Intellectual Disconnect

21 replies [Last post]
Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Dewey Cheatham's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-01

Put,
What do you call a person that graduated last in their class from medical school?
Doctor.
See.  Just passing is enough.
Next question.
Would you trust your life to a doctor that graduated from medical school in 1970 and hasn't completed any continuing education?
No.
See.  You are wrong and obsolete too!!!
P.S. - Put.  If you don't understand.  Substitute "stockbroker" for "doctor".

Duke#1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-06

Proof once again you don't understand our business, Put.  To become a rep the 7 is a regulatory necessity, most of which contained in it is of little if no practical use to being a good rep.  Thus, most reps spend enough time & energy just to get at least the 70.  An 85 or 90 on the 7 doesn't help them at all in this business.  In part, that's why there are no letter grades assigned, as you think.  It's a pass/fail exam, with 70 needed to pass.  Smart rookies with high standards will spend only the amount of time necessary to pass, to be able to free up more time to spend learning the more pertinent information they receive through their firm's regular training programs.

Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

Duke#1 wrote:Proof once again you don't understand our business,
Put.  To become a rep the 7 is a regulatory necessity, most of
which contained in it is of little if no practical use to being a good
rep.  Thus, most reps spend enough time & energy just to get
at least the 70.  An 85 or 90 on the 7 doesn't help them at all in
this business.  In part, that's why there are no letter grades
assigned, as you think.  It's a pass/fail exam, with 70 needed to
pass.  Smart rookies with high standards will spend only the
amount of time necessary to pass, to be able to free up more time to
spend learning the more pertinent information they receive through
their firm's regular training programs.

Tell me this.  If you don't know what to expect how can you spend "just enough time necessary to pass?"

Are you saying that the proper approach is to go to the testing center,
answer the 125 questions in the morning, take the break, come back and
answer 50 more in the afternoon and then push the "score me button?"

That is minimal effort.  Answer 175 of the question, which is all it takes to pass.

I said that realize that if you're not ambitious a 70 is all you
need.  I have also said that when decisions are being made as to
who gets to take a step up the ladder of success attention is paid to
the scores on qualification exams.

I don't know where you work, but I assure you that there are people who
were not considered for certain jobs simply because their Series 7
score was not high enough.

You see, while a 70 may be all it takes to pass the exam those who
score no higher are seen as intellectually challenged and not really
"The right stuff" for management positions--especially big salary, big
responsibility stuff.

As I mentioned most firms actually have numeric thresholds that must be
achieved in order to remain in contention for increasing
responsibilities.

Then there is the compliance layer.  Plaintiff's attorneys obtain
the scores from qualification exams and would have a field day with a
broker who scored in the 70s and an even larger field day with a
manager who had not been capable of mustering at least an 80.

Do you suppose that Merrill pays for three months salary with the goal
being that their rookies score 70s?  Does that really make sense
to you?

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

Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Just the sort of drivel I would expect to hear from a management hack...a former bureaucrat.

By the way....I got a 92. 

Duke#1's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-06

Put said: "Tell me this.  If you don't know what to expect how can you spend "just enough time necessary to pass?""
Boy, you may be a Mensa, but you are also dense and illogical (which again has little to do with raw intelligence).  To answer your question (read this slowly so you can follow the logic), to know enough to pass the test you don't need to completely retain all the material.  You only need to know enough to get 175 q's right. That's where you save the time for other things. Study everything to make sure you are familiar with all the material, then go back and focus on the major sections where most questions are.  Learn the test taking tricks (e.g., since it's all multiple choice even though you don't know the answer if you can eliminate 2 or the choices you have a 50% chance to pick the correct answer).  Take all the practice exams and review the questions you missed.  Chances are you'll find that you missed many questions only because you miss-read them, because they're tricky & often poorly written. If you can pass them consistently then should be ready.  You don't need to study any more intensely than that (and that's plenty of hours already).
Put said: "Then there is the compliance layer.  Plaintiff's attorneys obtain the scores from qualification exams and would have a field day with a broker who scored in the 70s and an even larger field day with a manager who had not been capable of mustering at least an 80."
Wrong. I was an NASD arbiter for three years. Never ever, was someone's test score brought up.
Put said: "Do you suppose that Merrill pays for three months salary with the goal being that their rookies score 70s?  Does that really make sense to you?"Makes all the sense in the world, because reps are hired to generate revenues, not to score high on a test that has no bearing on one's success nor qualifications to succeed. And, by the way, it's no longer the dark ages, Put.  Salaries vary by firm, but are much longer than 3 months!
And, Put, I'm not going to bother to comment much again on your inane comment about the 7 test score being a factor in any promotion.  Maybe you applied that as a factor in whatever management role you had, but that's not reality.  I think because you measure yourself so often by your IQ and Mensa you have some deep-seated hostility towards all of those who succeed so well despite having a lesser raw intellect than you.  I'm sure you hated all those C students in college that succeeded much higher than you.  They were drinking beer & getting laid and didn't take college as seriously as you.  But, nonetheless, they had the instincts, the drive, the raw business sense, the social skills, the people skills, the creativity, the salesmanship, the strategic thinking, etc. to succeed, regardless of their test scores. 

Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

joedabrkr wrote:

By the way....I got a 92. 

Right.  Never met anybody who didn't claim to have scored above
90.  Makes a thinking man wonder why the average passing score
hovers around 75%.

When they moved the test to computers--about 1984 or so--they began
reporting numeric scores.  Until then all you were told is that
you passed or you failed--only your compliance department was told what
your numeric score was.

That was too bad because it allowed an opportunity to boast--or to
lie--about your score.  There is no real reason why an individual
should know what his score was--nothing is served by such information.

On the other hand supervision must know--it's one of the ways to help
spot potential compliance problems.  Stupid people do stupid
things.

Your branch manager may say something inane like that you overstudied
if you got more than a 70--but in Human Resources and Compliance your
records are being flagged, your accounts will be more aggressively
surveiled and so forth.

Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

Duke#1 wrote:Put said: "Tell me this.  If you don't know what to expect how can you spend "just enough time necessary to pass?""
Boy, you may be a Mensa, but you are also dense and illogical (which
again has little to do with raw intelligence).  To answer your
question (read this slowly so you can follow the logic), to know enough
to pass the test you don't need to completely retain all the
material.  You only need to know enough to get 175 q's right.
That's where you save the time for other things. Study everything to
make sure you are familiar with all the material, then go back and
focus on the major sections where most questions are.  Learn the
test taking tricks (e.g., since it's all multiple choice even though
you don't know the answer if you can eliminate 2 or the choices you
have a 50% chance to pick the correct answer).  Take all the
practice exams and review the questions you missed.  Chances are
you'll find that you missed many questions only because you miss-read
them, because they're tricky & often poorly written. If you can
pass them consistently then should be ready.  You don't need to
study any more intensely than that (and that's plenty of hours already).

Let me see if I have this right.  You are suggesting that it is
possible to study "just enough to get a 70 or a 71 without running the
risk of making a mental error or two and ending up with a 69?

Is that what you're saying?

Tell me Duke, what self gratification is there to getting a 71?

Duke#1 wrote:

Put said: "Then there is the compliance layer.  Plaintiff's
attorneys obtain the scores from qualification exams and would have a
field day with a broker who scored in the 70s and an even larger field
day with a manager who had not been capable of mustering at least an
80."
Wrong. I was an NASD arbiter for three years. Never ever, was someone's test score brought up.

Is that right?  How did you get to do that?

Duke#1 wrote:

Put said: "Do you suppose that Merrill pays for three months salary
with the goal being that their rookies score 70s?  Does that
really make sense to you?"Makes all the sense in the world,
because reps are hired to generate revenues, not to score high on a
test that has no bearing on one's success nor qualifications to
succeed. And, by the way, it's no longer the dark ages, Put. 
Salaries vary by firm, but are much longer than 3 months!

How long do firms pay you to prepare for Series 7?   What is a trainee's major responsibility during their first three months?

Duke#1 wrote:

And, Put, I'm not going to bother to comment much again on your
inane comment about the 7 test score being a factor in any
promotion.  Maybe you applied that as a factor in whatever
management role you had, but that's not reality. 

What is amusing to me is how these losers sneer that my six plus years
in production mean nothing compared to their experience riding a gravy
train bull market--while also denying that my close to a quarter of a
century at the regional and HQ level did not yield me an opportunity to
learn a single thing about how the business actually works.

Who do you figure knows more about upper level decision making--a guy
who made some of the decisions alone and sat in on discussions
involving virtually every decision at his level or lower, or a guy who
has been a broker in a branch office for his entire career?

What is amusing to me is that these fools actually think that the
casual reader is going to think, "Yep, I'll bet the home office guy
doesn't have anywhere near as much experience as the broker in a branch
guy."

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

Put,
You don't get it! iF you were worth your mustard as an advisor, you would have done it for longer than 6 years. You'd still be doing it, because you wouldn't want to give up the jack or the lifestyle. There isn't a better job if you manage enough assets and make the money based on the AUM. The fact that you did it for only six years proves only that you were not successful at it. No respect from me, but I like you.
OTH, the fact that I started in one of the worst years in 70 years of history (2002), and doing well indicates I will be a success in this biz.
 

Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

ezmoney wrote:Put,
You don't get it! iF you were worth your mustard as an advisor, you
would have done it for longer than 6 years. You'd still be doing it,
because you wouldn't want to give up the jack or the lifestyle. There
isn't a better job if you manage enough assets and make the money based
on the AUM. The fact that you did it for only six years proves
only that you were not successful at it. No respect from me, but I like
you.
OTH, the fact that I started in one of the worst years in 70 years
of history (2002), and doing well indicates I will be a
success in this biz.

First of all if you started in 2002 your had NO CLIENTS to hold hands
with who lost their asses because of your advice.  It's
nonsensical to think you have any experience in dealing with the two
year adjustment that ended in early 2003.  How long has it been
since you got your first million under management, a year?  When
you're 23 a year is a significant portion of your life so it's no
wonder you think you've been around "forever" and have seen it all.

Can you grasp the concept that every one of your clients can lose huge portions of their money in a single day?

Can you wrap your brain around the fact that it won't make doodly squat
that you talked to them the day before they did--it's going to be
blamed on you and they're going to transfer their account to somebody
else?

The temerity those of your ilk display is awe inspiring.  God only help the fools who trusted you with their assets.

++++++

Now let's get on the other sneer in your drivel.  Suppose,
agaiinst all odds, you were ambitious instead of a loser who hopes to
do entry level work for forty years.

Further suppose, against all odds, that a role model adult approached
you and said, "EZ, I am impressed with what you've been doing and I'd
like to have you to work with me (and other role model types) and help
others around the region learn to do it too."

Would you tell him, "Thanks for the offer but I really don't want to
accept any responsibility?"  Apparently you would, which is why
you are going through life with an "L" on your forehead.

Do you think your branch manager is a loser and a leech?

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

Must I remind you yet again that it's you personally who is the loser and leech?  Your inability to remember what you've been told by your betters is the specific reason that you'll never amount to anything.
Sheesh.  You military brats are all alike.

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

Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard
Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told
us....to just get on the phone and sell!! 

Your an idiot Put.

Put Trader's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-08

rightway wrote:
Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard
Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told
us....to just get on the phone and sell!! 

Your an idiot Put.

An idiot?  I have knowledge of Alpha, Beta, Standard Deviations,
Sharp and Treynor--I know that they have to do with measuring why a
given investment did what it did--but NOTHING to do with what that
investment is going to do tomorrow.

Your job is not to analyze funds, your job is to sell them.

You're like a salesman at a Ford dealership who insists that his job is to analyze the chemical makeup of the tires.

Why do you waste your time dealing with the past performance of a
fund?  Do you actually believe that past performance is indicative
of future returns?

If all the standard deviations on earth say that an investment is
poised to go up does it not need one more element---investable capital?

Your job is to locate that capital--nothing more, nothing less.

stanwbrown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-01

rightway wrote: Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told us....to just get on the phone and sell!!  Your an idiot Put.
Poor old Put seems to think ML hands out lists that say "buy these funds for your client's portfolios" or "combine these managers in these percentages in your Consults accounts". He also seems to be a relic from days gone by when clients of means weren't smart enough to ask informed questions at their quarterly reviews.
I suppose his answer would "Hey buddy, my job's just to get your account here, the smart guys in NYC do all the thinking here"...
 

inquisitive's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-10

Put Trader wrote:
You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

I couldn't agree with that more.  Anyone, everyone, should always
strive for the best.  You may not get 100%, but you'll do a lot
better working toward that than an 80.

inquisitive's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-10

rightway wrote:
Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard
Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told
us....to just get on the phone and sell!! 

Your an idiot Put.

90+% of financial advisors will have absolutely no need for any of that
stuff.  90+% of people will never have any need for calculus,
either.  Doesn't mean that you shouldn't learn it.  But
overall, it's a bit more than necessary.

When's the last time you calculated standard deviations of anything,
rightway?  Odds are you haven't.  That information is often
provided for you.

Perhaps you need to be reminded, rightway:  you are compensated
for your ability to get clients in the door--and nothing more.

inquisitive's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-10

stanwbrown wrote:rightway wrote: Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.Yet
you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard Deviation,
Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told us....to just
get on the phone and sell!!  Your an idiot Put.
Poor old Put seems to think ML hands out lists that say "buy these
funds for your client's portfolios" or "combine these managers in these
percentages in your Consults accounts". He also seems to be a relic
from days gone by when clients of means weren't smart enough
to ask informed questions at their quarterly reviews.
I suppose his answer would "Hey buddy, my job's just to get your
account here, the smart guys in NYC do all the thinking here"...

Ah, you must be one of those guys who doesn't hand off his client assets to outside money managers...

You are a salesman.  You put on a horse and pony show. 
You are paid handsomely for it.  You get clients in the
door. 

If firms didn't need people to get clients in the door, why the hell would they pay you so much???  They wouldn't.

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

inquisitive wrote:
rightway wrote:
Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.

Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"

Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"

The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.

You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.

Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard
Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told
us....to just get on the phone and sell!! 

Your an idiot Put.

90+% of financial advisors will have absolutely no need for any of that
stuff.  90+% of people will never have any need for calculus,
either.  Doesn't mean that you shouldn't learn it.  But
overall, it's a bit more than necessary.

When's the last time you calculated standard deviations of anything,
rightway?  Odds are you haven't.  That information is often
provided for you.

Perhaps you need to be reminded, rightway:  you are compensated
for your ability to get clients in the door--and nothing more.

I don't need to be reminded of anything, especially from you.  I
don't know how many times I need to say this, but I just feel we need
to able to understand how to use these types of statistical tools, NOT
WRITE THE FORMULAS (which is how this whole subject started- Puts
inability to use them)

I have a book of business that sustains itself nicely through
referrals.  These referrals come from service.  I do not
actively prospect, other than asking clients to pass my name along. My
compensation is not derived from my "ability to get clients in the
door" anymore.  But when It was, there were many larger
relationships that came my way based on an ability to convey these at
times complex subjects in an understandable way.  I just think it
is good to know these things, but you all can do what you like.

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

I for one am so happy and feel so enlightened to have a former never-was spouting such words of wisdom. Thank you Put Trader!!!

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

Has l'enfant terrible finally gone the way of the dodo?
We can only hope, I guess.

stanwbrown's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-01

inquisitive wrote: stanwbrown wrote:
rightway wrote: Put Trader wrote:For those of you who are studying for Series 7 or any of the others.Note the intellectual disconnect in the comment, "It's a piece of cake, I got a 77"Why would they not say, "It's hard as hell I was only able to get a 77!"The reason is that they're satisfied with a D or a C just as long as they passed.You don't want to model yourself after a slacker who does not set high standards for themselves and others.Yet you feel that having knowledge about Alpha, Beta, Standard Deviation, Sharp, Treynor, etc... is a waste of time.  You told us....to just get on the phone and sell!!  Your an idiot Put.
Poor old Put seems to think ML hands out lists that say "buy these funds for your client's portfolios" or "combine these managers in these percentages in your Consults accounts". He also seems to be a relic from days gone by when clients of means weren't smart enough to ask informed questions at their quarterly reviews.
I suppose his answer would "Hey buddy, my job's just to get your account here, the smart guys in NYC do all the thinking here"...

Ah, you must be one of those guys who doesn't hand off his client assets to outside money managers...
You are a salesman.  You put on a horse and pony show.  You are paid handsomely for it.  You get clients in the door. 
If firms didn't need people to get clients in the door, why the hell would they pay you so much???  They wouldn't.

Let me see if I can help you here.... I DO use outside managers, OTOH, it's MY job to combine those managers and their investment styles into a coherent portfolio that meets a specific client’s needs, and then be prepared to explain it to the client. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Perhaps you work somewhere where they hand you a list and say “sell these three funds in these percentages to everyone who walks through the door” or some such. Where I am we have a wide array of tools and the job is to apply them appropriately to specific situations. You must also have clients who aren’t informed enough to ask insightful questions. I can assure you boards of charities and foundations, not to mention HNW investors (most of them former business owners) won’t settle for some half-baked dog and pony show by a rep who thinks his job’s over when the ACAT forms are signed.
I agree with you about brokers who glorify themselves by trying to be securities analysts or shy away from being primarily salesmen and asset gatherers. OTOH, let’s not go overboard and pretend you can do business with sophisticated investors without doing your homework and being a professional.

 

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

"I agree with you about brokers who glorify themselves by trying to be securities analysts or shy away from being primarily salesmen and asset gatherers. OTOH, let’s not go overboard and pretend you can do business with sophisticated investors without doing your homework and being a professional."
<?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />Perfectly said...

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×