500K and above

3 replies [Last post]
wolverine1945's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-04

Many people on this board keep saying that the wirehouses are going to force out all the 500K and under producers. 
 
First of all, if that is true, and maybe it is,  there are plenty of places such as Regionals, Independants that would love to have advisors doing 300-500K.   Frankly, why would anyone want to be doing this is they are under 300k and LOS 10+
 
Now, lets assume however, that the big wirehouses do get rid of all their 500K and under producers.  That means they would be cutting the bottom 60-70% of their brokerage force, and if anyone knows anything about real estate, you just can't get rid of that much space and not take a loss.
 
 
Also, this would make the 500-750K brokers ver nervous, and they would leave as soon as they could.
 
Now you are basically down to 20% or less of your original brokerage force.
 
 
Advisors doing 750k+  might sound great to the wirehouses, but they also are paid more, get more offfice space, more staff, and more perks. 
 
As a matter of fact since they would be the only ones left they could get more then they have now.  They also don't have any loyalty to the wirehouses so they must be paid big signing bonuses every couple of years.
 
There is no possible way that wirehouses could survive.  They simply have too many legacy costs to support so few brokers.
 

Sportsfreakbob's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-08-24

I think he's right. I think the wirehouses will, though, do whatever they can to lose the 250k and under producers, with LOS greater than 5 (or something like that.)And a lot of those guys will go to regionals, or indies, but a lot will just leave the bsiness.

A b's picture
A b
Offline
Joined: 2009-06-04

this talk always happens (87, 90,98,02).
The idiots downsize at the bottom.   the market is getting better. assets up. all that talk will stop

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×