Citi PWM Exodus
238 RepliesJump to last post
What is Fifth Third offering in Chicago?
S.H. (Loop) 1/8
M.S. (Loop) 1/8
G.G. (Buffalo Grove) 1/15
D.O. (Schaumburg) 1/15
G.B. (Chicago) 1/7
M.C. (Loop) 11/19 (I canned him)
S.M. (Calumet City) 11/04
S.B. (Chicago) 11/17
Their has to be more at Fifth Third then just the chance to work with Maria Holmes?
Whatever happened to Christo??
Salaried advisors don't have time to post.
The opportunity to work with HH, one of the best people in the business......What is Fifth Third offering in Chicago?
S.H. (Loop) 1/8
M.S. (Loop) 1/8
D.O. (Schaumburg) 1/15
M.C. (Loop) 11/19 (I canned him)
Their has to be more at Fifth Third then just the chance to work with Maria Holmes?
Vikram:
“their” ≠ “there” ≠ "they’re"
They’re three different words. Perhaps you’d win more clients if you learned them.
Does anyone think Sallie K. will take my calls to explain how these independent Madoff operations work?
P.L. (Bloomington) LPL 11/27
R.K. (Chicago) Mid Atlantic Capital 12/05
L.V. (Highland Park) LPL 12/11
G.F. (Chicago) LPL 12/11
C.H. (River Forest) Cambridge Investment Research 12/18
CPWM is in a serious slide and by next week all the remaining brokers will have to sign a non compete agreement inorder to stay. Watch to doors blow completely open…
I’ve seen the agreement (it’s the team agreement). It’s not a non-compete, and that wouldn’t fly with me. It simply says that if you leave, you can’t solicit accounts that were not acquired by your own efforts (other accounts of the team).
Interesting. Protocol trumps the stupid UBS “you can’t call inherited accounts” form. Protocol does NOT trump team agreements. So if an account is assigned to you via attrition you can’t call them…
This junk is sickening and I really empathize with anyone at firm like this. Here is my thought for the day that could apply to any of these idiot firms.
And it goes a little something like this…
‘We made a conscious decision to withdraw from the Protocol. We felt it encourages advisors to unnecessarily jump firms and potentially risk client privacy and as a firm we believe that offering large sign on bonuses to advisors is not in the spirit of the current economic climate; our senior management, of course, would exclude themselves from this principle since they are key in developing our vision and strategy. As a firm we feel our interest would be better served by not facilatating such ease of movement among financial advisors serving our clients. Our studies indicate that many clients are more interested in stability and being with an institution they know and trust, even if during a transition advisor compensation may be impacted and clients may find more comeptitive offering elsewhere. While we realize this may upset some advisors who may be contemplating new opportunities elsewhere, we are most concerned with protecting our clients’ best interests rather than encouraging movement amongst our advisory staff. We feel we know best for our clients and have also afforded our advisors the opportunity to form teams by simply signing team agreements whereas each financial advisor will now participate in a model designed to best serve the needs of Our clientele. By submitting to such agreements (to include necessary non complete clauses), we have offered competitive retention compensation to all of our qualified advisors (subject to lengthy contractual agreements). This is the appropriate business model of the future and we are proud to make this new model available to our clients.'
Right. Don’t get caught sleeping in the corporate frying pan of the self righteous senior management clowns. Say Bye bye BIG firms! You guys blew it. Your only strategy now is lock 'em down. Hypocrisy and arrogance blended (clouded) with wonderful retention deals. Firm’s hide behind this trash and arrogantly state they know hoe to best serve clients. What about what the client’s want? Most of the time they want to work with their advisor they know and trust and not the firm who often can’t be trusted. No different than Dr. / Patient relationship. The hospital definitely cares more about the bottom line than the patient and it’s the same way in our business.
America was built on competition and let the best man win - and the best firm win who offers clients and advisors the best offerings. Never ignore - Smart money goes where it is treated best and it ain’t treated best when you hold FAs hostage in your 2nd rate shops. Is this not obvious to anyone still at a firm like this???
Okay. I am done.
Focus Report came out yesterday showing that there are only 387 FA left at the firm from a peak of 700.
[quote=TOP BROKER]Focus Report came out yesterday showing that there are only 387 FA left at the firm from a peak of 700.[/quote]
Who was the guy who posted here few months back that there would be no ‘so called’ EXODUS from C and those of us who thought otherwise were fools? If this is not an exodus, what is it?
Actually 387 was as of end of Dec 2009. There are even less FAs left now.
What's amazing is that when LPL and Schwab are starting to go hybrid, what was CPWM management thinking that pure RIA would actually be competitive? Oh, wait, they weren't thinking![quote=burtonfinancial1]
[quote=TOP BROKER]Focus Report came out yesterday showing that there are only 387 FA left at the firm from a peak of 700.[/quote]Who was the guy who posted here few months back that there would be no ‘so called’ EXODUS from C and those of us who thought otherwise were fools? If this is not an exodus, what is it?[/quote]
I prefer the term structural reorganization
BIG day at C, or shall I say, BAD day at C today. Loosing on the both coasts. From what I hear, the movement that has happened in Dec. and Jan. thus far is prompting more FAs who have just dipped their toes in the water to get more serious.
On another note. I’ve heard some feedback from a big C FA who went independent in Nov. Has NOT gone well thus far. This guy was $800+. It’s very questionalbe how much sense it makes for any bank based FA to make the move into an indy platform. That’s open to debate for sure.
I think the best solution for a bank based broker that wants to go independent is Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network (Finet). It gives you the major bank "backdrop" which comforts many bank based clients. That's where I went on January 29th, and I am having excellent success bringing over clients so far. No disrespect intended to LPL, which is an excellent firm, but I was worried that my clients wouldn't come because of a complete lack of name recognition... which is why I decided upon Finet. They also give you 15% of trailing 12 in a forgiveable note... not much, but it helps, and it a little easier to walk away from the 9 year retention note at Citi.
How are offers from FiNet looking for bank brokers nowadays compared to a Wells Fargo Investments offers? Is the 15% you note the whole enchilada?