[quote=Starka]

[quote=Maxstud]EDJ bought a software bundle to improve our financial planning capabilities and we are being told to be able to access and use the complete package we have to be series 66 licensed.  If your not you can only access a portion of the software. [/quote]

That seems to be a bit of an overkill, don't you think?  You don't need a 66 to use the firm's planning software.  Jones could just as easily formed it's own RIA (if in fact it hasn't already), then made the brokers IARs.  QED, an no one needs to lose time in production for an unnecessary test.

That’s my point.  The explanation that makes the most sense is that they plan to roll out a fee based platform, and they want everyone up to speed license-wise.  Has St. Louis made the 66 a requirement for all brokers, whether you want it or not?  What are the ramifications for those who fail the test?

Well, this entire topic puzzles me, as an official statement was made

about a month ago that we’d be having a fee-based system some time in

the near future and that they’re currently “working out the kinks.”

(Finally…sigh)

[quote=Starka]

[quote=Maxstud]EDJ bought a software bundle to improve our financial planning capabilities and we are being told to be able to access and use the complete package we have to be series 66 licensed.  If your not you can only access a portion of the software. [/quote]

That seems to be a bit of an overkill, don't you think?  You don't need a 66 to use the firm's planning software.  Jones could just as easily formed it's own RIA (if in fact it hasn't already), then made the brokers IARs.  QED, an no one needs to lose time in production for an unnecessary test.

[/quote]

I believe you do need a series 66 to be an IAR.  In my firm we have software that is accessible to the brokers (registered representatives) and a more enhanced planning version that is accessed only if you are an IAR.  The main difference is the planning capabilities of the IAR side vs the investment product focus of the RR side.  

It all has to do with the Merrill rule.   It is very picky.  I just had a flyer I wanted to send out rejected because I use the terms Retirement Planning and Insurance Planning.   Have to change it to "Analysis"... sheesh.

Its very simple…IR’s in the field will be testing for the 66…all new hires will take 7 and then 66 from here on out.  We will have fee base choices and like annuities, we will charge a lower fee than the rest of you…and will exploit it to no end. As Weed dle said the demographics are changing and where the baby boomers were acumulating(trading)…they now will be protecting and getting distributions.  This will mean the money will become very stale and non moving…so we have to eat right…and walllaaa  fee base is okay.  You change with the times…and actually it sounds better than Merril or SBarney using it to smooth out their earnings for their shareholders.  We’re doing it because it is right for the client and we do everything for the client or my family…whichever comes first.

[quote=babbling looney][quote=Starka]

[quote=Maxstud]EDJ bought a software bundle to improve our financial planning capabilities and we are being told to be able to access and use the complete package we have to be series 66 licensed.  If your not you can only access a portion of the software. [/quote]

That seems to be a bit of an overkill, don't you think?  You don't need a 66 to use the firm's planning software.  Jones could just as easily formed it's own RIA (if in fact it hasn't already), then made the brokers IARs.  QED, an no one needs to lose time in production for an unnecessary test.

[/quote]

I believe you do need a series 66 to be an IAR.  In my firm we have software that is accessible to the brokers (registered representatives) and a more enhanced planning version that is accessed only if you are an IAR.  The main difference is the planning capabilities of the IAR side vs the investment product focus of the RR side.  

It all has to do with the Merrill rule.   It is very picky.  I just had a flyer I wanted to send out rejected because I use the terms Retirement Planning and Insurance Planning.   Have to change it to "Analysis"... sheesh.

[/quote]

Unless the rules have changed in the last five years or so, the 66 isn't necessary for an IAR.  (Of course, the rules for our industry seem to change hour by hour!)

This has been a question of mine for some time...

Do you have to be 65 or 66 licensed in order to charge fees?  I can understand that you do if you are "fee only."  But what if you have both fees and commissions (50/50)?