to a police scanner talking about automobile accidents nearby.
NASD–perhaps in the old days (ie yours), the above was true. News
flash–the world changes over time. I think now you’d find some people
that were/are on their way to the big hitter status setting up their own
shop. Obviously some of the perks of a major firm will keep many
around, but technology and many other factors (including real or
perceived “freedom”) make it worthwhile to move for some.
Your point about a bigger piece of a much smaller pie obviously has some
merit–but the people you’re talking about can’t or won’t get to $750k, as
you argue. There’s probably some point, perhaps $400k, where many
fewer people will leave for the indy world. But some future $1m
producers definitely leave early in their ascent…now, they may not get
there as fast as indy because of the disruption to the biz. If you don’t
care about your company’s name, getting 65% of 700k is better than
getting 45% of $1m…and you can afford your own trips to Venice, etc.
As with anything the 80/20 rule is probably applicable here: 80% of guys
that go indy from wires may fit NASD’s idea of them, but the other 20%
are legitimately successful at wires and make up 80% of the production of
those that leave for indy. I honestly don’t understand why a long time
wire guy with good relationships doing only $300k doesn’t go indy–can
probably easily increase his income by 40-50%. Must be they get a hard
on about saying the name of their firm, much like NASD.
PS NASD–your lawfirm comment doesn’t quite make sense. Instead,
think of attorneys, CPAs, doctors, etc–how many work for a firm with a
nationally known name (like Merrill Lynch known?). They don’t–they are
independent and own the place (hence the term “partner”).
NASD please stop posting, your f**king up the whole forum. You remind me of an Islamic Extremist who doesn’t want to accept reality.
[quote=Cowboy93]NASD--perhaps in the old days (ie yours), the above was true. News
flash--the world changes over time. I think now you'd find some people
that were/are on their way to the big hitter status setting up their own
shop. Obviously some of the perks of a major firm will keep many
around, but technology and many other factors (including real or
perceived "freedom") make it worthwhile to move for some.
Your point about a bigger piece of a much smaller pie obviously has some
merit--but the people you're talking about can't or won't get to $750k, as
you argue. There's probably some point, perhaps $400k, where many
fewer people will leave for the indy world. But some future $1m
producers definitely leave early in their ascent...now, they may not get
there as fast as indy because of the disruption to the biz. If you don't
care about your company's name, getting 65% of 700k is better than
getting 45% of $1m...and you can afford your own trips to Venice, etc.
As with anything the 80/20 rule is probably applicable here: 80% of guys
that go indy from wires may fit NASD's idea of them, but the other 20%
are legitimately successful at wires and make up 80% of the production of
those that leave for indy. I honestly don't understand why a long time
wire guy with good relationships doing only $300k doesn't go indy--can
probably easily increase his income by 40-50%. Must be they get a hard
on about saying the name of their firm, much like NASD.
PS NASD--your lawfirm comment doesn't quite make sense. Instead,
think of attorneys, CPAs, doctors, etc--how many work for a firm with a
nationally known name (like Merrill Lynch known?). They don't--they are
independent and own the place (hence the term "partner").[/quote]
I disagree--I am telling you that when wirehouse brokers leave it is when they've hit a plateau and they're unable to kick it up another notch.
So they go--and so does a lot of their book. A few are missed because they were good guys--most are not missed at all. Their desk is filled by somebody else, and a newbie is hired. Life goes on.
Would some of those guys eventuallly kicked it up another notch--the future million dollar hitter that Cowboy is talking about? Who knows? My conclusion that they would not have is based on more first hand knowledge than his opinion which is nothing more than that.
It seems as if only two of the people who are on this forum left a wire for LPL--Joeboy and Starka/Philo who are the same person.
Joeboy admits he was no million dollar producer--and Starka lies at every opportunity so nothing he says can be believed.
I'd be interested in knowing a bit about the top five producers at LPL--where they came from and stuff like that. I'll bet somebody can come up with who they are.
[quote=brothaK]NASD please stop posting, your f**king up the whole forum. You remind me of an Islamic Extremist who doesn't want to accept reality. [/quote]
What is reality? I was working at a major wirehouse about three months ago--you haven't even been able to land a job offer.
Are you old enough to buy a case of beer?
I found an old Ledger areticle from last October. The top 10 producers for that month were Ron Carson, Robert Fragasso, Susan Kaplan, Garrett Ahrens, Todd Feltz, John Waldron, Kerrick Bubb, Cleves Delp, H. Michael Gilbert, and David Latko. Other than knowing that Carson is generally #1, I have no idea how these people stack up over a year's time. I don't know all their histories, so I'll leave that part to someone else.