Morgan Stanley just canned trainees
132 RepliesJump to last post
"I will take 40, 40 thousand dollar accounts over a one million dollar account any time. There might be some big rollovers there!"
I will agree with that... Although more ideal would be five 200K accounts...
Blarm,
Wouldn't all those 40K accounts end up at the call center anyway? I got the impression from somewhere(?) that you don't get paid for that size account?
[quote=blarmston]
"I will take 40, 40 thousand dollar accounts over a one million dollar account any time. There might be some big rollovers there!"
I will agree with that... Although more ideal would be five 200K accounts...
[/quote]
Everyone should structure their business as they see fit. Personally I wouldn't be all that happy with either alternative, I'd want the $1MM account (unless the $200K account was part of a larger household). I'd rather have fewer households, and that requires larger accounts within each household (or you'll starve to death). That way I can give the depth of service I want to provide. Too many households and you just (or, at least I ) can't use the "trusted advisor" business model.
I don’t see how they could be cutting just underperformers. I’ve talked with a couple of brokers who say that ALL of the trainees in their branches were cut regardless of performance.
I know that they’re not cutting all trainees, but my partner and I have talked to some very promising candidates this morning. I supspect that most of the brokers will be snatched up by other firms very quickly.
[quote=frumhere]
mikebutler...
what's your opinion on cuts for under 500k?
[/quote]
Won't happen with the current plan. That would cut more (perhaps much more) than 50% of the force.
[quote=JCadieux]I don't see how they could be cutting just underperformers. I've talked with a couple of brokers who say that ALL of the trainees in their branches were cut regardless of performance.
I know that they're not cutting all trainees, but my partner and I have talked to some very promising candidates this morning. I supspect that most of the brokers will be snatched up by other firms very quickly.
[/quote]
The other brokers in the office are in no position to know the details of the production of trainees cut. Best of luck getting the bottom half of a training class placed.
[quote=mikebutler222][quote=xmsbroker]
"If you don't know the numbers for the line, why comment on them?"
bc things happen fast in that business. some of the most successful people at one point were not considered on track and then landed a big client or two. youre better off having 1 $1mm account and 10 great prospects then having 40 $40k accounts
[/quote]
So people not making the grade should be kept around even if they're failing to meet minimal standards because one or two of them may land a single large account and catch up? As a shareholder, you'll excuse me if I don't like that approach, OK?
Hey, you say you had a tough experience in your office, which is perfectly possible. I don't doubt that. It also seems you have other issues. If I were a betting man (and I am) I'd say you and the other new poster that's capitalization challenged and talks about working at Jones are the same guy and that you left in August. Call it a hunch.
[/quote]
nope, sorry. im happy to be out of the retail business but i stayed until '06
[quote=mikebutler222]
I know what the trainees told me.
There's your first problem. People new to the biz aren't usually the folks to ask what it takes to train someone for a biz they know nothing about...
It obviously requires a self-starter, but its foolish (and dangerous) to think a self starter is capable of properly managing millions of wealth w/out some instruction or prior experience.
They get plenty of what-to-do-with-it help. That's not where people who aren't bringing in accounts have a problem.
Youve never heard a client complain about the August cuts? You should have had some of the accounts that were transferred to me. MS pissed some people off.
Not a one. Now I know you're joking, or you left in August People usderstand standards. Most people don't have much use for an organization that keeps people around who are failing to meet some pretty minimal standards.
How is the training not 4 months? They were given 4 months to get licensed and then went into production. No oversight at all.
That's got to be a joke as well. They get four months to pass the exams and they get (even if your manager is brain-dead) plenty of oversight. What they don't get (anywhere) is accounts. Clearly the program is lacking, but it sure isn't what you've made it out to be.
[/quote]
Youre awfully defensive. ive qualified my perspective as it being from one branch, i dont see why you have such a hard time accepting it. im sure there are much slacker training programs at various firms and various branches.
In regard to the August layoffs, you must not have much contact w/ clients of fired brokers. many dont understand production minimums as they dont see their broker as a pure salesmen. All they know is that he did a good job for them. its further insulting if you suggest that their friend/relative just couldnt hack it. sure some dont care and some may think its good, but if they were friends/related to the person they generally werent happy.
[quote=mikebutler222]
[quote=JCadieux]I don't see how they could be cutting just underperformers. I've talked with a couple of brokers who say that ALL of the trainees in their branches were cut regardless of performance.
I know that they're not cutting all trainees, but my partner and I have talked to some very promising candidates this morning. I supspect that most of the brokers will be snatched up by other firms very quickly.
[/quote]
The other brokers in the office are in no position to know the details of the production of trainees cut. Best of luck getting the bottom half of a training class placed.
[/quote]
yeah right. the sas know and the sas love to gossip.
[quote=xmsbroker][quote=mikebutler222][quote=xmsbroker]
"If you don't know the numbers for the line, why comment on them?"
bc things happen fast in that business. some of the most successful people at one point were not considered on track and then landed a big client or two. youre better off having 1 $1mm account and 10 great prospects then having 40 $40k accounts
[/quote]
So people not making the grade should be kept around even if they're failing to meet minimal standards because one or two of them may land a single large account and catch up? As a shareholder, you'll excuse me if I don't like that approach, OK?
Hey, you say you had a tough experience in your office, which is perfectly possible. I don't doubt that. It also seems you have other issues. If I were a betting man (and I am) I'd say you and the other new poster that's capitalization challenged and talks about working at Jones are the same guy and that you left in August. Call it a hunch.
[/quote]
nope, sorry. im happy to be out of the retail business but i stayed until '06
[/quote]
Sure, if you say so
[quote=xmsbroker][quote=mikebutler222]
I know what the trainees told me.
There's your first problem. People new to the biz aren't usually the folks to ask what it takes to train someone for a biz they know nothing about...
It obviously requires a self-starter, but its foolish (and dangerous) to think a self starter is capable of properly managing millions of wealth w/out some instruction or prior experience.
They get plenty of what-to-do-with-it help. That's not where people who aren't bringing in accounts have a problem.
Youve never heard a client complain about the August cuts? You should have had some of the accounts that were transferred to me. MS pissed some people off.
Not a one. Now I know you're joking, or you left in August People usderstand standards. Most people don't have much use for an organization that keeps people around who are failing to meet some pretty minimal standards.
How is the training not 4 months? They were given 4 months to get licensed and then went into production. No oversight at all.
That's got to be a joke as well. They get four months to pass the exams and they get (even if your manager is brain-dead) plenty of oversight. What they don't get (anywhere) is accounts. Clearly the program is lacking, but it sure isn't what you've made it out to be.
[/quote]
Youre awfully defensive. ive qualified my perspective as it being from one branch, i dont see why you have such a hard time accepting it.
I've said several times that your branch environment could well have sucked. No argument there. My problem with your comments have to do with when you start to talk about the program across the firm and get the details very, very wrong.
In regard to the August layoffs, you must not have much contact w/ clients of fired brokers.
Trust me on this one, I had plenty of contact and not a single complaint. Zero, zip, nada. People understand business (most were senior people in theor own biz field) and most understand the benefits of having standards.
its further insulting if you suggest that their friend/relative just couldnt hack it.
The last thing you want to do, ever, is insult the "last guy", regardless of the circumstances.
sure some dont care and some may think its good, but if they were friends/related to the person they generally werent happy.
If they were friends/relatives they wouldn't be happy the guy was canned. If the guy stayed in the biz, they no doubt would have moved with him. Now that we've accounted for that .001%, let me say again, I never got a complaint. Not one.
Also note that the threatened lawsuits never materialized, or the bad press, or all the other dire predictions.
[quote=mikebutler222]Let me add, the same announcement said they
weren’t “making any reductions among Financial Advisors” and remain
committed to growing the sales force.[/quote]
I was canned too, only a couple of months after they said that same
statement. Of course, FA “trainees” are not FAs. Hey, if you are a
transactional guy, maybe he will call you a broker rathar than an FA…
Time will tell.
Mike, what is your position at the firm?
Can you also explain how a trainee is functionally different than an FA (differences besides comp plan)?
Mike is a dushbag. MS FA Trainees have “Financial Advisor” on their business cards. Is Morgan deceiving clients with that title?
The training program gives 1 year to reach our goals, I was given 9 months.
The ONLY 2 “success” stories of the program only made it by (1) landing
a big client in the last few weeks of the 1 year or (2) with help of a
senior FA.
[quote=SaySo]Mike is a dushbag. MS FA Trainees have "Financial Advisor" on their business cards. Is Morgan deceiving clients with that title?
The training program gives 1 year to reach our goals, I was given 9 months.
The ONLY 2 "success" stories of the program only made it by (1) landing a big client in the last few weeks of the 1 year or (2) with help of a senior FA.
[/quote]
Exactly. Not to mention that fa 'trainees' obviously have to assert themselves as highly qualified wealth managers. who's going to give their lifes savings to someone who 'in training'?
…i can say that the cuts by me happened to 3 guys that after a year had maybe 300k in total assets, in aggregate. i am sure some good trainees were cut, but it was possibly a lot of dead weight. you can say i had no training etc…and you may be right. bottom line is, if you are not given the training, get the training (out of your own pocket). this is your own business even though you are w2’ed. you must invest in it.
[quote=frumhere]...i can say that the cuts by me happened to 3 guys that after a year had maybe 300k in total assets, in aggregate. i am sure some good trainees were cut, but it was possibly a lot of dead weight. you can say i had no training etc...and you may be right. bottom line is, if you are not given the training, get the training (out of your own pocket). this is your own business even though you are w2'ed. you must invest in it.[/quote]
doubt it. people needed $1mm at the year mark to stay.
[quote=SaySo]Mike is a dushbag. MS FA Trainees have "Financial Advisor" on their business cards. Is Morgan deceiving clients with that title?
The training program gives 1 year to reach our goals, I was given 9 months.
The ONLY 2 "success" stories of the program only made it by (1) landing a big client in the last few weeks of the 1 year or (2) with help of a senior FA.
[/quote]
If you're going to call someone a "dushbag" [SP], at least spell it correctly. Better still, don't call another poster a "dushbag" at all.
I've had differences of opinion with Mike, but they are just that. Differences. He is certainly not a douche bag because of that.