It’s all about supply and demand - there are a heck of a lot of shell-shocked brokers walking around wanting to get out of where they are.  Then add in a bad market, where unhappy clients may not follow you as readily as when everything was roses… 

Not shocking although if they told me that I would have been like ‘reallly?’. This probably doesn’t bode well for WS reps getting some sort of big deal from whoever the heck buys us. Funny, Wells is the only one to make a move for WS.

Was 60% all they offered?  Was that just the cash portion?  I have found that with WS brokers who were ex AGE they have recieved that upfront and then there is a stock and bonus portion for a certain amount of time after.  Depending on you and the market it could be more than 100 or less.

I wonder if it would make a difference if it was an entire office of brokers moving instead of just one?  Maybe they were just low balling.  This was the first meeting.

If you are selling your house now do you expect to get the prices paid at the top, too?

the big 3 firms are still over 100% depending on your lOS and gross…

[quote=rocky]the big 3 firms are still over 100% depending on your lOS and gross…[/quote]
Just curious - what ARE the “big 3 firms” nowadays?  And is being “big” a positive now?  Why?

[quote=Morphius]

[quote=rocky]the big 3 firms are still over 100% depending on your lOS and gross…[/quote]Just curious - what ARE the “big 3 firms” nowadays? And is being “big” a positive now? Why?[/quote]



Not sure if being big is positive, but the big three are based mostly on FA count…

ML, Wachovia and SB are who I am talking about and the deals are still there.

I would think Morgan Stanley is in that mix.

I get the feeling that the good ol days of big transition packages are gone. Too many brokers (and firms) realizing that brokers want to move and that revenues are going down for a while.

Stifel and other smaller ‘regional’ firms have been 60, 70% up all year, despite record setting deals happening at other firms.  Big deals with major wirehouse players are still huge. 120% upfront and higher. Add back end bogies and they’re well over 200% if you hit. This has to decline.

Here’s the rub. Deals will come in some AND gross is dropping off highs for many of us if not most. The combo means real $‘s are going to be less in the future imho.

How many AGE guys have hung in all year after taking a relatively small retention package earlier just to see what the grid and other final changes look like in early 09’?

I am one (I PM’d you by the way).  I got 40% from WS last year so 60-70% off a higher number now seems somewhat appealing.

Go indy and get 80 to 90% payout for as long as you stay in the business and then you will never have to worry about changing firms and up front deals.

that is a valid point, the upfront deals tend to get more merit than they deserve.

Are the wirefirms still offering stock incentives or is it mainly cash bonuses instead?  I’ve read several reports some Advisors aren’t too thrilled with taking stock in lieu of cash due to the market and the decline of the stock price in general at some wirefirms?  Has this affected anyone on this board? 

Imagne if WB gave us six figures of their stock when it was over 50 and today around 4. Ugh! Sounds like Stifel is cash with stock bonuses.

Apprently we misspelled “Stiefel”. That aside, I am still looking at them as a good AG Edwards alternative.  Assuming there is not an office in my town (there is not), what are the additional headaches that I’ll have to deal with? I am thinking:

http://www.onwallstreet.com/attachment-cache/iag/pdf/ows/payoutgrids/2008/OWS_BB.pdf

[quote=Gordon Gekko]Apprently we misspelled “Stiefel”. That aside, I am still looking at them as a good AG Edwards alternative.  Assuming there is not an office in my town (there is not), what are the additional headaches that I’ll have to deal with? I am thinking: