Morgan for relatively new licensed rep?

29 replies [Last post]
xbanker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-01-21

Has the Morgan training program changed recently? I'm a current employee at another firm with 7/66 for a year now. I'd like to go to a major wire and am interested in my discussions with MS more than others but want to get out in the open the repeated negative comments on this forum and elsewhere about the culture there for new reps. Comments? Experiences?

Morphius's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-21

If you're licensed and been in production, why are you asking about their training?  

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

I am licensed but not at a full service firm. Apples/Oranges comparison. I was under the impression that one is generally brought on in these instances for the same "program" or ramp up period with the 4 month licensing portion lopped off.

nestegg's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-14

Have you looked at AGE/Wach

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

I have due to the fact that nearly everyone that I've EVER spoken to at either organization (AGE especially) has had nothing but positive comments. Unfortunately in my geographic area neither are hiring during the merger process. (I've cold called/emailed one branch manager from each.) I get the impression if you make it at Morgan it's great. Most of the people cut that I've known definitely deserved it, if not sooner. (400k under management 8 months post licensing or NO accounts four months after licensing for example with two reps in a nearby branch.) UBS is out after a recent interview. They neither hired myself nor 4 other potential reps (two others with license) who took the assessment. SB is out until I hear from MS since the recruiter wants me to only do the bank version, not wire. Merrill is a possibility in my area, just referred by a current rep, but really interested in specific Morgan branch so trying to see it through to conclusion first.  Any comments, specifically those about changes recently at MS are appreciated.

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

SB is out until I hear from MS since the recruiter wants me to only do the bank version, not wire.

Get a new recruiter. Its not about what the recruiter wants, its about what you want. In fact, why do you need a recruiter? SB is hiring people for the training program every day, just contact a BOM directly.

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

Regarding SB, the recruiter was one internal to the company, not a hired gun. I have spoken to the manager at the branch in my area and he's responsible (not sure if formally or informally) for the region in addition to his branch, including part of the bank territory. I got a very odd feeling about what's going on there and would much rather start at MS or ML.

Gaddock's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-02-23

I know two guys that I went through training at AGE in my class that jumped ship to MS just after the merger was announced. They regret it at this point. Since the sub prime debacle and some other MS internal issues THE HEAT IS ON. One said he had jumped from the frying pan into the fire. If you don’t hit your quarterly quota you are history in short order. They have been firing rookies left and right in his region. If after what they did a couple years back, basically fire mid to lower producers and keep their book, is any indication how they feel about anybody but top producers I would think twice. I think MS is a great firm and its system is second to none. If you go that way you better produce beyond the goals or you are just a piece of cold meat that will get the boot in a heartbeat.
 <?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />I don’t work at MS and this is only what I have heard so take it for what it’s worth.

cerpen's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-01-18

I second gaddock's voice.  Just interviewed with MS and BOM said pretty much you will produce 250,000 per quarter or you are out; said he didn't care how much he liked me but that business was business.  I am new to the industry, so I didn't feel that I was up for that type of challenge. He seemed shocked when I turned down the second interview.  I think if you are up to the challenge, it is a great firm to work for.  I have a few friends there that are happy and have been there for 10yrs or so.
Good luck. 

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

250k per quarter? Do you mean that this is the asset number that is the firm "not getting cut" minimum? If that's so, it's 1MM per year. How could you possibly get by on that anyway? I've got a couple accounts that will easily hit that... if they're getting really extreme like cutting no matter what to take accounts then that's a different story.

imabroker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-12-22

I have no first hand experience with MS but I've spoken to a few reps there.  It sounds like the training is weak at best, non-existent at worst.  they've got a prestigious name and that's about it.  At least around here anyway.

Morphius's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-21

cerpen wrote:I second gaddock's voice.  Just interviewed with MS and BOM said pretty much you will produce 250,000 per quarter or you are out; said he didn't care how much he liked me but that business was business.  I am new to the industry, so I didn't feel that I was up for that type of challenge. He seemed shocked when I turned down the second interview.  I think if you are up to the challenge, it is a great firm to work for.  I have a few friends there that are happy and have been there for 10yrs or so.
Good luck. I have no idea what may have been behind your particular situation or conversation, but it is beyond belief that MS's production minimum for NEW TRAINEES is $1MM/yr ($250K/qtr)!!  That would eliminate probably 99% of all trainees.  AUM, sure - no problem, but production?!Absurd.

cerpen's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-01-18

I heard the word "produce" in our conversation surrounding the 250K but he probably meant AUM which is doable.

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

Yeah, that was my confusion.  I have heard that there was a previous goal for someone in training that was 4MM AUM for the year, which included the 4 month licensing period. Apparently this is in the process of being changed to (or has already been changed to) 4.8MM over the year beginning AFTER licensing. Since I am already licensed, I'd say a minimum of 5MM AUM would be applicable for the year. I suppose the 250k is the "autocut" level per quarter. 

Morphius's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-21

cerpen wrote:I heard the word "produce" in our conversation surrounding the 250K but he probably meant AUM which is doable.Your potential BOM "probably meant" AUM?  Minimum requirements are NOT something you want to be uncertain about when you are interviewing or making career decisions, nor is this any time to be bashful.  Speak up - ask questions. 

Moneyguy877's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-01-08

There is absolutely no way they were referring to production with the 250K number. I have a cousin who works for MS and he loves it. He started in his mid twenty's and made it however that was awhile ago (he is about 40 now). He said that the vast majority of the guys in his training program washed out but that more of them quit then were fired.  I think if you are going to make it in this industry one company is about as good as the next, if someone is willing to give you a shot take it.  Once you get your foot in the door bust your butt everyday and hope for a little luck. Just curious though, how receptive has everyone been to the fact that you are jumping ship after such a short period of time?

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

Short period of time? After a year in a position isn't one a vet in this industry?!  To be honest, the issue hasn't even come up since it's easily explained.  I was looking for a wire last year and got an offer from ML after three weeks at a different firm. (Well known national discounter....decent gig short term.) I wanted to jump but went with the philosophy that it's not a good idea to have any job under a year on your U4. I can at least explain away the move with a desire to be at a full service firm, which is what I wanted to begin with.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29
Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

Yes, after a year in this biz you are a vet.  And after a year of marriage you are automatically qualified to become a marriage couselor. 

I used to chuckle at the people who used to come through my training program, fresh off the Series 7 boat, thinking they had the investment world by the tail.  I remember saying to someone once "Just think.  Jones gets 5000 applications a month for this job.  And these 12 are the best of the bunch?"   I'm getting that feeling again with this guy.

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

I was joking about the large turnover rate at firms, not my longevity in the industry at a whole. I know in my current role at least that's the case. If you haven't left in a years time, you're the equivilant of Hal Holbrook in Wall St.

Morphius's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-21

xbanker wrote:If you haven't left in a years time, you're the equivilant of Hal Holbrook in Wall St. If you want to leave, go ahead and leave.  But don't try and say one year with a firm is a long time.  That's just silly.Maybe in your one full year of experience one year seems like a long time, but that ain't saying much.

brain.ra's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-02-20

I was recently in the MS training program and my district was definitly looking for reasons to let the trainees go.  I had AUM of 550k with a 250K account on it's way (ACATS were signed) and they let me (and every other trainee in the district) go because I didn't hit the 600k minimum AUM for your first quarter, first quarter revenue minimum was $4500.00 (which I had over $5400.00 not counting my incoming account).  Point is, if you think you can hit the numbers it's a great place, but right now, they aren't doing any probabtion periods or cutting you any slack.
 
As far as training, it was very good for the first 4 months, but once you hit production you were basically on your own.  We were each basically given 1500 names/numbers to cold call on and the rest was on us.  This might all depend on your district though so I would definitly ask about ongoing training and marketing support before you decide to accept a position.
 
Good luck to you!
 

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

brain.ra, Where are you now? The one positive aspect of being in such a difficult program with that reputation is that everyone knows it and considers getting cut no big deal. I've heard a manager say he liked that someone "had the balls to try Morgan."  Getting cut from Joe's regional firm for lack of production would probably raise an eyebrow but I don't think anyone will see your situation as a negative in the same way.

brain.ra's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-02-20

I agree with you xbanker, I actually hide a recruiter from ML calling me before MS let me go and now I'm trying to decide between taking the position with merrill or going with a more corporate type job with fidelity.  I posted a topic under the rookie section asking for advice between the two jobs and i'm getting some good feedback.
 
I think MS has a great program and it's a great company if you don't need a lot of hands on training and you can bring in the assets.  It definitly pushes you to the limits .  I could definitly use some advice on choosing between the two jobs though if anyone wants to check out my other post (don't want to hijack your thread)

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

No prob at all. I was hired by ML a little over a year ago but unfortunately it took them so long that I was already in my current role at a firm similar to Fidelity. Go with ML. Discount land is a dead end, and there would be NO reason at all to bring clients of your own to that environment. The few people who would start your career at a wire would just be one drop in the bucket before starting over again in the next quarter at Fido, Chuck, TD, Scottrade, etc.

fritz's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-01-11

Your story is pretty much the case..I was in a large branch and saw about 300 trainees get blown out over 6 years.  Maybe 3-4 have survived.  I would say those odds are bad, I would go in a different direction.  This business is dead, especially for new people.  I think once this generation of people 50 years and up now, pass on, this business will be almost extinct.  Pretty sure in 50 years people will look back and say "there were actually people who sold you investment products/ideas and you paid for that"? 

Gaddock's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-02-23

As long as people have fear and greed we will have a job. As each day goes by and things are more global the need for a pro gets larger and larger.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29
Cowboy93's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-10

fritz wrote: Your story is pretty much the case..I was in a large branch and saw about 300 trainees get blown out over 6 years.  Maybe 3-4 have survived.  I would say those odds are bad, I would go in a different direction.  This business is dead, especially for new people.  I think once this generation of people 50 years and up now, pass on, this business will be almost extinct.  Pretty sure in 50 years people will look back and say "there were actually people who sold you investment products/ideas and you paid for that"? 

People generally don't like to move accounts and deal with the hassle unless they have a very good reason for it. Therefore, if you are young and make it at a wirehouse, you are in a wonderful position as the successful FA population continues to age===someone has to help manage the accounts of people that retire and/or slow down. Of course not everything is sticky, but ALL the data suggests this business is the opposite of dead. It is just difficult to gain people's trust and therefore there is a limited supply of people who can make a living at it...which is great for those who can.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×