Ameripise changing?

34 replies [Last post]
frogger's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08

I see a lot of Ameriprise bashing on these forums. Are they really as bad as they were a few years back as all the fish bowl and drone stories suggest? How can a company so bad have more CFPs than any other company? Any input would be appreciated as I've been told they are turning over a new leaf. True?? Anyone have recent experience to share? Can they ever compete with the big boys?

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous

frogger wrote:I see a lot of Ameriprise bashing on these forums. Rightfully so.  Are they really as bad as they were a few years back as all the fish bowl and drone stories suggest?  Yes.  How can a company so bad have more CFPs than any other company?  Who cares?  Any input would be appreciated as I've been told they are turning over a new leaf. True??  No.  Anyone have recent experience to share? Can they ever compete with the big boys?  No. 
 
My bill will be in the mail tomorrow afternoon.

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

frogger wrote:I see a lot of Ameriprise bashing on these forums. Are they really as bad as they were a few years back as all the fish bowl and drone stories suggest? Yes.  How can a company so bad have more CFPs than any other company? Because they Can't F'ing Produce.  Any input would be appreciated as I've been told they are turning over a new leaf. True??  Not a chance.  Anyone have recent experience to share?  Recent experience is of taking accounts away from them.  Can they ever compete with the big boys? Never.

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

joedabrkr wrote: For what it's worth, my perception is that Ameriprise is somewhat a tale of 2 companies....the "indy platform" advisors seem to be some pretty solid producers and good businessmen(er...women) from what I've observed.The "employee channel" advisors, however, seem to largely fit the stereotypes put forth by many of the 'bashers'.Agreed!  However, even the "indy" types aren't really independent at Ameriprise.  They don't own their book, they just get a higher payout and contract with Ameriprise for their services.  If they wanted to change firms, the B/D still owns the client.

xbanker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-01-21

I had an interview about four months ago with them. While I was very skeptical, I see no reason not to examine the situation myself and see if things are as they seem. Everything I'd heard about them was basically confirmed in the interview. You're expected to dish out proprietary products such as VAs and VULs for EVERY client. This is what all of the plans will advise. Don't even bother bringing someone on without a plan. The real deal breaker is the rigidity of the schedule. You don't just have to do the business, but do it in exactly the way that AMP lays out for you, down to a 60 hr schedule and specific marketing plan. The "grail" for those who can tolerate this long enough to get around 35-50 planning clients and about 10MM AUM is the ability to go indie which while it may be much better than the employee channel, is no LPL, Ray Jay, etc.

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

Ameriprise = joke. Requiring everyone to get a CFP is a marketing ploy. Not to bash CFP holders, but it's not rocket science (I've got one).

Some of the "independent" guys are ok, but it still sucks to be there.

I interviewed with them a while back, and they told me my 10 mil, hartford annuity-wrapped 401K would have to switch to riversource. Talk about a deal breaker.

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

They're a marketing machine.  I give them credit, I think their commercials work.  I think them and Fidelity do a very good job of marketing to middle-income America.  This says nothing of what they do for their clients - I just think they are both marketing machines.  At least with Fidelity you know what you are getting (call center support at best).

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Sounds like ice and snag got scooped a few too many times by their local Ameriprise practice.  Maybe your (former) clients were looking for an advisor, not a churner. 
 
And skippy, I do in fact "own" my client base, and Ameriprise has tried to make it as turnkey as possible to sell to another Ameriprise advisor one day.  Ameriprise practices typically go for a premium, and if it's worth a damn, buyers will be lining up.
 
And as far as being forced to sell all prop, or told that a Hartford 401k had to be changed to RiverSource?  Wrong.  The only area that I'm restricted to "Prop" is annuities.  Our annuities are highly rated by M* as having low expenses and relatively high number of "4 & 5 star subaccounts." Annuities aren't my concern, most of my aum is in wrap accounts.  There's no such thing as a "RiverSource 401(k)."  Our 401(k)s are all brokered.

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

Taco,
Is that why every time I see an Ameriprise statement, it has the same crappy Riversource funds in it?  No proprietary restrictions my arse.  That is ok though, those Riversource funds are gems and make it very easy for the client sign the ACAT.
 

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

Big Taco wrote:
 

And skippy, I do in fact "own" my client base, and Ameriprise has tried to make it as turnkey as possible to sell to another Ameriprise advisor one day.  Ameriprise practices typically go for a premium, and if it's worth a damn, buyers will be lining up.Well, that's great.  You can sell to another Ameriprise rep!  You still CAN'T LEAVE AMERIPRISE.  You still can't take your clients with you to another B/D.Basically, it's YOUR business as long as you stay with Ameriprise.  That doesn't sound like being independent to me.If you're happy there, all power to ya.

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

Taco,

I'm pretty sure I said, yep "my 10mil hartford ANNUITY wrapped-401k". That means, your "Prop" annuities would have been required to transition. Because the 401k (which ended with lower expenses because of the annuity wrap) was using a hartford annuity, Ameriprise will NOT hold it. Ask your branch manager if you can start a 401k with Hartford using an annuity wrap. I'll bet you dollars to protein shakes that he says no.

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

Big Taco wrote:Sounds like ice and snag got scooped a few too many times by their local Ameriprise practice.  Maybe your (former) clients were looking for an advisor, not a churner. 
 
 
Au contraire, I have never lost a client to Ameriprise.  In fact, I have a statement I'm looking at on my desk right now with RVS funds I need my NEW client to sell.  They have also referred me to their parents, also with Ameriprise.
 
I think I will write up a nice little thank you note and drop it in one of the local fish bowls here in my building... 

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous

LOL, I would do that Snags, that would be funny as hell! 
 
You got me Taco, I am just bitter because Ameriprise rejected me, and the semi local Ameriprise rep steals all of my clients. 

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

skippy wrote: Big Taco wrote:
 
And skippy, I do in fact "own" my client base, and Ameriprise has tried to make it as turnkey as possible to sell to another Ameriprise advisor one day.  Ameriprise practices typically go for a premium, and if it's worth a damn, buyers will be lining up.Well, that's great.  You can sell to another Ameriprise rep!  You still CAN'T LEAVE AMERIPRISE.  You still can't take your clients with you to another B/D.Basically, it's YOUR business as long as you stay with Ameriprise.  That doesn't sound like being independent to me.If you're happy there, all power to ya.
 
Thanks, glad we're on the same page.
 
 
 
 
 

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Magician wrote:Taco, I'm pretty sure I said, yep "my 10mil hartford ANNUITY wrapped-401k". That means, your "Prop" annuities would have been required to transition. Because the 401k (which ended with lower expenses because of the annuity wrap) was using a hartford annuity, Ameriprise will NOT hold it. Ask your branch manager if you can start a 401k with Hartford using an annuity wrap. I'll bet you dollars to protein shakes that he says no.
 
 
Hmm.  You must be some magician.  You created the "illusion" that a Hartford annuity is a good 401(k) platform.
 
And you must have "conjured" up a one-of-a-kind "RiverSource 401(k) annuity,"  because I'm looking at a pdf of the Qualified VA app right now, and I don't see a single box to check for "401(k)"......... SEP IRA, yes.  SIMPLE IRA, yes......  but no 401(k).  Sorry, magic.  Take the smoke and mirrors elsewhere.
 
 
 
 

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

snaggletooth wrote:Big Taco wrote:Sounds like ice and snag got scooped a few too many times by their local Ameriprise practice.  Maybe your (former) clients were looking for an advisor, not a churner. 
 
 
Au contraire, I have never lost a client to Ameriprise.  In fact, I have a statement I'm looking at on my desk right now with RVS funds I need my NEW client to sell.  They have also referred me to their parents, also with Ameriprise.
 
I think I will write up a nice little thank you note and drop it in one of the local fish bowls here in my building... 
 
Well, I'm looking at a pretty interesting statement too!  It proves, unequivocally, that BigFoot and George Bush are old Yalie buddies, and to this day, they make it a rule to never miss an episode of "Desperate Housewives". 
 
I'm sure both of our posts are 100% true, snag.  Afterall, this IS the internet.
 
 
 
 

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

Big Taco wrote:snaggletooth wrote:Big Taco wrote:Sounds like ice and snag got scooped a few too many times by their local Ameriprise practice.  Maybe your (former) clients were looking for an advisor, not a churner. 
 
 
Au contraire, I have never lost a client to Ameriprise.  In fact, I have a statement I'm looking at on my desk right now with RVS funds I need my NEW client to sell.  They have also referred me to their parents, also with Ameriprise.
 
I think I will write up a nice little thank you note and drop it in one of the local fish bowls here in my building... 
 
Well, I'm looking at a pretty interesting statement too!  It proves, unequivocally, that BigFoot and George Bush are old Yalie buddies, and to this day, they make it a rule to never miss an episode of "Desperate Housewives". 
 
I'm sure both of our posts are 100% true, snag.  Afterall, this IS the internet.
 
 
Look, we both know that the admissions department really missed the boat in 1964 at Yale.  But if BigFoot and Bush can get along, maybe there's hope that real advisors can get along with Ameriprise reps...
 
And it's true, I've never lost a client to Ameriprise.  It's pretty easy to tell since we can plainly see which firm is ACATing the accounts away. 

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Primo wrote:
Taco,
Is that why every time I see an Ameriprise statement, it has the same crappy Riversource funds in it?  No proprietary restrictions my arse.  That is ok though, those Riversource funds are gems and make it very easy for the client sign the ACAT.
 
 
Couldn't tell ya.
 
I've got some of them on the books.  I think RVS Div. Equity Income is a good value fund, and use it sometimes.
 
The other ones are from some of the clients that I bought years ago when prop was more common.  The ones that wouldn't come in for review, didn't see the point of making a change even though their portfolios were severely out of balance by then...  I sent most of those clients to home office.  Maybe they're who you're meeting?  The kind that don't feel the need to make a change until they get thier "Quarter ending March 31st, 2008" statement, crap their pants, then decide to call you, whereby they can now be your problem?  Good luck.
 
Or maybe it's like the clients that keep migrating to my office from other advisors.  Smith Barney statements come to mind (pretty convoluted statement, BTW).  The one where the advisor charged a 1.5% wrap with all (I mean 100% ALL) Citi CM funds in it was really over-the-top.  And it was just domestic equity funds-- large & small caps -- and this client has a very moderate risk tolerance.  I can't believe that's not a compliance violation (using all props in a wrapped account?).  Maybe these migratory clients will be like the ones I fired, or maybe they didn't like getting over-charged for garbage.  Time will tell.
 
And I really appreciate all the annuity salesmen who've decided that 1 large cap growth subaccount is appropriate for everyone.  When that brilliant asset allocation tanks the new clients come out of the woodwork.
 
There's a lot of other "investment strategies" and products that my competitors push out there that I'm grateful for.  I suppose we should all count our blessings.  I'll start with the TRAK account.
 
Either way, glad it's working out for you Primo.
 
 
 

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

You got me Taco, they never said it had to switch to Riversource. What he did say is that it would be impossible to hold. And that's a fact. The annuity wrap saved the plan 12k a year in fees. They get 32 different firms, at A-share costs. No smoke and mirrors, just simple math. "Mr. Plan Administrator, do you want to pay 12k more or less?"

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Magician wrote:You got me Taco, they never said it had to switch to Riversource. What he did say is that it would be impossible to hold. And that's a fact. The annuity wrap saved the plan 12k a year in fees. They get 32 different firms, at A-share costs. No smoke and mirrors, just simple math. "Mr. Plan Administrator, do you want to pay 12k more or less?"
 
Saved 12K a year in fees as compared to what?

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

The American Funds plan I was competing against, as well as any of the other Hartford platforms. Fidelity and Vanguard wouldn't negotiate on fees, so that's what happened.

Basically, the way it worked was, there were no fees for testing, loans, withdrawals, etc. Waived all administrative costs. Hartford picked up the TPA costs. Load-waived A-shares, Fidelity, even managed to squeeze some Vanguard in there because the CEO wanted it.

Hartford wanted it bad (so did I), because they only have 70 employees and are putting in 3mil a year (between deferments and profit sharing).

If you want, PM me and I'll show you how it's structured (minus client name, of course), and why it was the best fit for this plan.

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Sounds like you did your research and laid out a good case to the sponsor. 
 
Although I'm sure that you could find a similar or better brokered platform at similar or better costs to participants/sponsor, too, if that was the only thing holding you back from switching b/d's at the time. 

DodgerDraftpick's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-24

Magician I have a few questions for you on this 401 (k) plan.  First off you used the Hartford annuity not the Aviator platform?  Also on this size plan did you take a commission and trail or trail only?  And lastly what share class are the invesments?

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

Dodger,

I used the hartford annuity. I took 60 bps for upfront and additional contributions and 40 bps trail. A-share for most "load" type fund companies. Institutional class for Fidelity, etc.

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

Taco,

You may be right. The problem was, this plan had already been recently sold. And to be honest with you, the BOM and the guy from your transition department were jerks about it. Seemed like they weren't really trying to help. I prefer the "Let me see what I can do" approach. That's why I'm fed up at Jones. Our home office is a bunch of chumps who don't deserve a dime of pay.

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

Yeah, hard to switch over a plan that was recently sold.  Also unfortunate that the transition folks didn't make you feel that they were doing everything possible to help you. 

bluehorseshoe2's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-02

"Ameriprise Changing?"
 
I've been at Ameriprise for awhile and here is the most candid response I can offer based on my knowledge and experience with the firm.  Hopefully this will dispel some myths and bring everyone up to date with the firm and its platforms.
 
1.  Ameriprise is a tale of 2 platforms as someone suggested.  P1 and P2 have now been separated.  To get to the (so called) independent channel you now need to have 20 mil in assets and the independent channel has to pay the employee channel for your book.
 
2.  You are no longer prodded to sell RiverSource mutual funds.  This dissapeared sometime around late '03 early '04.  With that being said your only option for a managed mutual fund wrap program is through RiverSource.  They keep promissing that a non-proprietary managed mutual fund wrap will come out soon, but I see no reason to do so until the clueless advisors with the firm stop putting money in Active Portfolio's.
 
The all you can eat wrap account remains the best choice where the advisor can pick thousands of funds, individual stocks, bonds, etf's, uit's, etc... in the account.  The downsides to this account are that the firm takes a haircut from it before it even hits grid, the compliance and rebalancing requirements take a lot of time from the more important task of gathering assets, and the ticket charges for the independent reps are outrageous when compared to LPL, Ray James, etc...
 
An SMA platform has been introduced and the haircut to advisors was just reduced.  They continue to improve this, but it is still nowhere close to ML, MS, UBS or SB.
 
3.  We are proprietary when it comes to permanent life insurance and variable annuities.  I agree that the annuity product is pretty good and not too expensive, but it would be nice to have more options.  VUL was (and probably still is in some local offices) mostly an employee platform phenomenon.  In some regions there is this bizzare idea that all clients should be presented wth permanent insurance.  I believe this culture stemmed from the need for branch managers to retain new advisors who they should not have hired because they could not gather enough assets to make it in the business.  VUL thus turned no revenue clients into some revenue clients and helped keep new advisors from failing out.  There is no way you can tell me that someone that qualify's for Roth's should have a VUL.  I think most advisors in the independent channel follow the same philosophy and do not sell many VUL's.
 
4.  I believe most independants stay with the firm despite the platform limitations because the company does a good job at handcuffing them with the inability to move because of assets stuck in the annuity product and prop insurance.  I can't think of another reason, other than not wanting to re-paper accounts, because these guys/gals take a huge haircut on wrap/REITS/Annuities/Insurance/UIT's etc... compared to other independents.  When you run the numbers 450k in most platforms equates to about 350k at Ameriprise when you factor in these haircuts.
 
5. Fishbowls are going away.  Now that the employee channel is responsible for its own P&L statement this marketing technique is too expensive (thank god).  This should be totally phased out early next year.  The focus from management on the employee side is to hire people with a legitimate shot to make it in the business based on their current networks and affiliations.  The days of filling seats for filling seats sake seems to be over.  The mandate is that the new reps follow a more traditional model of referral and coi marketing.
 
6.  There is a national calendar for employee reps.  The clone atmosphere persists in the employee platform even though they are allegedly hiring different people.  I can't imagine real professionals entering this business will put up with being treated this way (not to mention working for a 24k forgivable draw) so I expect this calendar to continue to loosen up.  Mandatory Saturdays have been discontinued as of early '08.  If the firm is able to hire a real national sales manager from outside then I think their first battle will be taking the current management team out of 1990 and bringing them to the present day reality of the business.  They have a lot of folks with a manager title, but very few that are actually able to lead.  With recent compensation changes to their lower level managers and the restructuring of territory for upper level management some would argue that they've damaged the bench of future leaders in the company.  When you have the corporate office people telling the sales people how to manage their time and sell you are inevitably headed in the wrong direction.
 
7.  Will they ever be able to compete with the big boys?  No because they don't want to pursue the wirehouse business model.  The leadership is 100% invested in the idea of annual financial planning and that being the backbone of the business.  They really want the reps to be more than asset gatherer's and this will always impair the advisors ability to compete with the wirehouses when it comes to being SMA sales people and increasing production based on AUM.  The other issue is that to get the people in place that really know how to compete all the senior leadership that has always been with the firm will need to be replaced and that could take years to get done never mind actually changing the behavior of the reps.  They are sold on the idea that investment management fees will continue to decrease and that financial planning for a fee will be the future of the business.  It is really a contradiction senior leadership seems to be struggling with since I believe they have one of the worst revenue sharing addictions this side of Ed Jones.
 
The other issue preventing AMP from ever competing is the value proposition to competitive recruits.  The bait they are currently casting is easy to access marketing allowances and an enormous amount of staff support for the level of production people are doing relative to other firms.  The first hurdle in getting beyond this is that 99% of the senior leadership has never been anywhere but AMP.  They don't have the tools to compete with the wirehouse guys because they have no idea how the big boys do business.  If you hear of a real national sales manager coming in and replacing current SVP's and GVP's with people from ML, MS, SB, UBS, Wachovia, BOA then maybe those firms need to take notice.  As long as AMP is run by lifetime AMP people the firm will have no real chance to recruit the brokers they need to be competitive.  If the CEO and Board really cared about change and fixing the employee and independent platform they would own up to the real definition of insanity in this business and stop "having the same people, with the same skills (or lack thereof), doing similar things and expecting different results."  Until the house cleaning takes place the firm will remain a step behind.
 
Hope this post does some good in dispelling myths and letting people know what is really going on with AMP.

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

I agree with some of what you wrote, and disagree with some of your opinions. 
 
That said, permanent life insurance is not proprietary-only, at least for me.  Not sure if it's based on being a so called "Platinum Advisor" or what, but I can shop all insurance products, except annuities
 
Maybe I'm drinking the kool-aid, but I think there definitely a niche in annual financial planning.  There's a real contingent out there who want comprehensive advice, and are willing to pay for it (and not just through buying insurance/mutual funds/annuities).  I like being able to offer this service to clients, and if they decide they want me to manage assets and/or provide protection products on top of this, then I have the ability to shop insurers, and have a relatively large stable of investment products to offer.
 
I also don't see the problem with SPS as you do.  I like the platform, I like the asset-based-fee model, and where it puts monetary incentive.  Yes there is a "Global Fee" haircut.  No one wants a compensation haircut.  It's gone down some as my SPS assets have increased.  It's not a deal breaker for me.
 
Finally, I've been extremely impressed with the way technology has leaped forward over the last 3 years.  Some of the corporate people said that an independent audit (can't remember from whom, but it was a global consulting firm) reported that when our planned tech upgrades are/were completed, Ameriprise would be the industry leader in advisor technology.  I'm a techie guy, and appreciate this greatly.

bluehorseshoe2's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-02

Taco - I also agree and disagree with your post. Sounds like you have better access to outside insurance in P2.  Not sure why they can't open the insurance platform for the employee channel? 
 
I think you are right to say there is a place for fee based annual planning and there are clients that prefer to work that way.  With that said I don't think it is the future of the business or more shops would be doing it.  A great tool to have, but not the end all be all arrangement.
 
I do like SPS and the flexibility it gives you for more complex clients, but we shouldn't be forced to spend our time rebalancing 300k wrap accounts when a simple non-prop managed mutual fund platform could be added to the platform.  If you look at Active Portfolio's performance it is a total joke.  We need the tools to increase our capacity if we are to compete with other advisors out there and the lack of a managed mutual fund platform is a big deal.
 
The technology has improved, but is still not as good as non-prop stuff on the market.  I went to Minneapolis to see the new navi plan (aka never plan) rollout and I can say that a simple subscription to e money for all advisors would be a much better tool.  Don't even get me started on contact manager as that is the slowest program I've ever seen!
 
My point is that we have some good stuff in place and have moved forward, but we will never get to the point where we can really compete until some new blood and ideas are brought in from outside.

ameriwho's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-14

frogger wrote:I see a lot of Ameriprise bashing on these forums. Are they really as bad as they were a few years back as all the fish bowl and drone stories suggest? How can a company so bad have more CFPs than any other company? Any input would be appreciated as I've been told they are turning over a new leaf. True?? Anyone have recent experience to share? Can they ever compete with the big boys?Yes it's the same company. You'll see some announcements that they try to give the appearance they've changed but this is not the case. Ameriprise works by generating a captive audience for both it's advisors and it's clients. This is done by using as many proprietary products as possible so if an advisor jump ships they can't bring the client with them. Also, if a client attempts to move to a different firm, they'll be hit with as many fees as possible to prevent them from moving like surrender charges, closure fees, etc. Contrary to what other people say, you own your business as long as your with Ameriprise. Once you leave, you cannot take clients with you as if you attempt to do this you'll be hit with a lawsuit (for example, http://www.amexsux.com/pdfs/ameriprise_sues_advisor.pdf ). Even with as many hurdles as Ameriprise puts up, top advisors have left Ameriprise; for example, the only Ameriprise advisor, Charles Zhang, in Barron's top 100 advisors has left.Ameriprise also works by promoting within. They hire kids out of college and train them as P1 and the few who make it become P2s thus they don't know any better and after so many training sessions they honestly believe selling a VUL and annuity will solve all financial problems. Ameriprise doesn't do well with attracting people from other firms. This is starting to cause problems since they've lost a lot of advisors to the tune of 6% of all advisors have left per the last SEC filing.This company will never compete with the big boys. Per their filings, the average amount under asset is about 90K per client per advisor. This number is misleading. Once a client becomes inactive they place their account under the home office thus increasing the asset per client per advisor number. Why is this? High net worth clients do not view Ameriprise as an option. Seeing as this is the case, Ameriprise is left with no choice but to maximize as much revenue per client as possible and this is done by annuities and VULs.If you go to work for them, plan on hitting up everyone you know for a financial plan and in turn follow up the purchase of the plan with annuities and VULs. If you don't do this, you won't last.

BACFA's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-26

I've spoken to Ameriprise management and also know some of the FA's. I think Bluehorseshoe's description is fairly accurate.  Ameriprise recently hired several Bank of America managers to help recruit experienced advisors into P1.  Albeit, BAC managers are not exactly wirehouse managers, but at least there is some understanding of outside platforms. 
There is a huge difference between P1 and P2 advisors and my feeling is that P1 is no longer trying to just fill the seats.  They are even offering transition packages to bring over experienced brokers.
My impression of Ameriprise advisors (P1 and P2) is that they are lifers there.  They don't really care nor want to understand outside annuity or insurance products.  I also think their SPS platform is very weak (manually rebalancing is ridiculous) and the SMA haircut is expensive. 
That being said, most of the FA's seem happy.  I've seen some hugely successful P2 Ameriprise practices.  Some of the  practices require that the clients have $3 million in investable assets.

Big Taco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-16

We're all entitled to our opinions here, but "ameriwho?," I think you may want to consider seeking professional psychotherapy. 
http://forums.registeredrep.com/search_results_posts.asp?SearchID=20080618094505&KW=
(link to all 8 of ameriwho?'s posts, 100% of which are about Ameriprise)
 
every single post?  can you say: "disgruntled"?

DodgerDraftpick's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-24

Magician my question for you on the Hartford annuity is since you took 60 bps upfront where is the client paying for that?  In other words since you made $60,000 Hartford is forced to get that from somewhere.  That somewhere will be the expense ratios in the investments as well as other places.  I would be curious to know what the weighted avg exp ratio of the investments in this plan is.  Also how much revenue is this plan generating for Hartford?  I am only asking you this because I am assuming you have disclosed the amount of commission to the trustees, and the fact that you will be making $40,000  a year trail on this plan.  In my experience advisors who use an annuity on large plans like this need to be prepared to defend it especially when a knowledgable employee digs around and discovers the amount of money you are making on the plan.  Then you have to explain why  you didn't find an open architecture platform with a high level of institutional share class for the participants.  Or on the flip side when the plan goes through the 401(k) audit what are you going to do to justify your fees.   Please note I am not trying to bash you at all but see a lot of advisors who don't specialize in 401 (k) business use the annuity for the allure of the nice commission.  However an experienced advisor can easily come in and show them a NAV  platform with no fees and the same investments but at a share class Hartford won't have avaible.  With full fee disclosure coming soon from the DOL be the advisor who doesn't have to have the uncomfortable conversation on why you are making so much from a plan.  If you don't you are just setting yourself up to lose the plan in the future.  Just my opinion not Gosepl by any means.

ameriwho's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-14

On average, I've made one post every 6 weeks. I wouldn't call that an obsession. The only obsessed one here is you as your obsessed with my posts plus you claim I post all over the internet. The original poster was looking for some advice and I gave it to him obviously you don't agree. Anyhow, look at Ameriprise's stock performance as this puppy is sinking and sinking fast.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×