Ameriprise?? Is it really that bad??

51 replies [Last post]
BUDDYROSE's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-01-09

I read these posts about people bashing ameriprise and I am thinking to myself what the hell did american express do to get this god awful image in the finance industry??

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

The answer is they hire almost anybody who is willling to take a chance on themselves, and a lot of who they hire are actually little more than whining bitchoids.
There's not much wrong with Ameriprise except the limited product line and the fact that the little boys and girls are treated as though they were recruits in a boot camp.
None of those who complain day in and day out have a clue to the truth revealed in the statement, "Respect is earned not given."

D.H.K.'s picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-27
Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

One of the biggest problems American Express has had is the zeal with which they sell the opportunity to losers who wander into their road shows.
Years ago the quite literally hired anybody who was willing to take a chance on themselves.  That is a recruiting philosophy with some merit, after all at its core sales is really little more than an exercise in self motivation.
The wirehouses give batteries of tests and lots of interviews trying to sort through a bunch of applicants for a single job.  American Express hired them all, trained them in the disciplines of getting up early, putting on clothes that are appropriate, showing up, and prospecting their asses off.
Most do not make it, but one out of a hundred do.  Just like in the wirehouses. The difference is most of the 99 who didn't make it were never given a desk and a phone in the first place.  At American Express they were.
Put yourself in their shoes.  You are actually not much of a speciman, but you've been given a chance.
Since you're really not what is necessary you're going to fail.  But you begin to rot before you fall off the tree and while you're still hanging around you start to bitch and moan about what a horrible place it it.  You grasp at things like a narrow product line, overbearing managers, no "respect" (whatever that means) and so forth.
The reality is you don't need to have selling agreements with every fund that's out there, you need a handful of them. Most clients cannot tell the difference and today's darling is very likely to be tomorrows dog anyway.
It is human nature to blame anything, and everything, except the iimage in the mirror.  So, when Lonnie Loser finally begins to realize that he's failing at his career choice he begins to grasp at everything he can find to blame.  Except himself.
That somebody started the amerisux website is not unexpected, but it was not started by a guy who would have been able to make it anywhere else.
Drop a big hitter at any firm into an Ameriprise office and he or she will excel there just like they're excelling where they are.  Your broker dealer is important, but not as important as you are.
Conversely, a broker who fails at Ameriprise would have failed anywhere else.
The difference is that around an American Express office (especially several years ago) there were always a lot of young people in various stages of failing and they spent countless hours bitching to each other about how the company was the problem.
It wasn't then and it isn't now.  It's a fine place to start a career, it's a fine place to spend a career, it's a fine place to end a career.
As anybody who makes it anywhere knows, at the end of the day it's up to you.

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

It is the worst because you CAN NEVER LEAVE.
Go anywhere else.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

maybeeeeeeee wrote:
It is the worst because you CAN NEVER LEAVE.
Go anywhere else.

Where in the world did you get that idea?

BrokerRecruit's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-19

It's getting easier.  AMP is spending much less effort on pursuing departing reps.  Additionally, many firms are starting to do buyouts of the prop VAs in order to bring more clients over.
The fact of the matter is, though, that the prop products have (generally) been middle of the road, to 3rd or 4th quintile performing products and they're getting pushed like there is no tomorrow.  Additionally, what if a client doesn't want a financial plan?  Is it right to penalize that rep for not pushing a $750 plan for someone that doesn't want it, simply to remain at a higher payout based on the scorecard?
And, BEF, you are right to an extent that you don't need every product on the street.  However, how can one justify that the 5 VAs we work with that are not as competitive as the 500 that the ML office across the street works with fo your $1M account, Mr. Client?  I do think it comes back to the rep, in many instances, but you can't go to war with a 9mm pistol and expect to win against a tank every time.  There needs to be a re-vamping of the product line.  They're taking a good step by improving the technology and bringing it into the 21st century, but they also need to take a look at opening up the prop products and expanding a little outside of their comfort level, in addition to becoming more progressive, forward thinking and innovative. 

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
One of the biggest problems American Express has had is the zeal with which they sell the opportunity to losers who wander into their road shows.
Years ago the quite literally hired anybody who was willing to take a chance on themselves.  That is a recruiting philosophy with some merit, after all at its core sales is really little more than an exercise in self motivation.
The wirehouses give batteries of tests and lots of interviews trying to sort through a bunch of applicants for a single job.  American Express hired them all, trained them in the disciplines of getting up early, putting on clothes that are appropriate, showing up, and prospecting their asses off.
Most do not make it, but one out of a hundred do.  Just like in the wirehouses. The difference is most of the 99 who didn't make it were never given a desk and a phone in the first place.  At American Express they were.
Put yourself in their shoes.  You are actually not much of a speciman, but you've been given a chance.
Since you're really not what is necessary you're going to fail.  But you begin to rot before you fall off the tree and while you're still hanging around you start to bitch and moan about what a horrible place it it.  You grasp at things like a narrow product line, overbearing managers, no "respect" (whatever that means) and so forth.
The reality is you don't need to have selling agreements with every fund that's out there, you need a handful of them. Most clients cannot tell the difference and today's darling is very likely to be tomorrows dog anyway.
It is human nature to blame anything, and everything, except the iimage in the mirror.  So, when Lonnie Loser finally begins to realize that he's failing at his career choice he begins to grasp at everything he can find to blame.  Except himself.
That somebody started the amerisux website is not unexpected, but it was not started by a guy who would have been able to make it anywhere else.
Drop a big hitter at any firm into an Ameriprise office and he or she will excel there just like they're excelling where they are.  Your broker dealer is important, but not as important as you are.
Conversely, a broker who fails at Ameriprise would have failed anywhere else.
The difference is that around an American Express office (especially several years ago) there were always a lot of young people in various stages of failing and they spent countless hours bitching to each other about how the company was the problem.
It wasn't then and it isn't now.  It's a fine place to start a career, it's a fine place to spend a career, it's a fine place to end a career.
As anybody who makes it anywhere knows, at the end of the day it's up to you.

You are quite accurate in your description of their hiring practices.  I used to be in a building that was also a major branch for Ameriprise.  It was like a friggin' revolving door.  I'd occasionally end up chatting with some of these folks in the elevator or when I took a break.  Very poor training, limited experience if any at sales or financial business, and unreasonable expectations.  Frankly the only folks who seemed to be making money were the branch manager and sales manager and VERY FEW advisors who were 'team leaders' or some silly term like that.  For the rest it was a revolving door.  Like the rookies at the wirehouse but far worse.
You'd be surprised, by the way, at some of the losers who get through the hiring process at the wires, too, from what I've observed over the years.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

joedabrkr wrote:
You are quite accurate in your description of their hiring practices.  I used to be in a building that was also a major branch for Ameriprise.  It was like a friggin' revolving door.  I'd occasionally end up chatting with some of these folks in the elevator or when I took a break.  Very poor training, limited experience if any at sales or financial business, and unreasonable expectations.  Frankly the only folks who seemed to be making money were the branch manager and sales manager and VERY FEW advisors who were 'team leaders' or some silly term like that.  For the rest it was a revolving door.  Like the rookies at the wirehouse but far worse.
You'd be surprised, by the way, at some of the losers who get through the hiring process at the wires, too, from what I've observed over the years.

I think the training is actually quite good in that they take very rough individuals and turn them into prospecting machines.
It is true that their brokers are not very well versed in much of what they could deal in with their Series 7 ticket, but they have been taught discipline, self motivation and other intangibles that are not taught at the wirehouses.
Because it is a revolving door they have to hire a dozen or so people each month. That group becomes a peer group and the tend to push each other........until they begin to realize how hard it is then they tend to agree with each other as the go about the process of failing.
Bill bitches so much that he depresses Joe who also gives up and the two them convince Becky that the place sucks and pretty soon they're gone.
Meanwhile a handful of those who are  hired each year don't listen to the caterwauling and end up making it.
It's a recruiting philosophy and I'm not sure it's wrong, but you sure have to be willing to put up with a bunch of goofballs and losers along the way.  The old "You have to kiss a lot of frogs in order to find a prince" idea come to life.

BrokerRecruit's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-19

How, then, are they justifying all of the senior level reps (in essence, the higher producers) leaving the firm because of the internal structural issues regarding the payout, scorecard and so on?  Obviously firms are losing people daily, but when you're hemhorraging like AMP has been for the past year, something has to be done, otherwise it will be a big black eye to the firm, unless they keep doling out kool-aid.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

BrokerRecruit wrote:How, then, are they justifying all of the senior level reps (in essence, the higher producers) leaving the firm because of the internal structural issues regarding the payout, scorecard and so on?  Obviously firms are losing people daily, but when you're hemhorraging like AMP has been for the past year, something has to be done, otherwise it will be a big black eye to the firm, unless they keep doling out kool-aid.
Often a new management team does virtually nothing to keep the existing staff intact.
For all you know a few, a very few, of the senior people were offered especially attractive incentives to stay and keep quiet as the rest of the firm drifts away.
What is needed there is a wholesale turnover--too many losers with too many bad habits.

TexasRep's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-18

what, me worry?
Naw, cause i'm at H&R Block-
NY Files $250M Fraud Suit Vs. H&R Block

By SAMUEL MAULL, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 44 minutes ago

NEW YORK - New York state filed a $250 million fraud suit Wednesday against H&R Block Inc., the nation's largest tax preparing service, charging the company fraudulently steered customers into a losing retirement account plan. New York Stock Exchange.
The lawsuit, filed in Manhattan's state Supreme Court, says Block advised clients to buy an "unsuitable, fraudulently marketed, poorly performing, fee-ridden 'retirement vehicle' called the Express IRA," an account that actually shrinks over time.
 

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

TexasRep wrote:
what, me worry?
Naw, cause i'm at H&R Block-
NY Files $250M Fraud Suit Vs. H&R Block

By SAMUEL MAULL, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 44 minutes ago

NEW YORK - New York state filed a $250 million fraud suit Wednesday against H&R Block Inc., the nation's largest tax preparing service, charging the company fraudulently steered customers into a losing retirement account plan. New York Stock Exchange.
The lawsuit, filed in Manhattan's state Supreme Court, says Block advised clients to buy an "unsuitable, fraudulently marketed, poorly performing, fee-ridden 'retirement vehicle' called the Express IRA," an account that actually shrinks over time.
 

Some realities.
1.  The people who do investment business with H&R Block are not going to be the brightest bulbs in the chandelier so most of them will not become aware of it unless they were victimized and get some sort of class action letter.
2.  Those who do notice it will say to themselves that they're glad they don't do business with H&R Block then immediately forget about the entire thing.
3.  There is no way for a competitive broker to use it against H&R Block because most brokers are not competing with Block.
The sad reality is the American public has the attention span of a small child and any news, good or bad, has a lifespan of a few days.
Don't worry about it.  Things will be back to normal, whatever that is at Block, within a matter of weeks perhaps even days.

BrokerRecruit's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-19

They did make offers, however many were turned down.  The fact remains, though, that there are many valuable P2s and OSJs across the country that are tired of the instability of the firm and the weaknesses of the internal systems.  A little "hush money" isn't going to solve the problem of good producers (and quality people) from realizing that there could potentially be stronger opportunities with more stability and better growth potential.

Moneytree's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-12-27

BrokerRecruit wrote:   However, how can one justify that the 5 VAs we work with that are not as competitive as the 500 that the ML office across the street works with fo your $1M account, Mr. Client?  

Just wondering what the difference is between ML and Ameriprise when it comes to product choice?

Having an unlimited number of annuities and insurance is irrelevant since one cannot follow so many. At the same time I realize the benefit of having at least more than one.   Both firms have enough fund families to choose from. Both have managed options to choose from.

From the statements I've seen, brokers are basically using the same stuff. What am I missing?

7GOD63's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-01-29

AMEX sold off their investment division.... Does this happen often? I mean the big and small RR firms usually stay in business and do not sell... Right? AMEX or Ameriprise was mass emailing people who had a degree to find RR's. They they just closed shop in many places including Pensacola Florida.

BrokerRecruit's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-19

The bottom line is the performance of the products you offer.  AMP pushes the prop products that are historically not as strong as others that are offered.

Ace Planner's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-09

Amp Advisors have only Amp insurance products (except for LTC).  But they do have most every mutual fund in their wrap program.  They also have a stock platform.  It's possible to not use their products, but it's difficult.  And the insurance products will always pay more than the straight investment products.  But the tax savings will more than compensate the client for the costs.
Ace (an ex amp advisor)

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

Ace Planner wrote:
Amp Advisors have only Amp insurance products (except for LTC).  But they do have most every mutual fund in their wrap program.  They also have a stock platform.  It's possible to not use their products, but it's difficult.  And the insurance products will always pay more than the straight investment products.  But the tax savings will more than compensate the client for the costs.
Ace (an ex amp advisor)

An ex-AMP advisor?  That can't be, it has been stated that it is impossible to leave AMP.

Ace Planner's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-09

I was in the office that closed in P-cola.  They said go to another employee office, pay franchise fees of around 11k per year, plus get an office, or quit.  I quit (them).  Most of my GDC was from insurance, and while I had a few 100k AUM, I didn't like the client that formed the bulk of it.  So it really wasn't a problem.
Ace

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

Ace Planner wrote:
I was in the office that closed in P-cola.  They said go to another employee office, pay franchise fees of around 11k per year, plus get an office, or quit.  I quit (them).  Most of my GDC was from insurance, and while I had a few 100k AUM, I didn't like the client that formed the bulk of it.  So it really wasn't a problem.
Ace

Boy isn't that the truth.  If most of your book is in a single client you want to get rid of that SOB as soon as you can.

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

Big Easy Flood wrote:
The answer is they hire almost anybody who is willling to take a chance on themselves, and a lot of who they hire are actually little more than whining bitchoids.
There's not much wrong with Ameriprise except the limited product line and the fact that the little boys and girls are treated as though they were recruits in a boot camp.
None of those who complain day in and day out have a clue to the truth revealed in the statement, "Respect is earned not given."

Don't you see this is the problem?  If you use your own people how would you treat your clients?  They bring in 100 people 3 stick the rest fail.  How desparate were those 97 right before they failed and how many VULs did they sell to clients who didn't need them.
We turn down people EVERY day.  We are very selective in our hiring practice.  We only choose people who have a great chance at success.  Then they are PAID while they study and given tons of training and back up to help them succeed.
At RayJay clients are number 1 and financial advisors are treated as clients.
 

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

maybeeeeeeee wrote:Big Easy Flood wrote:
The answer is they hire almost anybody who is willling to take a chance on themselves, and a lot of who they hire are actually little more than whining bitchoids.
There's not much wrong with Ameriprise except the limited product line and the fact that the little boys and girls are treated as though they were recruits in a boot camp.
None of those who complain day in and day out have a clue to the truth revealed in the statement, "Respect is earned not given."

Don't you see this is the problem?  If you use your own people how would you treat your clients?  They bring in 100 people 3 stick the rest fail.  How desparate were those 97 right before they failed and how many VULs did they sell to clients who didn't need them.
We turn down people EVERY day.  We are very selective in our hiring practice.  We only choose people who have a great chance at success.  Then they are PAID while they study and given tons of training and back up to help them succeed.
At RayJay clients are number 1 and financial advisors are treated as clients.
 

Do you work in the Human Resources department in St. Petersburg?  If not what makes you qualified to speak on the topic of how many people are turned down?
Have you ever been trained with another firm?  If not what makes you qualified to know how the Raymond James training compares to the training received at other firms?

babbling looney's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Do you work in the Human Resources department in St. Petersburg?  If not what makes you qualified to speak on the topic of how many people are turned down?
Have you ever been trained with another firm?  If not what makes you qualified to know how the Raymond James training compares to the training received at other firms?
While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid. 

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

babbling looney wrote:

While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid. 

Ain't that the truth.  It's a nice firm to work for but it's still an also ran in the grand scheme of things.

Starka's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

babbling looney wrote:
training compares to the training received at other firms?
While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid. 

There is, however, a subtle difference...Maybeeeeeee doesn't need to be constantly reminded by RayJay how lucky he is to be with the firm. 

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

Starka wrote:babbling looney wrote:
training compares to the training received at other firms?
While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid. 

There is, however, a subtle difference...Maybeeeeeee doesn't need to be constantly reminded by RayJay how lucky he is to be with the firm. 

If you have only eaten at Sizzler you will swear that there is no better meal than a Sizzler T-bone and the salad bar.
How many broker/dealers has Maybeeeee worked for?

Starka's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

Big Easy Flood wrote:Starka wrote:babbling looney wrote:
training compares to the training received at other firms?
While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid. 

There is, however, a subtle difference...Maybeeeeeee doesn't need to be constantly reminded by RayJay how lucky he is to be with the firm. 

If you have only eaten at Sizzler you will swear that there is no better meal than a Sizzler T-bone and the salad bar.
How many broker/dealers has Maybeeeee worked for?

Who cares?  The statement made has nothing to do with how many firms Maybeeeee has worked for. 

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
That somebody started the amerisux website is not unexpected, but it was not started by a guy who would have been able to make it anywhere else.

Just for the record, amexsux was started by an unhappy client. As unhappy as some of the AMP advisors are, their clients are far unhappier with what was done to them.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

William wrote:Big Easy Flood wrote:
That somebody started the amerisux website is not unexpected, but it was not started by a guy who would have been able to make it anywhere else.

Just for the record, amexsux was started by an unhappy client. As unhappy as some of the AMP advisors are, their clients are far unhappier with what was done to them.

What was done to them?
Is owning a second tier mutual fund with positive results 200 basis points below last year's top fund akin to have your account churned in the OEX?
Is a salesperson who suggests a VUL when it's not really appropriate as bad as a guy who convinces you that the way to retire early is to buy sugar futures?
The world is a big bad place, and abuses run wild out there.
Whining that firms that generate close to 100% of their revenues from selling mutual funds and life insurance are somehow manhandling their customers reveals an awe inspiring detatchment from reality.
If the joker who started amerisux thinks they're bad can you imagine how distraught he would be if he had listened to a voice that said,
"Hi Mr. Jones, I'm Freddy Phuqemfaster and I am a stock broker with the Wall Street investment banking firm A.S. Goldman, you probably read that wonderful article about us in the Journal last week.
I am not selling anthing, but every so often opportunities come along that are so good that I buy them myself.
I was wondering if I might call you the next time such a situation exists because, according to law, I have to explain the opportunity to 100 clients and prospects before I am allowed to buy it myself?"
Brokers, and their clients, need to get a grip on what is possible in managing money and just because you don't see your mutual fund on the Forbes top ten list does not mean you made a mistake.  Either as the honest salesman who did his best to recommend someting appropriate, or as the customer who listened to that honest broker.
Now, if you're out there being told by somebody, "Look, there are people with money who are going to be screwed by a broker sooner or later, it might as well be you who gets there first....."

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

babbling looney wrote:Do you work in the Human Resources department in St. Petersburg?  If not what makes you qualified to speak on the topic of how many people are turned down?
Have you ever been trained with another firm?  If not what makes you qualified to know how the Raymond James training compares to the training received at other firms?
While Maybeeeeee seems like a very nice person, it is obvious from previous postings that Ray James has its own brand of kool aid.  true dat homey!

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
What was done to them?
Is owning a second tier mutual fund with positive results 200 basis points below last year's top fund akin to have your account churned in the OEX?
Is a salesperson who suggests a VUL when it's not really appropriate as bad as a guy who convinces you that the way to retire early is to buy sugar futures?
The world is a big bad place, and abuses run wild out there.
Whining that firms that generate close to 100% of their revenues from selling mutual funds and life insurance are somehow manhandling their customers reveals an awe inspiring detatchment from reality.
If the joker who started amerisux thinks they're bad can you imagine how distraught he would be if he had listened to a voice that said,
"Hi Mr. Jones, I'm Freddy Phuqemfaster and I am a stock broker with the Wall Street investment banking firm A.S. Goldman, you probably read that wonderful article about us in the Journal last week.
I am not selling anthing, but every so often opportunities come along that are so good that I buy them myself.
I was wondering if I might call you the next time such a situation exists because, according to law, I have to explain the opportunity to 100 clients and prospects before I am allowed to buy it myself?"
Brokers, and their clients, need to get a grip on what is possible in managing money and just because you don't see your mutual fund on the Forbes top ten list does not mean you made a mistake.  Either as the honest salesman who did his best to recommend someting appropriate, or as the customer who listened to that honest broker.
Now, if you're out there being told by somebody, "Look, there are people with money who are going to be screwed by a broker sooner or later, it might as well be you who gets there first....."

 
Rationalize abuse however you like. I'm simply correcting your error.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

But William you're the one who used the phrase, "Done to them" and I'm just asking what you see as having been done to somebody who has, or had, an account with AMP.
What do you see as the abuse?

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
But William you're the one who used the phrase, "Done to them" and I'm just asking what you see as having been done to somebody who has, or had, an account with AMP.
What do you see as the abuse?

 
'salesperson who suggests a VUL when it's not really appropriate' is one example. NASD's Broker Check can provide many other examples.

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

Guilty as charged.  Yes, I love my company.  I would NOT nor could NOT work at a company that was not doing the best for the client.
I do not want a PENNY of revenue if I have had to cheat someone to get it.  I have to look myself in the mirror and love the person I am.
My company lets me be the best, and do the best for my clients.  I have had MANY clients come over from Ameriprise.  Their portfolios are pitiful.  Amex mutual funds, VULs and any other high priced low value thing that was pushed at them.
Tell me, do you get Ray Jay customers coming over to you (No)
Do Ray Jay advisor switch to Ameriprise (Heck no)
Go ahead and lie to yourself if you have to, but my momma did not raise any fools.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

maybeeeeeeee wrote:
Guilty as charged.  Yes, I love my company.  I would NOT nor could NOT work at a company that was not doing the best for the client.

Do you suppose you will ever find yourself attempting to talk a client into buying what you can sell them instead of what they say they want?
There is nothing inherently wrong with selling from a narrow product line.  No firm has selling agreements with every fund, every insurance company, every tax shelter and so forth.
It is the height of arrogance to sneer that somebody who is busting their hump at First Investors is doing his client a disservice by selling them a First Investor's fund.
Hell, it's also arrogant to sneer that a Primerica rep who is out there busting their hump is doing his client a disservice by selling them a ghastly thing filled with front end charges and the whole nine yards.
The fact is that they found that person and that person needed help at that time.  That is no more, nor no less, than anybody else in this business is trying to do.
It shows a remarkable lack of understanding about this industry to suggest that a place like AMP is unethical or any other adjective that suggests it.

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
It shows a remarkable lack of understanding about this industry to suggest that a place like AMP is unethical or any other adjective that suggests it.

It shows a remarkable lack of understanding about ethics to suggest that a firm with 34 regulatory actions against it is ethical.
ethical: Being in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of a profession.
unethical: not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior; "unethical business practices"
Or perhaps you are saying that you think that ethics does not apply in this industry? I can't help you with that one.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

William wrote:
It shows a remarkable lack of understanding about ethics to suggest that a firm with 34 regulatory actions against it is ethical.

Thirty four is a lot when there are thousands of reps?
I know individuals who have ten or more arbitration claims going simulataneously.

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

Big Easy Flood wrote:
Thirty four is a lot when there are thousands of reps?
I know individuals who have ten or more arbitration claims going simulataneously.

Yes, 34 is a lot. Go read them. Then read this:
http://advisor.morningstar.com/articles/doc.asp?docId=4278
Interesting to know that you will dismiss unethical behavior if you think someone else has done it more or worse. Sorry, but that's not the way ethics works.
 

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

Big Easy Flood
You are exactly where you belong.
A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.
You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.
Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

maybeeeeeeee wrote:
Big Easy Flood
You are exactly where you belong.
A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.
You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.
Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

You're right, ever since the firm dropped First Boston from the name I've experienced some anti-Swiss bias for some reason.
It's as if the clients think the Swiss and the French are the same thing.

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

maybeeeeeeee wrote:Big Easy Flood
You are exactly where you belong.
A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.
You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.
Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.Then again my dear you sound like you're getting a mite big for your britches for your limited tenure.....

VinR1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-19

I 'interviewed' with Ameriprise - that place was like a scene straight out of the movie 'Boiler Room'
thirty some odd people on the phone, couple of guys walking around shouting random stuff at the top of their lungs, etc, etc
didnt seem like I'd fit in so... thanks but no thanks...

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

joedabrkr wrote: maybeeeeeeee wrote:
Big Easy Flood
You are exactly where you belong.
A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.
You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.
Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.
I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.Then again my dear you sound like you're getting a mite big for your britches for your limited tenure.....
 . . does my butt look big in these jeans?

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

yes... it does... in fact it looks horrible... completely repulsing...you have definately let yourself go... get yourself into a Ballys Total Fitness and tighten up woman!!!

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

joedabrkr wrote: I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.
What would be an example of "abusive behavior?"

maybeeeeeeee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

 . . . I promise that if I can set aside the time and money I will start to work on my body.  Actually, I need a butt.  Have you ever seen a frog's butt?  Just kind of that bulge at the top of the legs?  That is me.
And speaking of rear ends- - - here is Big Easy Dud

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

maybeeeeeeee wrote:joedabrkr wrote: maybeeeeeeee wrote:
Big Easy Flood
You are exactly where you belong.
A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.
You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.
Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.
I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.Then again my dear you sound like you're getting a mite big for your britches for your limited tenure.....
 . . does my butt look big in these jeans? I dunno....you'll have to send me a picture and I'll render my expert opinion....

RCTFA's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-22

Ameriprise has without a doubt had it's problems in the past, especially under the name American Express Financial.  There have been mass changes at the company since the spin off and it does appear that things are improving.  About their small/bad selections of funds...Their Diversified Equity Income Fund received the 2006 Lipper Fund Award in the Equity-Income Category.  They have recently disposed of one of their largest and poorest performing funds, The Riversource New Dimensions Fund, and folded it into their Large Cap Equity Fund which was in the top 3% in its category last year.
And to the Maybeeeee, the staunch Raymond James supporter.  I understand you like your company but you need to get over the "Homer" bias you posses.  You do know this is the same RayJay that reported they owed customer $6.875M in breakpoint discount they should have provided.  This is also the Raymond James that was probed by the SEC in 2002 after $12.5M entrusted to an account was missappropriated by the company.  This is also the Raymond James that the SECs Division of Enforcement charged with fraud in 2004.  The Enforcement Division alleges that, in 1999 and 2000, Herula [a Raymond James Investment Advisor] and others fraudulently solicited a number of investors to deposit approximately $44.5 million in a Raymond James brokerage account held in the name of Brite Business, promising them astronomical returns with no risk if they did so.  The money was then transferred to the Reps wife's account at Raymond James and never returned to investors.  The Order also alleges that Raymond James, J. Stephen Putnam, the firm's former president and chief operating officer, and David Ullom, Herula's former branch manager, failed reasonably to supervise Herula. According to the Division, Putnam and Ullom were aware that Herula was conducting activities for a suspicious business venture and was making or had made misrepresentations on behalf of Raymond James in connection with that business venture, but failed to take timely or adequate steps to address those misrepresentations or to stop Herula from making further misrepresentations. The Order also alleges that Putnam and/or Ullom facilitated the dissipation of the investor funds raised in the scheme by approving the transfers from the Brite Business account to Herula's wife's account. In addition, the Order alleges that Raymond James and Putnam failed to establish and/or implement procedures concerning the supervision of registered representatives who worked away from the office (as Herula did), heightened supervision of registered representatives, monitoring or auditing operating accounts of branch offices, and investigation of suspicious fund transfers.
I could also go into how RayJay was sued again by investors who were being placed into fee-based accounts who clearly didnt not have the assets necessary to be in such an account and were over charged on an annual basis. 
So go on thinking your company is a perfect angel.  Your naivete will make it easier for us other brokers to get clients.

Big Easy Flood's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-29

There's a lot more than what was mentioned above.
Years ago the firm was one of the sleaziest players in the game, really bad stuff that would make what is detailed above look tame.  Almost taken down by the SEC on more than one occasion.  Especially when all Tom was was the boss's kid.
Tom is well liked in the industry and has been very active with the various groups and as a result the image has improved but the reality is that nobody in this business is a vestal virgin.
They have left a lot of ruined lives in their wake.

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

You say that there have been "mass changes at the company since the spin off and it does appear that things are improving".
What has changed? And by that I don't mean what is Ameriprise now doing that was forced upon them by regulators. What are they doing voluntarily to clean up their act?
Have they lowered fees? Have they changed the whole hiring process (the scripts are sickening, BTW). Has the training vastly improved? Have they gone back and cleaned up client portfolios that are a mess?
From a Morningstar article:
"The biggest strike against Ameriprise is the hushed tone it has maintained throughout this investigation, and that it is adopting even now. ....  It's clear from Ameriprise's statement that it is more eager to comfort shareholders in the company rather than address the concerns of fund investors. What's particularly unfortunate though, is that the funds' board of directors, the group that represents fundholders, has also not come forth with the much needed disclosures. "
http://advisor.morningstar.com/articles/doc.asp?docId=4278
Have disclosures now been made?
I would love to see this shop clean up it's act. Please tell me how it is doing that.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×