Question… Is it not good for the entire industry that Jones is defending this case and beating back an obnoxious, political hack of an AG? Maybe it will make the next money hungry schmuck rethink his frivilous lawsuit. In any case Incredble and I are celebrating.

[quote=Incredible Hulk]Question... Is it not good for the entire industry that Jones is defending this case and beating back an obnoxious, political hack of an AG? Maybe it will make the next money hungry schmuck rethink his frivilous lawsuit. In any case Incredble and I are celebrating.[/quote]

Why?  Jones is the one accused of these nefarious activities, no one else.  Frankly, running Jones out would be good for the consumer and the industry at large.

As to jumping on the State AG, why has no judge shut down Spitzer?  (Talk about a political hack!)

Seems like the Cal AG missed the boat on this along with the regulators.

They focused on the revenue sharing side only. What about the double-

dipping? The wholesale practice of dumping good, non-preferred funds to

go into these “preferred” funds? High commission exchange for no

recognizable benefit. That should have been the focus. Jones always touts

they hold their preferred funds longer. Well, that is great. What about the

better performing funds that the clients owned that were conveniently

dumped?

Drinks are on us.

[quote=The Truth]Seems like the Cal AG missed the boat on this along with the regulators.
They focused on the revenue sharing side only. What about the double-
dipping? The wholesale practice of dumping good, non-preferred funds to
go into these “preferred” funds? High commission exchange for no
recognizable benefit. That should have been the focus. Jones always touts
they hold their preferred funds longer. Well, that is great. What about the
better performing funds that the clients owned that were conveniently
dumped? [/quote] Onliest firm I know that uses the “liquidate and transfer” form 

Rev…I think that form is part and parcel of the “firm name eligible” fund list as well. I can recall a few accounts my rep lost because Jones, “couldn’t hold that fund, so you’ll have to liquidate it and take a loss if you want to transfer”. I can also recall every year the list of firms rejecting that form grew longer and longer.

[quote=Incredible Hulk]Question... Is it not good for the entire industry that Jones is defending this case and beating back an obnoxious, political hack of an AG? Maybe it will make the next money hungry schmuck rethink his frivilous lawsuit. In any case Incredble and I are celebrating.[/quote]

I'm just glad it happen to Jones. Those protein shake drinkers aren't part of the industry, they need to disclose how to lie to employees and reward worthless idiots.

[quote=Incredble Hulk]Drinks are on us.[/quote]

HOLD THAT DRINK- the other shoe hasn't dropped yet. Remember the class action and civil suits are still pending. AND EDJ should be VERY careful about stating that "98% of clients' kept their funds while 2% traded out to another perferred fund due to client 'loyalty'. It is what we were instructed to have them do- discourage clients' from selling out of their funds.

I agree with the Revealer....It should be noted that the Liquidate and Transfer Form was my best friend while I was at Jones. 

I do agree that the AG went a little far with his suit.  When I was at Jones I didn't know all the stuff that was going on behind the scenes.  I was just selling the preferred funds because that's what I was taught, not because it was going to increase my revenue sharing. 

On a side note...WSJ look at mutual funds this morning was interesting.  The Dodge and Cox Balanced Fund crushes good ole American Funds Balanced Fund.  Why doesn't Jones tell their IR's that if they want to use a Balanced Fund, you can look outside of the preferreds.  That is never mentioned in any training, mentorship, publication, or anything. 

On a side note...WSJ look at mutual funds this morning was interesting.  The Dodge and Cox Balanced Fund crushes good ole American Funds Balanced Fund.  Why doesn't Jones tell their IR's that if they want to use a Balanced Fund, you can look outside of the preferreds.  That is never mentioned in any training, mentorship, publication, or anything. 

[/quote]

They were to busy drinking the Ted Jones protein shake.

Not to mention that it is a no-load, better suited for fee-based (at least if you want to get paid)

D&C is a great fund… I think I will put some money in there… Oh $hit, its closed…

[quote=blarmston]D&C is a great fund... I think I will put some money in there... Oh $hit, its closed...[/quote]

 , looks like Spiked needs to look into his research choices.

Mr. Maxstud,

What I was saying, was why doesn't Jones tell people tolook outside of the preferreds?

[quote=spikedkoolaid]

Mr. Maxstud,

What I was saying, was why doesn't Jones tell people tolook outside of the preferreds?

[/quote]

Kool aid answer would be that these funds are screened to meet the needs of EDJ clients.  Although there now is a list of pre-screened funds that are not preferreds.  Real answer is above and EDJ makes more money with the agreements they have with the preferred funds.  Thats business.  Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure.

When can I start moving some assets to the Doge and Cox fund?

To prevent spelling flamer:

Dodge and Cox fund?

Max…try Dodge & Cox International…that’s open…

[quote=Indyone]Max…try Dodge & Cox International…that’s open…[/quote]

Ok I’ll check it out but I am a little leary of it, I always thought Dodge’in Cox was an adult movie. 

[quote=Maxstud] [quote=Indyone]Max...try Dodge & Cox International...that's open...[/quote]

Ok I'll check it out but I am a little leary of it, I always thought Dodge'in Cox was an adult movie. 
[/quote]

That reminds me of my own personal favorite- I watch it every Fourth of July - "Yank my Doodle, It's a Dandy"