ok...just to clarify: i know there is no true fact. just think of this post like a poll. Stock brokers usually gets paid for any movement of securities/money (in or out) and FA's have a lot more to offer but usually dont charge commission that way (for example: selling insurance). Thats why I ask. Just asking for an opinion, no facts  

I understand what you are asking, but the line is so blurred anymore that you just cant differentiate. In my office there are three of us who are stock, bond, uit, mf, actively managed account guys and will sell only simple life insurance. Then there are two guys who are really into life insurance, whole, vul, high net worth stuff and then there is another guy who just does health care and di. We trade half deals back and forth, I will run a managed account as well as anyone, but know nothing about health insurance.

I dont know if this answers your questions other than to say that the terms stock broker and advisor are no longer mutually exclusive.

[quote=killerRep]

ok...just to clarify: i know there is no true fact. just think of this post like a poll. Stock brokers usually gets paid for any movement of securities/money (in or out) and FA's have a lot more to offer but usually dont charge commission that way (for example: selling insurance). Thats why I ask. Just asking for an opinion, no facts  

[/quote]

"just think of this post like a poll"......

moron!

Until you spend the time cold calling, you can’t meet with clients.  It’s like comparing apples to oranges.

I think it’s an Ed Jones IR. 

nah, I am not EDJ. Nor am I a moron (hey Joe, do you feel like your D*$k got bigger with that remark? I sure hope so little guy ). All im asking is what tastes sweeter to you guys. Do you prefer "oranges" or "Apples". A poll has no facts but a simple who likes what. Thats all.

PS: Im a rookie, I just want to see what you experience guys prefer thats all  

[quote=killerRep]

nah, I am not EDJ. Nor am I a moron (hey Joe, do you feel like your D*$k got bigger with that remark? I sure hope so little guy ). All im asking is what tastes sweeter to you guys. Do you prefer "oranges" or "Apples". A poll has no facts but a simple who likes what. Thats all.

[/quote]

Nope not really.  It's not especially impressive.  Bad draw in the gene pool I suppose.  Oh well....I'm way past measuring my self-worth based on that.

Clearly, though, in your little mind 'size matters'!

What are you going to try next?  "My dad can beat up your dad?"

I have to echo what giff said - the line is so blurred and I doubt there would be any type of evidence to prove one side or the other.  There's an "FA" I worked with that was a first-year producer doing $720k.  No inherited accounts, all derived from him pounding phones 12 hours a day for a year.  Now he sits back and works that book and meets with his clients regularly.  But, again, I don't think there is a clear-cut answer.  You have to start out by cold-calling to get anywhere in this business.  Financial Advisor and stock broker are simply titles and everyone is so diversified these days that it won't matter.

Broker,

What was his approach on the phone? 

Honestly, I couldn’t tell ya.  I only spoke to him once for 10 minutes and he had to go.  Every time I tried to follow up, he was on the phone!

I agree w/ Broker recruit.  Financial Advisor/Consultant/Planner, Wealth Manager, Investment Advisor/Consultant, Finacial Representative, Stock Broker, Registered Representative, Customer's Men are just titles with no clear distinction on real measurable differences.  There were "Stockbrokers" who practiced asset allocation, managed money, financial planning as well as the guys who hawked hot stocks, Limited Partnerships etc....  The titles have more to do with branding and marketing than anything else.  Currently the title "Stockbroker" supposedly invokes an attitude akin to car salesman in clients minds, so we are now "Financial Advisors".  Hell I know of a gal who was a CFP that was pitching hot dots in the late 90's and evaporated her book in the correction, so much for designations.  The old cliche' applies: you can't judge a book by it's cover.

In fact I've given thought to positioning myself as an old fashioned stockbroker, since it seems like almost every new entrant into this industry is a financial Advisor now, selling the same basic investment with the same exact "planning" focus.  I tend to think it's hard to differentiate yourself with that approach. 

Example - Smith Barney is changing theirs from Financial Consultants to Financial Advisors.  FA, FC, Broker, IR - BFD.

[quote=BrokerRecruit]Honestly, I couldn't tell ya.  I only spoke to him once for 10 minutes and he had to go.  Every time I tried to follow up, he was on the phone![/quote]

Well that tells you something right there! ;-)

Why is Smith Barney making such a worthless change, you'd think that confusing the clients would'nt be worth the effort.  I can understand the change to "financial consultant" from "broker" (although the true value is questionable), but from "consultant" to "advisor"?  Odd........

It’s a silly change.  Mostly it is to make the title consistent across the board.

KillerRep,

It's okay to be a rookie...but not to act like one (to clients, peers, or otherwise).

Clients don't want to perceive the one who is handling their money as "just learning the ropes," so for pete's sake, act like you have a clue, even if you don't.  That's how most people start in this business anyway.

"Fake it till you make it."  I'm in that middle stage...don't have to fake it, but haven't quite made it...at least to where I want to be.   

i really appreciate this guys. I was just curious about the major difference and the gross envolved in the difference. It may have sounded like a dumb question but I was seriously clueless on the major differences (if any). Anyway, thanks again