How do you pick funds - REALLY!

125 replies [Last post]
Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

I've been in the biz since 1998 & have just been confronted w/ an uncomfortable truth:

I don't know my arse from a hole in the ground when it comes to picking, measuring, managing and reallocating portfolios.

Yeah, I use Principia, and I've been talking upside/downside w/ clients since 2002 but that's not the it.

For instance, have you noticed w/ American Funds that it doesn't matter which 5 funds you pick you pretty well get to the same place? And isn't that all rear view mirror during a period when value stocks have really rocked?

The reason I ask the question is I've recently started doing a lot of wrap biz & it's not just about Franklin, American, and Hartford... It's about how do you create not only a strategic allocation, but manage that thru and ahead of the curve. For certain clients it makes sense to self-manage.

The question: What is your specific methodology to manage portfolios & what do you do to stay ahead?

Thx.

Bamzor's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-14

Point & Figure Charting methodology by Tom Dorsey. Look up Dorsey, Wright, & Associates. This could be the answer your looking for to help make sense of  managing portfolios by managing risk. The 3rd edition to his book was just released.

AllREIT's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-16

Ashland wrote:
The question: What is your specific methodology to manage portfolios & what do you do to stay ahead?

Thx.

1.) I know what I'm doing.

2.) Think in pictures. Decide on a top down allocation, and then have
some good choices for funds for each asset class. There are a huge
amount of mediocre funds out there. Most funds with hot track records got that way b/c of luck and not manager skills. So look for cheap funds with steady returns.

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Read some books.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Ashland wrote:I've been in the biz since 1998 & have just been confronted w/ an uncomfortable truth: I don't know my arse from a hole in the ground when it comes to picking, measuring, managing and reallocating portfolios. Yeah, I use Principia, and I've been talking upside/downside w/ clients since 2002 but that's not the it. For instance, have you noticed w/ American Funds that it doesn't matter which 5 funds you pick you pretty well get to the same place? And isn't that all rear view mirror during a period when value stocks have really rocked? The reason I ask the question is I've recently started doing a lot of wrap biz & it's not just about Franklin, American, and Hartford... It's about how do you create not only a strategic allocation, but manage that thru and ahead of the curve. For certain clients it makes sense to self-manage. The question: What is your specific methodology to manage portfolios & what do you do to stay ahead? Thx.
Mutual Funds suck. Any numbskull can use them. Find something else to do and you will get a lot more business.

vbrainy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-26

He asked a good question.  How do some of you knuckleheads survive?  Read a book???  That is history.
You have to use forward looking research.  Not what has happened in the past, but which funds are going to perform in the future. 
We have unbiased, internal research, that recommends funds.  PM me if you want to know more.
And they are NOT just American Funds, Franklin, etc.  Some great small shops like Keeley and even T Rowe.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

vbrainy wrote:
He asked a good question.  How do some of you knuckleheads survive?  Read a book???  That is history.
You have to use forward looking research.  Not what has happened in the past, but which funds are going to perform in the future. 
We have unbiased, internal research, that recommends funds.  PM me if you want to know more.
And they are NOT just American Funds, Franklin, etc.  Some great small shops like Keeley and even T Rowe.

 
How many of them consistently beat the indices?

vbrainy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-26

Philo Kvetch wrote:vbrainy wrote:
He asked a good question.  How do some of you knuckleheads survive?  Read a book???  That is history.
You have to use forward looking research.  Not what has happened in the past, but which funds are going to perform in the future. 
We have unbiased, internal research, that recommends funds.  PM me if you want to know more.
And they are NOT just American Funds, Franklin, etc.  Some great small shops like Keeley and even T Rowe.

 
How many of them consistently beat the indices?

You win the award for idiotic question of the day.  You are still talking about the past.  Believe it or not, some people want protection in good times and bad.  You get the best possible asset allocation, re balance it, and service the client.
You cannot control the market.  You control your service.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

vbrainy wrote:Philo Kvetch wrote:vbrainy wrote:
He asked a good question.  How do some of you knuckleheads survive?  Read a book???  That is history.
You have to use forward looking research.  Not what has happened in the past, but which funds are going to perform in the future. 
We have unbiased, internal research, that recommends funds.  PM me if you want to know more.
And they are NOT just American Funds, Franklin, etc.  Some great small shops like Keeley and even T Rowe.

 
How many of them consistently beat the indices?

You win the award for idiotic question of the day.  You are still talking about the past.  Believe it or not, some people want protection in good times and bad.  You get the best possible asset allocation, re balance it, and service the client.
You cannot control the market.  You control your service.

Nice sidestep, but no prize.
I think we can safely assume that the answer is, "None of them."
Why don't you use individual equities and guard them with stops?

blarmston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-26

Chris Davis, Tom Marsico, Dan Fuss. Those three right there have consistently outperformed their benchmarks for all conceivable time periods. And I would sleep well knowing a little Bill Gross and Marty Cohen were busy managing my money (even Nick Calamos, with his recent underperformance, would make the line up...).
The fact is, there ARE excellent managers out there. You simply need to fully understand their process and have faith in their ability to run money.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

My point is that one can do equally as well with individual issues or ETFs, with less of a downside risk to the client.  Of course, the commissions are lower......

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

blarmston wrote: Chris Davis, Tom Marsico, Dan Fuss. Those three right there have consistently outperformed their benchmarks for all conceivable time periods. And I would sleep well knowing a little Bill Gross and Marty Cohen were busy managing my money (even Nick Calamos, with his recent underperformance, would make the line up...).
The fact is, there ARE excellent managers out there. You simply need to fully understand their process and have faith in their ability to run money.

You bring up Calamos, do you think he was preparing for a crash that never happened?

silouette's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-13

Mutual Funds suck. Any numbskull can use them. Find something else to do and you will get a lot more business.
Unless they are inside a VUL or annuity?
 

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

silouette wrote:
Mutual Funds suck. Any numbskull can use them. Find something else to do and you will get a lot more business.
Unless they are inside a VUL or annuity?
 

I don't use them in VA's, either, and I've never sold a VUL.

silouette's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-13

My methodology:
Use asset allocation, customized to client's personality. " Push" the allocation tactically, a little, based on market performance expectations.
Funds: work with my preferred providers, now Fidelity, Oppenheimer and Columbia, some ETFs, some individual securites mainly. Why? Train clients to expect steady performance, and branded, top down management of the fund managers themselves. Fidelity is not too shabby - if a fund manager develops a drinking problem, they are usually on it pretty quickly.
Lots of things work, simplification is pleasant. If you train your clients to focus on performance, that's what they focus upon...
Bobby is right, mutual funds are not very unique. But the you can sell sizzle and still enjoy the traditional benefits of diversification, professional management, liquidity and so on. There is so much BS about alternative investments, it is true high net worth expect more, but I think we are talking 5m AUM +.

silouette's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-13

I don't use them in VA's, either, and I've never sold a VUL.
Well then if you stop molesting mom, you might get an apology.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

silouette wrote:
My methodology:
Use asset allocation, customized to client's personality. " Push" the allocation tactically, a little, based on market performance expectations.
Funds: work with my preferred providers, now Fidelity, Oppenheimer and Columbia, some ETFs, some individual securites mainly. Why? Train clients to expect steady performance, and branded, top down management of the fund managers themselves. Fidelity is not too shabby - if a fund manager develops a drinking problem, they are usually on it pretty quickly.
Lots of things work, simplification is pleasant. If you train your clients to focus on performance, that's what they focus upon...
Bobby is right, mutual funds are not very unique. But the you can sell sizzle and still enjoy the traditional benefits of diversification, professional management, liquidity and so on. There is so much BS about alternative investments, it is true high net worth expect more, but I think we are talking 5m AUM +.

Yawwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnn.......

Captain's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-07

I'll mention this...

If you use Principia, you might consider adding their asset allocation
module. It is virtually the same thing as the Ibbotsen Allocator Pro
software - it's portfolio optimization software.

Yes, they give you the historical risk/return numbers, and yes.... you are
looking in the rear-view mirror to judge risk/return numbers.

But...

You have the ability to construct your OWN risk and anticipated return
expectations within the software in order to construct portfolios for your
clients. If you think high yield will have 50% more risk, and 30% less
return than its historical average, then make the adjustment within the
software. You can do this for each individual asset class. At that point,
you are using an historical reference as your guideline, making
adjustments according to YOUR expectations about underperforming/
outperforming asset classes going forward.

Once you've completed your inputs, you complete the model and the
software will provide you with an optimum allocation based on your
assumptions.

At the least, it's a methodology that allows you to use your own expected
returns, while optimizing the blend based on YOUR anticipated risk/
return expectations. You can then move along the efficient frontier, and
build different portfolios for each level of targeted risk for each client
group (aggressive, moderate, conservative). It will provide you with the
appropriate allocation, and you pick the funds to fill the segments.

Asset allocation software is just over $1k. Good product, great support.

C

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Captain wrote: I'll mention this...

If you use Principia, you might consider adding their asset allocation
module. It is virtually the same thing as the Ibbotsen Allocator Pro
software - it's portfolio optimization software.

Yes, they give you the historical risk/return numbers, and yes.... you are
looking in the rear-view mirror to judge risk/return numbers.

But...

You have the ability to construct your OWN risk and anticipated return
expectations within the software in order to construct portfolios for your
clients. If you think high yield will have 50% more risk, and 30% less
return than its historical average, then make the adjustment within the
software. You can do this for each individual asset class. At that point,
you are using an historical reference as your guideline, making
adjustments according to YOUR expectations about underperforming/
outperforming asset classes going forward.

Once you've completed your inputs, you complete the model and the
software will provide you with an optimum allocation based on your
assumptions.

At the least, it's a methodology that allows you to use your own expected
returns, while optimizing the blend based on YOUR anticipated risk/
return expectations. You can then move along the efficient frontier, and
build different portfolios for each level of targeted risk for each client
group (aggressive, moderate, conservative). It will provide you with the
appropriate allocation, and you pick the funds to fill the segments.

Asset allocation software is just over $1k. Good product, great support.

C

Bobby... this is how you write a good response. Take notes.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Philo Kvetch wrote: My point is that one can do equally as well with individual issues or ETFs, with less of a downside risk to the client.  Of course, the commissions are lower......

Philo - Very much agree w/ you. There are certain asset classes it makes a ton of sense to use ETFs with and others that it makes sense to actively manage. I believe we entering a demographic period in the United States that will be very much like the 60's and 70's. What performed: Small caps & International's. Lrg Grwth, Value & to some extent Mid's can be managed w/n your ETF's. To get alpha, tho, we have to use active management in smalls & Int'ls.

Of course - we do this w/n the wrap product so we still get paid. Planning, investments... don't want to be the cheapest, just offer a good value.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

 
How many of them consistently beat the indices?

Philo - not about beating the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump-sum at the right time.

That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're 20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact opposite of what they need to do.

I want to be able to show my clients(and my boss) that within certain assumptions, we have a good and measured chance of having that happen while taking appropriate levels of risk.

Now, Bobby... Bobby will tell you that's the reason he sells 98% VA's - and only uses the fixed acct w/n them because he never sells mutual funds

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client?

Here's the scenario:

Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating
the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the
downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump-
sum at the right time.

That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're
20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the
world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an
overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact
opposite of what they need to do. "

Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can
establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up
as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or
greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your
gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile
of cash from those that have."

Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business?

I don't think so.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Philo Kvetch wrote: No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client?

Here's the scenario:

Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating
the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the
downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump-
sum at the right time.

That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're
20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the
world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an
overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact
opposite of what they need to do. "

Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can
establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up
as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or
greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your
gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile
of cash from those that have."

Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business?

I don't think so.

We obviously live in different world. I'm a bank-based rep & you live in Wirehouse/Indy-ville. I take 3 - 4 of your $200 - $500K clients ever quarter because you can't do what you're talking about with them.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

And what makes you think that I can't?

I can do it in a managed account at say 1.25%, and still blow the doors off of
your MFD portfolio from a cost standpoint. You can't take the client,
because the client is making more in up years, and losing nothing in down
years.

AllREIT's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-16

Ashland wrote:
We obviously live in different world. I'm a bank-based rep &
you live in Wirehouse/Indy-ville. I take 3 - 4 of your $200 - $500K
clients ever quarter because you can't do what you're talking about
with them.

And then the plucky little RIA says that bank brokers have the lowest
payouts in the industry and so they push the highest comission products
(VA's and A-shares) to make up for it. Meanwhile the private
banking/trust folks try to keep as much money as possible tied up in
deposits.

Banks have no business with money.

Meanwhile the 5 years +/- retirement are the "red zone" where you need
to be extra cautious, untill the retirement situation stabilises.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Ashland wrote: Philo Kvetch wrote: No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client? Here's the scenario: Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump- sum at the right time. That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're 20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact opposite of what they need to do. " Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile of cash from those that have." Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business? I don't think so. We obviously live in different world. I'm a bank-based rep & you live in Wirehouse/Indy-ville. I take 3 - 4 of your $200 - $500K clients ever quarter because you can't do what you're talking about with them.
I had a feeling you were gay. What bank do you work for?

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Bobby Hull wrote: Ashland wrote: Philo Kvetch wrote: No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client? Here's the scenario: Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump- sum at the right time. That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're 20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact opposite of what they need to do. " Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile of cash from those that have." Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business? I don't think so. We obviously live in different world. I'm a bank-based rep & you live in Wirehouse/Indy-ville. I take 3 - 4 of your $200 - $500K clients ever quarter because you can't do what you're talking about with them.
I had a feeling you were gay. What bank do you work for?

USB

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Philo Kvetch wrote: No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client?

Here's the scenario:

Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating
the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the
downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump-
sum at the right time.

That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're
20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the
world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an
overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact
opposite of what they need to do. "

Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can
establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up
as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or
greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your
gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile
of cash from those that have."

Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business?

I don't think so.

So you lose 15%, when do you get back in? I guarantee you miss it. I take an avg. of 5 clients per month from the wirehouses every month, north of 200K.   Here are the bigger transfers I have done this month, we are only half way through April:

750K-Wachovia
500K -Merrill
300K - SB
225K - Merrill
200K - Merrill

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

So you lose 15%, when do you get back in? I guarantee you miss it. I take
an avg. of 5 clients per month from the wirehouses every month, north of
200K.   Here are the bigger transfers I have done this month, we are only
half way through April:

750K-Wachovia
500K -Merrill
300K - SB
225K - Merrill
200K - Merrill"
____________________________________________________________ __
Of course you do.

Where did I say I lose 15%? If your reading comprehension is no better
than that, I suggest you stay at the bank and continue to 'put up those
big numbers'.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

bankrep1 wrote: Philo Kvetch wrote: No offense intended Ashland, but have you ever met a real client? Here's the scenario: Broker A is talking with a HNW prospect. He says, "It's not about beating the indices. It's about providing enough return while measuring the downside so we can achieve the w/d rate that we need to or hit the lump- sum at the right time. That 10 - 12% rate of return doesn't make a bit of difference when we're 20 yrs old & have $2000 to invest but makes all the difference in the world at 64 and 2 yrs from turning on the tap. Most people at 64 go to an overly conservative portfolio because of the downside fear - the exact opposite of what they need to do. " Broker B says, "Look. We can buy individual issues or ETFs. We can establish a stop/loss base 15% below current prices, and move them up as the stock or ETF moves up. That way, if there's a fallout 15% or greater, you're on the sidelines in cash, locking in a large portion of your gains. What you're left with are investments that haven't fallen, and a pile of cash from those that have." Do you honestly think that Broker A is going to get the business? I don't think so. So you lose 15%, when do you get back in? I guarantee you miss it. I take an avg. of 5 clients per month from the wirehouses every month, north of 200K.   Here are the bigger transfers I have done this month, we are only half way through April: 750K-Wachovia 500K -Merrill 300K - SB 225K - Merrill 200K - Merrill
You're a liar.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Here are the bigger transfers I have done this month, we are only half way through April:

750K-Wachovia
500K -Merrill
300K - SB
225K - Merrill
200K - Merrill

   The bank biz is high volume, but that's really high there!

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

For you rookies, I have been at the same desk for over 4 years, I pull in over 2 Mil. every month consistently. I certainly did not start out at this volume. Believe what you want, the only one I am out to impress is myself of course.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

At bank payout rates, you'd better be doing numbers that good or better.

That assumes, of course, that you're not fibbing.

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Philo out payout if your doing over 400K is 38% + bonuses starting at 500K

AllREIT's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-16

Philo Kvetch wrote:
Where did I say I lose 15%? If your reading comprehension is no better
than that, I suggest you stay at the bank and continue to 'put up those
big numbers'.

Cmon' Ashland is an insecure bank rep. Humor him.

However, he is right that it is fairly easy to take business from ML
and other wires. Bank brokers have time to service clients at thier
desk, vs the wire brokers who are constantly moving for the next kill.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

Cmon' Ashland is an insecure bank rep. Humor him.

However, he is right that it is fairly easy to take business from ML
and other wires. Bank brokers have time to service clients at thier
desk, vs the wire brokers who are constantly moving for the next kill.

Allreit - All of us are constantly moving for the next kill, but you got it right. Because I know where the money is & I get to deal with so many more people than you do I get to spend more time with each of them. Therefore I get to do the retirement, insurance, etc. planning that you find it difficult to do for my the $200 - $500K customer. And don't think I'm not chasing your $2MM customer, too! I do $800 - $1MM in packaged product sales on a monthly basis & easily add $500K to wrap products monthly.

If any of you are looking for an easier way to do this that will get you to your goals faster - pm me!

roythenn's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-04-15

 I love it.  
Ashland is cool.
 

AllREIT's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-16

Ashland wrote:Allreit - All of us are constantly moving for the next
kill, but you got it right. Because I know where the money is & I
get to deal with so many more people than you do I get to spend more
time with each of them. Therefore I get to do the retirement,
insurance, etc. planning that you find it difficult to do for my the
$200 - $500K customer.

I'm an RIA, I do only investment management/planniong. I collect my 1%
and I don't care who does the rest. Most of my book is either
sophisticated enough, or naive but wary enough not to fall for all the
crap sold by "financial advisors" be they at a bank or at brokerage.

In my experience, bank brokers tend to push lots of high commision products and/or keep lots of money tied up in bank deposits. I get a kick whenever I see annuity brochures next to brochures advertising CD's at better rates.

The whole idea of investing in a contract where the sponsor gets to pick the crediting rate is stupid on its face. An annuity is basicly locking yourself into an assured below market rate. It's a dumb idea, and anyone who sells a 5 year annuity when 5 year CD is available, is a crook.

roythenn's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-04-15

But many bank customers likely just want peace of mind, and don't really give a rip about the details.

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

AllREIT wrote: Ashland wrote:Allreit - All of us are constantly moving for the next
kill, but you got it right. Because I know where the money is & I
get to deal with so many more people than you do I get to spend more
time with each of them. Therefore I get to do the retirement,
insurance, etc. planning that you find it difficult to do for my the
$200 - $500K customer.

I'm an RIA, I do only investment management/planniong. I collect my 1%
and I don't care who does the rest. Most of my book is either
sophisticated enough, or naive but wary enough not to fall for all the
crap sold by "financial advisors" be they at a bank or at brokerage.

In my experience, bank brokers tend to push lots of high commision products and/or keep lots of money tied up in bank deposits. I get a kick whenever I see annuity brochures next to brochures advertising CD's at better rates.

The whole idea of investing in a contract where the sponsor gets to pick the crediting rate is stupid on its face. An annuity is basicly locking yourself into an assured below market rate. It's a dumb idea, and anyone who sells a 5 year annuity when 5 year CD is available, is a crook.

I know some banks still have the annuity pushers, but I think you would be suprised at what some reps are doing in banks. Management in most cases wants advisors not annuity sales people.

Philo Kvetch's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-17

bankrep1 wrote: Philo out payout if your doing over 400K is 38% +
bonuses starting at 500K

You'd better get a move on if you're going to try to hit $400 K this year.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

Philo Kvetch wrote: bankrep1 wrote: Philo out payout if your doing over 400K is 38% + bonuses starting at 500K You'd better get a move on if you're going to try to hit $400 K this year.
Especially with the haircut that the bank worker never sees.

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Bobby Hull wrote: Philo Kvetch wrote: bankrep1 wrote: Philo out payout if your doing over 400K is 38% + bonuses starting at 500K You'd better get a move on if you're going to try to hit $400 K this year.
Especially with the haircut that the bank worker never sees.

Are you a moron. There is no haircut. There is at Merrill though. E.g. I do a 7 yr. annuity I get paid 7.25% if the guy at Merrill writes the same biz he gets like 5% to his grid.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

bankrep1 wrote: Bobby Hull wrote:
Philo Kvetch wrote: bankrep1 wrote: Philo out payout if your doing over 400K is 38% + bonuses starting at 500K You'd better get a move on if you're going to try to hit $400 K this year.
Especially with the haircut that the bank worker never sees.
Are you a moron. There is no haircut. There is at Merrill though. E.g. I do a 7 yr. annuity I get paid 7.25% if the guy at Merrill writes the same biz he gets like 5% to his grid.
Since you make more money than any bank worker in the history of the world, I have to believe that you don't get haircuts. The bank wouldn't want to upset someone as productive as you.

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Bobby shouldn't you be out knocking on doors finding your next victim.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

bankrep1 wrote:Bobby shouldn't you be out knocking on doors finding your next victim.
No. I'd rather hover at the teller window waiting for somene to deposit a 4 figure check that could go into a CD or fixed annuity.

Ashland's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-07

C'mon boys... good natured jabbing is OK. This personal s*it has got to stop.

AllREIT's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-16

Ashland wrote:C'mon boys... good natured jabbing is OK. This personal s*it has got to stop.

Why do people respond to Bobby? Why hasn't forum mod banned him?

bankrep1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Me and Bobby go way back 5 or 6 screen names for him at least. Your're right no one with any money goes to a bank....

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

AllREIT wrote: Ashland wrote:C'mon boys... good natured jabbing is OK. This personal s*it has got to stop.Why do people respond to Bobby? Why hasn't forum mod banned him?
I'm usually good for a month or so before I get banned. Then I come back as someone else. I won't be hard to spot when I come back and then we start the cycle all over, again.

blarmston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-26

"You bring up Calamos, do you think he was preparing for a crash that never happened?"
I think Calamos and his son are fine managers.  They have a good track record through many market cycles, with fine proprietary research and trading disciplines.
Calamos Growth has lagged severely due to a couple factors in my opinion. First, the asset bloat in recent years (the fund has exponentailly increased in asset size) has made it more difficult for them to properly invest these new dollars. Some managers can handle the large inflows- Calamos has shown that they havent been as adept as others.
The other big factor is that they went heavliy into technology a couple years ago, with the thought that the sector would rebound. Also, they were predicting that LC Growth would begin to emerge again as a market leader. Still waiting for that to gain traction...
All in all, I have been slightly trimming positions in the fund, but am hoping that they regain their prowess for making the NAV rise...

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×