What Leads? 

In my region, BofA is trying out FSA positions which are supposed to act as a buffer between the bank and ML.  But the system is flawed.  Tellers have no incentive to refer a possible brokerage customer to an FSA.  I know a couple of FSAs who have had to bribe the tellers into referring clients, simply put the tellers are lazy and do not reap any benefits from referring.  On the rare occasion a referral is made, the FSA profiles them while not being able to give any specific advice.  The most likely scenario for these "referrals" is that these people are #1 cheap, #2 dumb, #3 not brokerage-type clients, #4 and seek FDIC insurance which in any case they are given back to the banking side for CDs which are paying as much as my grandma throwing her money under the bed.  I have yet to hear of one lead making it to my branch, and I know one guy in our region who has received a qualified lead turn into anything ($125k Roth IRA).

The HUGE benefit to BAC is ML FA's selling BAC banking products.  Look at it this way....BAC bought MER really cheap.  They will see natural market appreciation of the investment because the market came back for everyone.  On top of that, they are doing things to become leaner and make the unit look more profitable.  On top of THAT, I think they will turn around and sell MER within 5-7 years.  They will either be taken private or be sold elsewhere (but not to another bank).  So not only will BAC get a huge asking price for MER, but even after they are gone, ALL OF THOSE MER CLIENTS THAT GOT SOLD BAC BANKING PRODUCTS WILL STILL OWN THOSE BAC BANKING PRODUCTS.  They win on so many levels.

As soon as news of BofA buying ML was known, I completely though they would hold on to ML for a few years (4-5) and then turn around and sell it for a hefty profit.  But as time and the business processes have progressed, I'm not so sure anymore. 

BofA has completely gotten rid of their BAI unit and rebranded it under ML.  If their long-term plans were to spin ML off or sell it outright, it seems that they would have kept a semblance of a brokerage.  I know they still have US Trust and what not but by building the ML brand up and creating very "sticky" clients it seems to make more sense that this marriage will last longer. 

FAs are increasingly growing entangled in BofA as are the clients.  As for this forum topic, the real leads, as B24 said, are ML clients buying more banking products.  ML has created a lucrative business for the bank and I'm not so sure that they would be willing to part with a brokerage completely.  What would they do to replace that line of business?

[quote=BullRunt]

As soon as news of BofA buying ML was known, I completely though they would hold on to ML for a few years (4-5) and then turn around and sell it for a hefty profit.  But as time and the business processes have progressed, I'm not so sure anymore. 

BofA has completely gotten rid of their BAI unit and rebranded it under ML.  If their long-term plans were to spin ML off or sell it outright, it seems that they would have kept a semblance of a brokerage.  I know they still have US Trust and what not but by building the ML brand up and creating very "sticky" clients it seems to make more sense that this marriage will last longer. 

I agree with you.  I don't think they will sell unless the idea of breaking up the big banks gains momentum and they are basically forced to.

FAs are increasingly growing entangled in BofA as are the clients.  As for this forum topic, the real leads, as B24 said, are ML clients buying more banking products.  ML has created a lucrative business for the bank and I'm not so sure that they would be willing to part with a brokerage completely.  What would they do to replace that line of business?

[/quote]

What about the fact that the ML clients are going to get fed up dealing with BAC  products and poor service.

Stuck on hold on there  800#.. 

You have to admit BAC has the worst client service of any bank perhaps worse than  Wells Fargo.   

Honestly, my heart goes out to the ML guys....having lived through the rape and pillage of Smith Barney by the bumbling keystone corporate baffoons of Citi....i and everyother person can foresee the same thing happening to ML.....they will lose a lot of FA's and the ones left will hate them with a passion....really a pitiful painful way to have to live your live.....Only in hindsight do i tell you this...never again.  The masses should have left the day the sale was announced.  It is like watching the first five minutes of "Waterworld"....it does not get better from here.

Problem is, the folks that have stayed at Merrill Lynch that matter (the bigger producers), all too checks to stay.  By the time their indentured servitude expires, something else would have changed, and maybe they will be getting another fat check.  As one of my Merrill friends put it that keeps trying to recruit me (and I tell him I can't stand the thought of working for BAC, and would be too nervous about the next transaction), "well, if somethign else happens, we'll just get another fat check to do nothing".  He basically said they all think it's a big joke, and that they made millions (they are fairly big producing team) to basically do nothing more than hold some hands with clients.  Seven years ago (or whenever it was), they took big checks to come from Advest.  They lost hige on deferred comp during the meltdown, but they have made a lot in retention awards.

This is not meant to be bait and it really is a question not a condesceding remark but:

Why would anyone go to Merrill?  if you started there fine....but why would anyone that had other options do it?

Stupidity,