Piss-ant Regionals Big Winners?
37 RepliesJump to last post
Looks like the little piss-ant regional wanna-be firms that were mostly wanna-be FA’s…(only objective tough love here).
have become the BIG BIG winners in the MF free world melt down of 2009.
WFC (JS)
BAC (ken lewis)
Central government leader B. Obama and the Obama socialist nation all want FA pay cut say…in half.
The piss ants (no banks, no cdo’s.no cmo’s, no witch doctor, no witch hazel etc).
just good old school brokers trying to make some people some moolay…look like they might become much more relevant
wrong
Want-to-be is still the right way to describe little regional firms.
Those guys do $350,000 and they think their Bill Gross.
It will not change. The big wire houses will be the place for “real” rain makers
(that includes AG Edwards)
I just heard the Principality of Dumbf***istan is buying WFA, Merrill and UBS with an eye toward acquiring MS/SB. Sounds like a perfert fit for the superior types like you.wrong
Want-to-be is still the right way to describe little regional firms.
Those guys do $350,000 and they think their Bill Gross.
It will not change. The big wire houses will be the place for “real” rain makers
(that includes AG Edwards)
[quote=JayMc] wrong
Want-to-be is still the right way to describe little regional firms.
Those guys do $350,000 and they think their Bill Gross.
It will not change. The big wire houses will be the place for “real” rain makers
(that includes AG Edwards)
[/quote]
Totally wrong. Tired of the bullsh!t the banks have done to our industry. Don’t be surprised if there is resurgence of the Regionals. With majors you are a number and it will always be a numbers game, lose one $1mm producer, lets buy another one. No loyalty whatsoever. Regionals, you actually know people in the headquarters to get stuff done. With technology the way it is today, main difference would be underwriting and no one is doing that in this climate, plus, anything worth s sh!t would go to Institutionals anyway.
I can guarantee you one thing, my partnership about 5x the amount you referenced and we are considering them. Nothing is wrong with going to a boutique firm. Actually, it will probably be more refreshing for clients than you think.
I am confused. If you are at AGE/WS Doesn't DL preach about how we are the big Firm that has the regional culture. Sounds like most people want that regional firm environment. Or at least try to pretend it has a regional environment. When I started at WS it was a little regional and it has only gotten worse from then till nowwrong
Want-to-be is still the right way to describe little regional firms.
Those guys do $350,000 and they think their Bill Gross.
It will not change. The big wire houses will be the place for “real” rain makers
(that includes AG Edwards)
I am confused. If you are at AGE/WS Doesn't DL preach about how we are the big Firm that has the regional culture. Sounds like most people want that regional firm environment. Or at least try to pretend it has a regional environment. When I started at WS it was a little regional and it has only gotten worse from then till now[/quote][quote=JayMc]wrong
Want-to-be is still the right way to describe little regional firms.
Those guys do $350,000 and they think their Bill Gross.
It will not change. The big wire houses will be the place for “real” rain makers
(that includes AG Edwards)
What people want is a firm that will take care of them and their clients. Regionals have typically been more responsive to brokers making them feel appreciated and not just an employee. The issue with Regional Firms historically, is their product offerings and their systems have lagged behind the wire houses.
Brokers have had to make trade offs in the past better tools/products for less autonomy or vice versa. Regional firms still lag behind the wire houses but brokers seems to find their offerings sufficient to run their books.
Someone on these forums predicted the resurgence of regional firms and I would agree with them. WS was an experiment in linking a bank to a brokerage firm and it looks like that experiment has failed. Banks view all clients as theirs period. They my pay lip service otherwise, but they will not be able to resist pushing their stuff on your clients. I have seen it happen personally at WS and believe the ML people will experiance the same thing in the future. If not under Ken under the next guy.
Point to all of this, do your research when looking to jump. The regionals will probably surprise you. You will not get as big of an upfront check, but will probably be happier in the long run.
Woud love to hear from others on why they choose one firm over another.
I chose the regional route because I was tired of losing prospects to Wachovia’s bad press. Dealing with a market meltdown is enough of a challenge. To each his own. Brokers in love with wirehouses will justify their superiority to the bitter end.
The lack of product is a BS story wirehouses have been spreading about regionals for years. There are a lot of products that regionals don't want in their system, AGE didn't allow structured products (retail derivatives) because they are a rip off. They know that they are loaded with fees by the bank that created them, and that a lot of retail brokers/ clients don't really understand what they are buying. Do you really need access to 1000s of money managers? Are they all that different? Many regionals try and do the due diligence on a few select ones and allow them into their systems, it is what is best for the client. Wirehouses will pretty much let any thing into their retail accounts as long as they can get their cut. Putting the client first should be more then just a slogan.
[quote=mnbondguy]
The lack of product is a BS story wirehouses have been spreading about regionals for years. There are a lot of products that regionals don’t want in their system, AGE didn’t allow structured products (retail derivatives) because they are a rip off. They know that they are loaded with fees by the bank that created them, and that a lot of retail brokers/ clients don’t really understand what they are buying. Do you really need access to 1000s of money managers? Are they all that different? Many regionals try and do the due diligence on a few select ones and allow them into their systems, it is what is best for the client. Wirehouses will pretty much let any thing into their retail accounts as long as they can get their cut. Putting the client first should be more then just a slogan.
[/quote]This post is dead on. I have been doing the due dilligence, and i am amazed at what the Regionals AND the Indies offer. The wirehouses have brainwashed us all with the bullsht about superior platforms and technology. None of it is correct. And i am amazed at how many million dollar producers at the wires have no clue about this. The “piss-ant” offerings are as good.
And to JayMC - The “piker” at the regional doing 500k makes about as much as you doing a million at a regional, after all the expenses, and has a better lifestyle and more freedom. So you can swing your big rainmaking d** all you want, its no bigger than the piker indie/regional d***. There are only three things that matter - taking care of cients, how much NET pay you get for it and enjoying your work. How big your d*** is has no relevance.
You guys are Hilarious…there are lots of Million Dollar guys at regionals, the only difference is they are smart enough to realize that they get to keep more than they earn there rather than pay it all to ML, MS, WS etc. Sure there are guys doing 250-400k at regionals and the firms and the brokers are both happy, what is wrong with that. Anyone that thinks technology, products or services are lesser at regionals has been drinking the Kol Aid for way to long…I have seen the scale and scope of the wirehouse and also the reginoal side, and I have way more to offer clients from a reginoal than I ever could at a ‘large’ company like Wachovia. It is nice to be able to help your clients anc actually be compensated for it!
Sportsfreakbob........are you still lying to your wife? lolHow big your d*** is has no relevance.
Sportsfreakbob........are you still lying to your wife? lol[/quote][quote=Sportsfreakbob] How big your d*** is has no relevance.
Dog,
What does that have to do with the size of my d*** deal?
Listen, to attract REAL money from real players…you need a huge,reputable,solid bank/firm behind you.
Say for example a Wachovia Bank with its “fortress balance sheet” or a Bank America. If a guy is going to give you millions to manage, they have to KNOW that NOTHING could ever happen bad to the firm you work for.
Imagine how funny it would be for someone to question the stability of bac or wachovia. funny.
people need that “piece of mind”
(foot firmly in mouth)
(feeling like corn cob firmly up my a$@)
[quote=JayMc]Listen, to attract REAL money from real players…you need a huge,reputable,solid bank/firm behind you.
Say for example a Wachovia Bank with its “fortress balance sheet” or a Bank America. If a guy is going to give you millions to manage, they have to KNOW that NOTHING could ever happen bad to the firm you work for.
Imagine how funny it would be for someone to question the stability of bac or wachovia. funny.
people need that “piece of mind”
(foot firmly in mouth)
(feeling like corn cob firmly up my a$@)
[/quote]
LOL, for a moment I thought you were actually serious!
Stanford would have been considered a regional I assume so it’s not totally black-and-white on the wirehouse versus regional debate.
Merrill Lynch advisors have continued their tradition of unwavering commitment to their clients and the tradition of being recognized as the best in the industry. Merrill Lynch led the list of advisors on the Barron's Winner's Circle ranking of top 1,000 advisors, with nearly twice as many as the nearest competitors.
The results, which were published in the February 9 issue, placed Merrill Lynch first in both the greatest number of advisors in the top 1,000, with 239 selected for that honor, and the greatest number of advisors ranking number one in their state, with a total of 15. The rankings are based on client satisfaction and the quality of advice. Other important selection criteria are client assets with the firm and community involvement.
"This honor acknowledges once again how all of our advisors support our clients every day, and why their advice is especially crucial in times like these," said Dan Sontag, head of Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management. "We're proud of every advisor at Merrill Lynch who delivers for our clients, and we congratulate all those who were recognized."
The February 9 issue contains the complete list, "America's Top Advisors: State by State." To honor the winners, and to showcase the quality of advice provided by our advisors, as well as the power of our brand, Merrill Lynch placed a full-page congratulatory ad to the winners in the issue.
Barron's Winner's Circle is an independent research organization that recognizes advisors who represent the highest levels of ethical standards, professionalism and success. It works within the financial services industry to promote best practices, integrity and professionalism.
You realize that is basically an advertisement…firms pay to submit the advisor’s names…