Poor Ads by WFA
7 RepliesJump to last post
Is anyone else out there disappointed by the new ads by WFA? Why did they use someone with such a wimpy sounding voice??
Clint Eastwood would have been good and they should ditch the Wachovia bit and move ahead with the new brand.
It does not matter who they use, they should just be honest and tell the public something like this.
Here at Wells we could not manage our own money but hey we really want to manage yours.In my parts, people don’t recognize the Wach name nearly as much as AG. To me it seems to be money wasted here by not mentioning AG.
remember no one knew AGE that was why danny went with the Wachovia name lmao! they should just say...welcome to Wells your third stop on thye merry go round...enjoy your stay!In my parts, people don’t recognize the Wach name nearly as much as AG. To me it seems to be money wasted here by not mentioning AG.
I cannot believe that Danny Ludeman is still running the show. I do the math like this. When WS took over Prudential Securities the newly combined firm had 12K advisors. Then when WB to over AGE they again had 12K advisors. So this management loses 6K advisors and he is still running the show. This management team should not be allowed to run a book store. That is completely amazing to me. Keep trying to sell the universal bank model which is totally Bullsh*t. This business is about advising client which product is best for them. Period.
[quote=Greenbacks]It does not matter who they use, they should just be honest and tell the public something like this.
Here at Wells we could not manage our own money but hey we really want to manage yours. [/quote]Wells managed their own money well, dimwit. They were one of two or three really strong banks after the meltdown. That's how they managed to buy Wachovia for a song. Wachovia on the bank side made some stupid loans, but the brokerage side was profitable.
Are you really that dumb and ill-informed?