Why do former employees and others with no prior affiliation spend so much time writing against it?

It’s just a sick form of amusement, I guess.

So many former employees do so because they see the effort jones and it's cult followers spend spewing bs into the streets about how ethical and upright they are.  How they are the "best" firm to work for and they always do the right thing for the client crap.  Because we have seen the bs about how the inner workings really operate and that the limits placed on an IR at Jones are a joke compared to just about every other b/d on wall st.  We also see how the GPs continued to line their pockets off the sweat equity that the advisors put out and know that when it's all said and done, that same IR will walk away empty handed after building a book for many years.  We see how the GPs again this year found it necessary to give themselves a large pay raise, including the top 6 paid GPs there - who received a 81% raise ( including a fellow by the name of Doug Hill who was pretty much forced to step down) while holding back LP offerings and bonuses or most importantly - never giving the IR a payout raise; instead an additional expense to cover.

That's a short list of why - care to tell us why you support the GPs?

[quote=csmelnix]

So many former employees do so because they see the effort jones and it's cult followers spend spewing bs into the streets about how ethical and upright they are.  How they are the "best" firm to work for and they always do the right thing for the client crap.  Because we have seen the bs about how the inner workings really operate and that the limits placed on an IR at Jones are a joke compared to just about every other b/d on wall st.  We also see how the GPs continued to line their pockets off the sweat equity that the advisors put out and know that when it's all said and done, that same IR will walk away empty handed after building a book for many years.  We see how the GPs again this year found it necessary to give themselves a large pay raise, including the top 6 paid GPs there - who received a 81% raise ( including a fellow by the name of Doug Hill who was pretty much forced to step down) while holding back LP offerings and bonuses or most importantly - never giving the IR a payout raise; instead an additional expense to cover.

and these are the good points

[quote=Butkus]Why do former employees and others with no prior affiliation spend so much time writing against it?[/quote]

Maybe it's the totally unprofessional way that Jones treats its employees after they leave?

[quote=Gone Indy]

[quote=Butkus]Why do former employees and others with no prior affiliation spend so much time writing against it?[/quote]

Maybe it's the totally unprofessional way that Jones treats its employees after they leave?

[/quote]

Gone

way to slam the door shut

Got tired of playing the "reindeer games" here.

Mentor this one, go to this regional meeting, host this New IR Meeting, recruit, host this New IR dinner, spend a week in STL volunteering for the newbies, recruit, be on this conference call, loose VALUEABLE time teaching, encouraging, coddling, new news, recruit, growf, growf, growf.

Seems like we were never left alone to just work.

I think all you have to do is look at who is becoming GPs, especially those

that are from the home office. That would have to frustrate you if you are a

decent hitter at Jones. I

Overall, the brokerage's 305 or so general partners received roughly 70 percent, or about $180 million, of the $256.7 million allocated to the group from the company's net income. The balance is retained for the business.

Here's another great reason - the business gets 30% while the GPs get 70% and the top 6 GPs received $42million of the $180m.  Ya, the GPs interests are definitely aligned with the IRs - these numbers just prove it!

Got to tell you guys that it is awfully hard to get upset that the Managing Partner makes around 6-10 million a year at Jones  when it places them amongst the lowest paid CEOs of financial corporations of our size in the country.

Not when the %s are so skewed compared to them