BAC

142 replies [Last post]
mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

I do NOT work in a bank branch.
I private labeled my firm and I use Wachovia Finet as my b/d, I can fire them any time I want (as they can me) and switch to any other b/d that I can make a deal with (which, so far, means just about anybody). I could be an LPL office if I wanted to (I guess).
I did pause over the use of the word Branch, because I lacked the verbiage to make it clearer. I am in no way an employee of Wachovia. I hire them to perform certain back office and supervisory functions. I give them the right of refusal to hold the license of any registered employee that I may want to hire. They have to approve all my outgoing correspondence, in comming correspondence, advertising/marketing, etc etc... I have less "freedom" than I would have if I was my own B/D, but I don't know what a b/d that wants to avoid running afoul of the NASD/NYSE/SEC could let me do that this company doesn't (Wachovia DOES have some fairly restrictive nums on B shares though, so I guess that's one area...)
I run my own Branch of my own Firm, client accounts are able to be linked into the Wachovia banking system through the "CAP" account system which is available across their four platforms (Bank, bank broker, private client, indy) it's like the FMA at smith barney or the CMA at merrill except that it's integrated throughout the Wachovia systems.
As to the Teller issue, YUP! It CAN happen, but we're very careful to let the clients KNOW that WE are the firm and Wachovia is not. Meanwhile, we've taken more than our fair share of accounts from the local wirehouses because of terrible service too. AND when I was there I lost more clients due to bad service than any other single thing (now I lose clients because of ME, and that's one of the things about indy that sux, the buck stops here!)
Mr. A
  

$$$$$'s picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-10

still run by a bank

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

mranonymous2u wrote:
I do NOT work in a bank branch.
What sort of office space do you use, and what else is in the building?
mranonymous2u wrote:I did pause over the use of the word Branch, because I lacked the verbiage to make it clearer.
I'm still not sure it's completely clear, but ok.
mranonymous2u wrote:.... client accounts are able to be linked into the Wachovia banking system through the "CAP" account system which is available across their four platforms (Bank, bank broker, private client, indy) it's like the FMA at smith barney or the CMA at merrill except that it's integrated throughout the Wachovia systems.
So when a client signs on to the Wachovia website, can they see their security holdings they have with you?

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

$$$$$ wrote:still run by a bank
Do you figure your comment is accurate about every channel at Wachovia?

mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

When I got here I was just about the only person in the entire bulding.  The building is an old four story office building of the late 1960's early 1970's style.
I leased the top floor corner space with a commanding view of the river valley and the mountains on either side. I got 2,400 square feet of office space on a floor of about 14,000 SF. (room to expand!)
Then someone new bought the building. I moved down to a 2400SF suite with my own elevator and a doctor's office the only other tenent on the floor (they are completely separate from me except that we share an emergency fire exit.
The new owner has done wonders with the building, but he rented out to a collection of county agency offices for the third and forth floors. Downstairs is a criminal atty (whenever I think I'm having a bad day, I look out the window, when I see people going in to see the Atty, I know THAT person is having a BAD DAY!) and an antiques emporium.
Point being that the building is filling up but not with the sort of folks that will bring me foot traffic or impress the clients that come by. (Clients at this point are impressed with the look of my particular suite of offices but...)  I'm thinking that I'll be looking elsewhere when the lease is up.
I built MY branch where I felt I got best value for my dollar, all things considered. That's part of the difference between working for yourself or working for someone else. For better AND for worse.
Can my clients see their accounts? Yes, on the Wachovia website they can access their accounts. It's generally yesterday's activity, but today's pricing (in other words, the client might not see the dividend check that went out today, until tomorrow).
$$$$$,
"Still run by a bank." Was sort of why I gave you the BOTD before. Run by a bank? What does the word "run" mean to you?
Aside from the Mutual fund routine (no more than $50,000 in B shares in a single fund family per household, which seems awfully low to me, but I don't do MF's so it's not a biggie) and the compliance dept alerting you to investments outside of the client's investment parameters, and flags on "excessive velocity" sorts of CYA's I don't feel the overly protective cloak of a bank telling me what I can and cannot do. Again, this is not so big of an issue to me in that I run a fairly plain vanilla business, so there could be people who have a different experience than I do. But I have gone to the meetings and spoken to lots of guys who tend to run the "Managed Money" paradigm, but then I run into the index options jocks too, and they don't complain, even when I open the door.
I don't know what to tell ya, I have a great back office that is constantly updating with the technology and the document service/paperwork reduction initiative. I can and do do supervision right from my desktop. I have a question they have general and specific help desks. I can call virtually anybody in the firm's headquarters and get responded to (not something I tend to like to do) if I have a problem, we can work it out.
We're small, with lots of capacity. We work and there's enough work to go around, but there are enough people to go around too, so that you don't run into the rubber stamp mentality.
I think that Wachovia is committed to the vision that this is the future of the Brokerage industry. The bank is willing to spend the money to do this right, to build their platform in the path of progress. Wachovia is not at all interested in the >$100,000 producer. They want producers and branch owners that want to build their own franchise, and want to hire Wachovia to be their back office.
Mr. A
 

mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

Did I do that wrong?
I meant the < $100,000 producer. Less than $100,000.
I had in my mind's eye the line in Investment News detailing the number of brokers above $100,000 and, being the contrarian that I am, looked at that number (3,000 out of 6,000) as being a disasterous number.
Sorry.
Mr. A

planrcoach's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-13

a commanding view of the river valley and the mountains on either side.
Nice.
 I think that Wachovia is committed to the vision that this is the future of the Brokerage industry. The bank is willing to spend the money to do this right, to build their platform in the path of progress.
Yep
They want producers and branch owners that want to build their own franchise, and want to hire Wachovia to be their back office.
This is smart. I looked at going downtown to a nice big name office to serve that affluent, and I even looked at going to a strip mall for Ed Jones.
I ended up like you, maybe the view is not so sweeping, but being the neighborhood franchisee and providing custom service to the mass affluent.
But looking the Jones model influenced me to stay local and solo, of course, I am a franchisee.
The other thing about Jones, they are good generalists and they have a very frequency of contacts with existing clients.
As the urbanization of America's countryside continues, there are a lot of smart things we can learn from all the models, and incorporate them into our own franchises or RIAs for that matter.
Thanks for the glimpse into your world.

$$$$$'s picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-10

another market director leaving.

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

$$$$$ wrote:another market director leaving.Why in the world would managers at BAC leave when they have such smart, positive guys like you working under them?  I just can't understand it!!!

$$$$$'s picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-10

 Very funny Joe.

mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. A

NOFX's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-22

$$$$$ wrote:you guys are a$$holes.
 
a 2 buck hole? who?

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

mranonymous2u wrote:Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. ASorry Mr. A....been busy and hadn't seen the question.My general sense in speaking to the recruiting folks was that Wachovia had many of the trappings of being indy, and when push came to shove it really was indy.But, culturally, it didn't seem to me to be the same as LPL by any stretch of the imagination.  I also seem to recall that there was certain requirements as to signage, (Wachovia) branding, and how one's office must be configured.  Again-only my recollection.I also did not like that you as an indy were competing against the bank and wirehouse platform for resources.  My recruiter tried to sell it to me as a positive that I would "have access to" the same trading desk and bond inventories as the wire and bank guys.  However, it was my feeling that when push came to shove the bank and wire guys would get better attention because they generated higher margins for the firm.In all honesty, too, I didn't like the recruiter.  He was an ex-Merill BOM who was damn pushy and kept trying tell me I had to sign "right now so you can get this year's deal".It turned me off that they were so eager to throw around some pretty big chunks(for indy) of up front money in the form of loans and outright hiring bonusses.So those were my purely unscientific impressions and observations.  In the end if you're happy there I'm sure I'd find it to be waaaay better than being in a wirehouse office.  And that being able to use the branch network thing is pretty cool too.

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

mranonymous2u wrote:Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. Alol.....wtf is a "washday housefrau"?Is that an obscure Nazi reference intended to prompt me to cite that law thingy that is supposed to automatically close the thread?

nope's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-31

Which MD is leaving?

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

nope wrote:Which MD is leaving?Michael Hunt

mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

Joe,
Thank you.
None of those things have been issues for me in the slightest. and as far as he resources thing... I can say it's a good concern, but the reality is that Finet is its own "profit center" and the group has the same sort of clout (at least) as a guy in a wirehouse would who headed a team of 500 brokers and 125MM in production (that guy would have a lot of influence at any firm).
He's not going to win every fight, but he's not going to have to fight most of the time.
Also, now I'm not perfectly clear on the shake here but... Wachovia owns FCC (First Capital Clearing) which does clearing for Finet and (apparently) a significant tonnage of other firms Summit comes to mind as one. As such, FCC brings bigger scratch to the top line than just Finet, and Finet is a way for Wachovia to have a presence in this market.
As to the corporate feel. Yeah, I felt that too (and I'm about as non corporate as you get, power to the people and all that) but then, this IS a business, and it is nice that someone somewhere in the organization is willing to show up in a suit every day.
Mr. A

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

mranonymous2u wrote:Joe,
Thank you.
None of those things have been issues for me in the slightest. and as far as he resources thing... I can say it's a good concern, but the reality is that Finet is its own "profit center" and the group has the same sort of clout (at least) as a guy in a wirehouse would who headed a team of 500 brokers and 125MM in production (that guy would have a lot of influence at any firm).
He's not going to win every fight, but he's not going to have to fight most of the time.
Also, now I'm not perfectly clear on the shake here but... Wachovia owns FCC (First Capital Clearing) which does clearing for Finet and (apparently) a significant tonnage of other firms Summit comes to mind as one. As such, FCC brings bigger scratch to the top line than just Finet, and Finet is a way for Wachovia to have a presence in this market.
As to the corporate feel. Yeah, I felt that too (and I'm about as non corporate as you get, power to the people and all that) but then, this IS a business, and it is nice that someone somewhere in the organization is willing to show up in a suit every day.
Mr. AI hear ya.  In the end, when I visited the folks at LPL they just seemed to have nice suits but a little less starch in their collars.  They seemed to 'get it' just a little better as to what went in to catering to an independent business owner.Admittedly, too, that recruiter-Northeast Region-really rubbed me the wrong way, so FiNet had a real uphill climb after that.  Maybe not logical, but some times you have to trust your gut as well.All that matters is that you're happy, just as I am!

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

joedabrkr wrote:
mranonymous2u wrote:Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. Alol.....wtf is a "washday housefrau"?Is that an obscure Nazi reference intended to prompt me to cite that law thingy that is supposed to automatically close the thread?And btw you never answered MY question!

mranonymous2u's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-29

joedabrkr wrote: joedabrkr wrote: mranonymous2u wrote:
Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. A
lol.....wtf is a "washday housefrau"?Is that an obscure Nazi reference intended to prompt me to cite that law thingy that is supposed to automatically close the thread?And btw you never answered MY question!
Yeah I guess we can claim Godwin's law! If we wanted to stretch it beyond all recognition! What they heck.
Mr. A
 

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

mranonymous2u wrote:joedabrkr wrote: joedabrkr wrote: mranonymous2u wrote:
Joe,
You going to answer my question or are you just going to be a washday hausefrau tossing gossip over the backyard fence?
Mr. A
lol.....wtf is a "washday housefrau"?Is that an obscure Nazi reference intended to prompt me to cite that law thingy that is supposed to automatically close the thread?And btw you never answered MY question!
Yeah I guess we can claim Godwin's law! If we wanted to stretch it beyond all recognition! What they heck.
Mr. A
 lol just wondered

NOFX's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-22

$800k producer left NE today.

whalehunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-28

What mkt?

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

350+ producer leaving soon

NOFX's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-22

whalehunter wrote:What mkt?[/quote
MA

banknomore's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-22

most likely boston or newton.

NOFX's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-22
banknomore's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-22

any idea where they went?
wirehouse, indy

NOFX's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-22

Citi

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

indy my friend

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

Atlanta market director quit today.

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

ezmoney wrote:Atlanta market director quit today.man the place is imploding!

nope's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-31

They also lost another manager in Florida.  The place is being run by morons!

daytradah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-05

ezmoney:
Did you see this:   Malcolm Berko Blisters Bank of America...
Rethink placing trust in U.S. Trust( http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/couriernews/business/berk o/319824,3_3_EL30_BERKO_S1.article )

March 30, 2007

Dear Mr. Berko: Way back in 1999 you told me that it would be in our best interest to have our account managed by U.S. Trust because they could give me and my husband the personal services we need. They managed our stock account, paid our bills, arranged our travel plans, took care of our properties when we were away, and assisted us with our bookkeeping and taxes. Now we learned that U.S. Trust is being bought by Bank of America. Please give us your thoughts on this large institution and please advise if we should allow them to manage our affairs.
W.P.
Boca Raton, Fla.
Dear W.P.: Yes, I remember our conversations and please tell your delightful husband that my sister followed his advice and the results were outstanding, awesome and magnificent.
Certainly you've heard that old axiom, "if your bank is bought out by a larger bank, then it's time to change banks." So race, run, rush, dash and fly like a bat out of Hades to Bessemer Trust in the U.S., or Butterfields or N.M. Rothschild in London or Pictec & Cie or Lombard Odier in Geneva, Switzerland.
If you allow your affairs to be managed by Bank of America (BAC-$50.53) you will most likely be swallowed up into the biggest black holes in the Orion or Trifid Nebula. Charles "Charlie" Schwab is selling its wealth management subsidiary of U.S. Trust to BAC for $3.3 billion so Charlie can concentrate its expertise on the "do-it-yourself" investor. Charlie bought U.S. Trust in 2000 hoping it would be a natural fit for its customers as they began to accumulate wealth. However Charlie's independent, do-it-yourself clients had no use for the venerable 155-year-old U.S. Trust, whose white-shoe clientele is accustomed to personal pampering and red carpet treatment.
Compared to U.S. Trust, Bank of America is a hillbilly dressed in a three-piece pinstripe suit. So if you prefer martinis to moonshine, I suggest you move your account soon. The merger should close this spring and most of the good folks who assisted you at that blue-blood blue-chip bank will be out of a job soon. Last year, U.S. Trust's managed accounts produced about $835 million in revenues and BAC's green eyeshade bean counters intend to reduce U.S. Trusts costs by $200 million and plop its 13,000 clients into BAC's 115,000-account cesspool. The change will be like moving from the polo fields of Palm Beach to the cock fights in Miami's Little Havana.
At U.S. Trust you and your husband were known by name and you enjoyed a warm, personal relationship with your representatives. They actually cared about you and that's what made them so special. At BAC, no matter what you're promised, you will be a cold, hard, impersonal number among their 128,000 managed accounts . I've heard good things from folks who have wealth management accounts at U.S. Trust, Bessemer Trust, Rothschild, Butterfields, Pictec, Lombard, even Union Bank of California and UBS Switzerland. I've also been privy to the investment results from each of those private banks and as cautious as I can be ... I am not unimpressed!
However I know several couples who have wealth management accounts at BAC and as cautious as I can be, I am not impressed. Bank of America is a huge retail institution; soon to be the largest as well as the most profitable retail bank in the U.S. That huge size can be protective and comforting, sort of like having an elephant in your bed. But only heaven can help you if that elephant sneezes and rolls over.
Frankly, I've not heard one word of praise from several folks whose substantial accounts (and personal services) are handled by the Bank of America. The reason behind BAC's recent account management success is that it is able to attract the coveted customer who is not demanding or sophisticated and is satisfied with mediocrity. And how would you regard a bank that puts Braille on its drive-through teller machines?
I recommended U.S. Trust to you folks because I knew some of the folks there personally and by reputation. I recommended U.S. Trust way back then because I also knew a few of their accounts who couldn't say enough good things about their professionalism, their services and their account management. And for the same reasons I am recommending Pictec, Lombard, Rothschild, Bessemer, and Butterfield. There are certainly other private banks equally as capable in this country and across the pond. However, I cannot recommend them because I lack the necessary personal information to do so.
Please address your financial questions to Malcolm Berko, P.O. Box 1416, Boca Raton, FL 33429 or e-mail him at eval(unescape('%64%6f%63%75%6d%65%6e%74%2e%77%72%69%74%65%28%27%3c%61%20%68%72%65%66%3d%22%6d%61%69%6c%74%6f%3a%6d%61%6c%62%65%72%40%61%64%65%6c%70%68%69%61%2e%6e%65%74%22%3e%6d%61%6c%62%65%72%40%61%64%65%6c%70%68%69%61%2e%6e%65%74%3c%2f%61%3e%27%29%3b')).

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

great piece. BAC is a horrible place to work at and do business. For once I agree with Clark Howard, move your accounts to a community bank.

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

daytradah wrote:
ezmoney:
Did you see this:   Malcolm Berko Blisters Bank of America...

 
Not that I disagree with this guy about BoA, but it's hysterical that a guy with his record would talk about anyone or any firm being low-rent.

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

ezmoney wrote:great piece. BAC is a horrible place to work at and do
business. For once I agree with Clark Howard, move your accounts to a
community bank.

BAC sucks, I tell all my clients to move their deposit accounts over to a local community bank. Better rates and service.

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

BAC does suck. I feel sorry for the friends I left behind.

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

ezmoney wrote:BAC does suck. I feel sorry for the friends I left behind.lol....I feel the same way about UBS!

Mucho de Tejas's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-08

The Bank of America announced yesterday that U.S. Trust Corp. CEO Peter Scaturro will not come on board when it completes its acquisition of U.S. Trust later this year, dealing what the Wall Street Journal calls "a setback to the big bank's ambitious push to become the leader in the lucrative business of managing rich people's money." Scaturro was supposed to continue leading the exclusive private bank, which requires a $2 million deposit to open an account and has about $93 billion in client assets. Announced in November, the deal was supposed to allow U.S. Trust clients to continue to enjoy their preferred treatment, while benefitting from the giant bank's broad reach. People familiar with the situation say that after numerous disagreements over how the integrated unit would be run, Scaturro decided to step down this summer. Differences of opinion include the big bank's insistence that U.S. Trust switch over to its computer platform, Scaturro's reluctance to cede his autonomy over guiding the unit, and BoA's failure to appreciate the high-cost methods private banks use to lure clients and keep them happy. The Journal says the setback is unlikely to derail the acquisition, but that it highlights the difficulties big banks have in changing their mass-market strategies to suit the ultra-wealthy. Frances Aldrich Sevilla-Sacasa, U.S. Trust president, is likely to replace Scaturro, a person close to the matter said.
Yeah, BAC does suck.

daytradah's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-05

Mucho  you beat me to it......
Appearantly Berko knows exactly what he is talking about. Would like to see how many accounts Scaturro pulls with him to his new employer.
Looks like another expensive arbitration for BAC..
LOLOLOL

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

ezmoney wrote: BAC does suck. I feel sorry for the friends I left behind.[/
QUOTE]

Why feel sorry for them? You left, didn't you EZ? They can find the door if
it's as bad there as you say.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×