[quote=Grant]I have another question.  How much time is needed to study for the Series 63???  Being a person who just passed their series 7?[/quote]

One week.

Is taht if yoru like a supergenius, like those people who say they took the 7 after 4 days of studying or is it really not that bad?

[quote=Grant]Is taht if yoru like a supergenius, like those people who
say they took the 7 after 4 days of studying or is it really not that
bad?[/quote]



It really shouldn’t take you more than a few days to get ready to ace the Series 63.



You’ll find most of what it covers to be common sense if your moral compass points in the right direction.

Since you’re already in the habit of studying and test taking, I agree…one or two weeks after.  The quantity of material is substantially less.

[quote=Put Trader][quote=Grant]Is taht if yoru like a supergenius, like those people who
say they took the 7 after 4 days of studying or is it really not that
bad?[/quote]



It really shouldn’t take you more than a few days to get ready to ace the Series 63.



You’ll find most of what it covers to be common sense if your moral compass points in the right direction.

[/quote]



I should add that the NASD has been rewriting some of the Series 63
questions as they rework the Series 66 which encompasses much of the
same material.



My point is that as recently as a few months ago the training materials
were pretty much “right on” and the were a lot of verbatim questions
reflected in the stuff published by Dearborn, STC and the others.



These days it’s more critical that you not depend on rote memorizing
and instead think the facts through as to why they are what they are so
that you can actually understand the reason for the rule being tested.

Out of curiousity, why are you just taking the 63?  Why not take the 66 (63 & 65 combined)?  This assumes you ever want to be able to offer fee-based advisory accounts (thus the 65).  The 66 is just 35 more questions than the 63, while the 65 taken by itself is 130 questions.  So, with the 66 you knock out both areas in one blow.

[quote=Duke#1]Out of curiousity, why are you just taking the 63? 
Why not take the 66 (63 & 65 combined)?  This assumes you ever
want to be able to offer fee-based advisory accounts (thus the
65).  The 66 is just 35 more questions than the 63, while the 65
taken by itself is 130 questions.  So, with the 66 you knock out
both areas in one blow.[/quote]



There are firms out there that will not sponsor their people for the 65 or 66 because they do RIA type biz.



It’s never a good sign for the quality of your future, but that’s the way it is.

What about series 63…without 7? How long`? Series 63 being my first…how long??

[quote=mrsobama]What about series 63…without 7? How long`? Series 63 being my first…how long??[/quote]

And why would you take the 63 without having the 6 or 7, you can’t do anything with it?

[quote=ExPropTrader]

[quote=mrsobama]What about series 63…without 7? How long`? Series 63 being my first…how long??[/quote]And why would you take the 63 without having the 6 or 7, you can’t do anything with it?[/quote]



I am having problems getting a sponsor for series 7 so I thought if I did the 63 & then the 65 on my own it would show potential employers that I’m serious & they would hire me & sponsor for 7.



Think this might be a good idea?

[quote=mrsobama] [quote=ExPropTrader]

[quote=mrsobama]What about series 63…without 7? How long`? Series 63 being my first…how long??[/quote]And why would you take the 63 without having the 6 or 7, you can’t do anything with it?[/quote]



I am having problems getting a sponsor for series 7 so I thought if I did the 63 & then the 65 on my own it would show potential employers that I’m serious & they would hire me & sponsor for 7.



Think this might be a good idea? [/quote]

You could do it that way but it might be a better use of time to analyze WHY no one will sponsor you and fix that problem.

[quote=ExPropTrader]

[quote=mrsobama] [quote=ExPropTrader]

[quote=mrsobama]What about series 63…without 7? How long`? Series 63 being my first…how long??[/quote]And why would you take the 63 without having the 6 or 7, you can’t do anything with it?[/quote]



I am having problems getting a sponsor for series 7 so I thought if I did the 63 & then the 65 on my own it would show potential employers that I’m serious & they would hire me & sponsor for 7.



Think this might be a good idea? [/quote]You could do it that way but it might be a better use of time to analyze WHY no one will sponsor you and fix that problem.[/quote]



Good point … kinda hurts but true!

I have another question.  How much time is needed to study for the Series 63???  Being a person who just passed their series 7?

How long does it take to drink a case of beer?  That is good enough!

You’re not allowed to take the 63 before passing the 7.  It’s a prerequisite requirement.

[quote=Wildcat_02]You’re not allowed to take the 63 before passing the 7.  It’s a prerequisite requirement.[/quote]

I don’t think that’s correct at least according to FINRA.org.

http://www.finra.org/RegistrationQualifications/BrokerGuidanceResponsibility/Qualifications/p011051?ssSourceNodeId=759&ssSourceSiteId=5

The 66 requires you to pass the 7 before taking it but you don’t even need to be sponsored for the 63.

I could be wrong but that’s the info I came up with.

Any prop shop will sponser you for the Series 7. The 63 will take a cople days max. The current version of the 65 was made almost impossible to pass after the 66 was made available. You used to be able to take the 65 with no series 7 and was thought to be being abused by those who were not registered and only had insurance lisencing. The NASD in it’s infinite wisdom decided to bring out the 66 (a combination of the 63 & 65) and increase the 65 to a rideiculious lever of difficulty.

Any prop shop will sponser you for the Series 7. The 63 will take a cople days max. The current version of the 65 was made almost impossible to pass after the 66 was made available. You used to be able to take the 65 with no series 7 and was thought to be being abused by those who were not registered and only had insurance lisencing. The NASD in it’s infinite wisdom decided to bring out the 66 (a combination of the 63 & 65) and increase the 65 to a rideiculious lever of difficulty.

I took the 65 about 18 months ago. I already had 7 and a 63 and wanted to be able to go RIA if I so chose, and in doing so could allow my 7 to lapse.



I should add that while it certainly wasn’t a walk in the park, it wasn’t ridiculously difficult either. Perhaps it’s been changed in the meantime.