Skip navigation

MS G Day Friday

or Register to post new content in the forum

65 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Feb 23, 2006 2:09 pm

[quote=BrokerRecruit]Cuts $350k and under would be a nightmare for MS.[/quote]

Perhaps, but you should NEVER undersestimate the long-term stupidity of wirehouse management…

Feb 23, 2006 2:33 pm

We have a town hall today.  Someone I know on our other platform said Gorman said there will be a shrinking of current FA’s with a re-hiring to follow.

Feb 23, 2006 2:44 pm

ditto Joe.

Feb 23, 2006 4:21 pm

pre-word is that your “old timers/lifers” will have the biggest issues.

Feb 23, 2006 4:47 pm

At MER Gorman cut a third of Merrill's brokers and closed a quarter of it's offices (see http://english.people.com.cn/200508/19/eng20050819_203467.ht ml ).

To think he won't do the same at MS is just utter denial of the facts. He won't be happy till MS brokers are producing more than Merrill's brokers. IMHO.

Feb 23, 2006 5:50 pm

he will.  it’s those 10 LOS and up doing under 300k that will be up sh*t’s Creek

Feb 23, 2006 7:12 pm

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=BrokerRecruit]Cuts $350k and under would be a nightmare for MS.[/quote]

Perhaps, but you should NEVER undersestimate the long-term stupidity of wirehouse management.....
[/quote]

There's stupidity and then there's empty speculation. The current median production for MS means that a cut below $350k would be a very, very large number of brokers. People seem to confuse average with median quite often.  

Feb 23, 2006 7:19 pm

[quote=NY_BROKER]

At MER Gorman cut a third of Merrill's brokers and closed a quarter of it's offices (see http://english.people.com.cn/200508/19/eng20050819_203467.ht ml ).

To think he won't do the same at MS is just utter denial of the facts. He won't be happy till MS brokers are producing more than Merrill's brokers. IMHO.

[/quote]

That's the typical exaggeration of what Gorman did. Yes, ML's number of brokers shrank dramatically, but so did every other major firm during that time period (2000-2005) as the market itself culled thousands of brokers. Gorman trimmed real estate, which I believe he’ll do again. There’s also talk of investment in systems and technology. I’ve spoken to management who says that before they can compare MS brokers to ML brokers they’ll have to give them the same support in terms of products and technology. The process of turning the old “socks and stocks” nature of DWR (stocks, bonds and proprietary MFs) isn’t completely done in terms of personnel.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Having said that, if your over LOS 8 and doing 300k, you may not have realized it, but you’ve been working your way out of the business for years.

Feb 23, 2006 7:20 pm

"The current median production for MS means that a cut below $350k would be a very, very large number of brokers"

By my calculations, about 4,000

Feb 23, 2006 7:36 pm

[quote=Spook5365]

"The current median production for MS means that a cut below $350k would be a very, very large number of brokers"

By my calculations, about 4,000

[/quote]

4,000 of what, about 9,000 or 10,000?  The chance of a 40% cut sounds pretty remote to me.

There is a group, like the guy quoted in one of the newspaper links here who feels MS should end its broad retail business and go to a GS business model. They're the ones that cheer the idea of gutting the sales force and get snarky when Mack says he's sticking to the broad retail plan. Nothing wrong with that, it's just that their POV sould be considered when you read their comments.

Feb 23, 2006 7:44 pm

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=NY_BROKER]

At MER Gorman cut a third of Merrill's brokers and closed a quarter of it's offices (see http://english.people.com.cn/200508/19/eng20050819_203467.ht ml ).

To think he won't do the same at MS is just utter denial of the facts. He won't be happy till MS brokers are producing more than Merrill's brokers. IMHO.

[/quote]

That's the typical exaggeration of what Gorman did. Yes, ML's number of brokers shrank dramatically, but so did every other major firm during that time period (2000-2005) as the market itself culled thousands of brokers. Gorman trimmed real estate, which I believe he’ll do again. There’s also talk of investment in systems and technology. I’ve spoken to management who says that before they can compare MS brokers to ML brokers they’ll have to give them the same support in terms of products and technology. The process of turning the old “socks and stocks” nature of DWR (stocks, bonds and proprietary MFs) isn’t completely done in terms of personnel.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Having said that, if your over LOS 8 and doing 300k, you may not have realized it, but you’ve been working your way out of the business for years.

[/quote]

Gorman fired 12000 Merrill employees in 1999/2000. See http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B9C5 CED16%2DF5A2%2D4C3A%2D83EE%2DBB493017312B%7D&siteid=goog le&keyword=

Think about it John Mack + Jim Gorman = more like a GS type firm rather than a weak Merrill type firm. 

Feb 23, 2006 8:06 pm

"4,000 of what, about 9,000 or 10,000?  The chance of a 40% cut sounds pretty remote to me. "

That what I meant.  Didn't word it correctly.  There are only ~ 7500 left, so I doubt they're gutting 4000 of them

Feb 23, 2006 8:45 pm

[quote=NY_BROKER][quote=mikebutler222][quote=NY_BROKER]

At MER Gorman cut a third of Merrill's brokers and closed a quarter of it's offices (see http://english.people.com.cn/200508/19/eng20050819_203467.ht ml ).

To think he won't do the same at MS is just utter denial of the facts. He won't be happy till MS brokers are producing more than Merrill's brokers. IMHO.

[/quote]

That's the typical exaggeration of what Gorman did. Yes, ML's number of brokers shrank dramatically, but so did every other major firm during that time period (2000-2005) as the market itself culled thousands of brokers. Gorman trimmed real estate, which I believe he’ll do again. There’s also talk of investment in systems and technology. I’ve spoken to management who says that before they can compare MS brokers to ML brokers they’ll have to give them the same support in terms of products and technology. The process of turning the old “socks and stocks” nature of DWR (stocks, bonds and proprietary MFs) isn’t completely done in terms of personnel.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Having said that, if your over LOS 8 and doing 300k, you may not have realized it, but you’ve been working your way out of the business for years.

[/quote]

Gorman fired 12000 Merrill employees in 1999/2000. See http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B9C5 CED16%2DF5A2%2D4C3A%2D83EE%2DBB493017312B%7D&siteid=goog le&keyword=

Think about it John Mack + Jim Gorman = more like a GS type firm rather than a weak Merrill type firm. 

[/quote]

Note Gorman fired 12,000 employees, not 12,000 brokers. The market cut the brokers at ML like it cut them everywhere else. With the market gutting the number of brokers, there wasn't as much of a need for back-office types and real estate. I fully expect that to happen at MS. Again, notice that Gorman didn't cut 40% of ML's brokers like you're saying he'll do at MS.

You may feel, as some others do, that MS would be better off as a GS type firm. I'm not saying that that's not a valid POV. I'm simply saying that's not the direction the firm is headed today, so don't expect Gorman to head tat way out of the box. Who knows, if Gorman fails, that may be the future of MS.

Feb 23, 2006 8:51 pm

[quote=Spook5365]

"4,000 of what, about 9,000 or 10,000?  The chance of a 40% cut sounds pretty remote to me. "

That what I meant.  Didn't word it correctly.  There are only ~ 7500 left, so I doubt they're gutting 4000 of them

[/quote]

I'm with you.

Feb 23, 2006 9:34 pm

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=NY_BROKER][quote=mikebutler222][quote=NY_BROKER]

At MER Gorman cut a third of Merrill's brokers and closed a quarter of it's offices (see http://english.people.com.cn/200508/19/eng20050819_203467.ht ml ).

To think he won't do the same at MS is just utter denial of the facts. He won't be happy till MS brokers are producing more than Merrill's brokers. IMHO.

[/quote]

That's the typical exaggeration of what Gorman did. Yes, ML's number of brokers shrank dramatically, but so did every other major firm during that time period (2000-2005) as the market itself culled thousands of brokers. Gorman trimmed real estate, which I believe he’ll do again. There’s also talk of investment in systems and technology. I’ve spoken to management who says that before they can compare MS brokers to ML brokers they’ll have to give them the same support in terms of products and technology. The process of turning the old “socks and stocks” nature of DWR (stocks, bonds and proprietary MFs) isn’t completely done in terms of personnel.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Having said that, if your over LOS 8 and doing 300k, you may not have realized it, but you’ve been working your way out of the business for years.

[/quote]

Gorman fired 12000 Merrill employees in 1999/2000. See http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B9C5 CED16%2DF5A2%2D4C3A%2D83EE%2DBB493017312B%7D&siteid=goog le&keyword=

Think about it John Mack + Jim Gorman = more like a GS type firm rather than a weak Merrill type firm. 

[/quote]

Note Gorman fired 12,000 employees, not 12,000 brokers. The market cut the brokers at ML like it cut them everywhere else. With the market gutting the number of brokers, there wasn't as much of a need for back-office types and real estate. I fully expect that to happen at MS. Again, notice that Gorman didn't cut 40% of ML's brokers like you're saying he'll do at MS.

You may feel, as some others do, that MS would be better off as a GS type firm. I'm not saying that that's not a valid POV. I'm simply saying that's not the direction the firm is headed today, so don't expect Gorman to head tat way out of the box. Who knows, if Gorman fails, that may be the future of MS.

[/quote]

Gorman cut 6000 brokers, 30% of the then 20000 broker force.

May be at MS the thinking is cut 2000 to 3000 more and hire 1000 to 2000 more, (more productive brokers),  to bring the broker head count to around 7000. I allready heard that Gorman could pull up to 500 Merrill brokers over this year. The MS CFO is on record that broker head count will be down another 1000 by year end. As I recall, last year's published reports about Gorman's being hired also stated that the firm was looking at Gorman running a 6000 high gossing high profit broker force. I am confident that Gorman was hired to do more and better at MS than MER. Mack's not the type of boss to expect less. He wan't to fix MS as fast as possible. 

Feb 23, 2006 10:00 pm

[quote=NY_BROKER]Gorman cut 6000 brokers, 30% of the then 20000 broker force. [/quote]

I don't think Gorman fired them, like every other firm, the market killed them.

[quote=NY_BROKER]

May be at MS the thinking is cut 2000 to 3000 more and hire 1000 to 2000 more, (more productive brokers),  to bring the broker head count to around 7000.

[/quote]

Gorman just said you're wrong.

[quote=NY_BROKER]

 I allready heard that Gorman could pull up to 500 Merrill brokers over this year. 

[/quote]

He said MS will recruit. Bringing over ML brokers (but remember, Gorman wasn't the most popular guy in the world there) would obviously be part of it.

[quote=NY_BROKER]

The MS CFO is on record that broker head count will be down another 1000 by year end.

[/quote]

I think I would have heard that. Got a quote?

[quote=NY_BROKER]

As I recall, last year's published reports about Gorman's being hired also stated that the firm was looking at Gorman running a 6000 high gossing high profit broker force.

[/quote]

Yeah, like the "published report stated" that MS was going to be a GS firm. The missing part, of course, was anyone at MS saying that.

[quote=NY_BROKER]

I am confident that Gorman was hired to do more and better at MS than MER. Mack's not the type of boss to expect less. He wan't to fix MS as fast as possible. 

[/quote]

Fix, yes. Gut the sales force? Well, he just said no....

Feb 24, 2006 12:40 pm

[quote=NY_BROKER]

The MS CFO is on record that broker head count will be down another 1000 by year end.

[/quote]

I think I would have heard that. Got a quote  

http://www.onwallstreet.com/article.cfm?articleid=3206                                                                                               

Feb 24, 2006 2:50 pm

[quote=NY_BROKER]

[quote=NY_BROKER]

The MS CFO is on record that broker head count will be down another 1000 by year end.

[/quote]

I think I would have heard that. Got a quote  

http://www.onwallstreet.com/article.cfm?articleid=3206                                                                                               

[/quote]

"In December, Morgan Stanley Chief Financial Officer David Sidwell said the firm plans to end this year with 1,000 fewer reps than it has now. Attrition will play a part in that reduction, which will leave Morgan with about 8,600 advisers."

Notice he was paraphrased. Here's another take on what he said;

Chief Financial Officer Officer David Sidwell in December said Morgan Stanley lost more "seasoned productive brokers" to competitors than it hired last year, resulting in a net loss of $8 billion of client money. The firm expects to lose another 926 brokers this year, due to smaller training classes and raids from competitors, he said.

Now, tell me where the "cuts" are in that comment.....

I'm not saying it's impossible. They could change their strategy tomorrow. However, the current plan, as Gorman said yesterday, is no new wave of cuts, MS won't be selling the business and MS will not be moving to a GS business model.

Feb 24, 2006 3:37 pm

MikeButler222

I hope that you are not believing what management says 100%. Anyone that puts thier career in the hands of MS management has to be a newbee in the business or aspiring to get into management. 

Feb 24, 2006 4:00 pm

NY_BROKER

You are 100% correct. Do you know what the MS town hall meeting was about yesterday?