Wachovia Support Group

112 replies [Last post]
go_huskies's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-11

This thread is for venting about mismanagement, inquiring about technology, guidance for switching firms and anything else aside from retention (there's already a long established thread for that subject).
Why is it that I feel like an inmate trying to get time off for good behavior by teaching the ropes to the new additions on the cell block?...or is it an insane asylum??? 

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

This is a needed thread and it is probably my fault for starting the bitching in the retention thread....
 
 
I just didn't want to be the newbie that started his own thread!
 
 
Smart Staion is OK   or should I call it "Click Sation" as it takes 4 to 8 times the amount of clicks to get the same info... Some info cannot be found, some functions are gone and the Contact Management is an abamanation!
 
 
I truly can't believe that WB had AGE advisors in on the meetings when they desinged this software?
 
There is NO notepad.  Or at least there is not one that is functional...only a history of notes, which each must be opened individually to read....uuuughhhhh....F*ing IDIOTS!!!
And to change a date on a to-do takes 5 clicks instead of one...it's aweful, just aweful!!!  Best part is that the model already exist in Outlook.  I think these people actually want to make it worse!   I think that is their goal, to absolutely ruin whatever good AGE had and if so, they are succeeding!
 
 
OK, I'm done....I will continue to bark up the ladder while I look for a new home.  Either, they fix or I move...  Last straw!

go_huskies's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-11

well mucker, you're only one day in. once you get accustomed, you may find it to be a worthy tool. 
 
i hated it when i first got here, as it's a far cry for smith barney's nextgen, but give it a few weeks. 
 
 

go_huskies's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-11

mucker makes one broker ready to move.  thread counter at 1

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

go_huskies wrote:mucker makes one broker ready to move.  thread counter at 1
 
Our entire office is talking to Raymond James...That is close to $9M in production... Even DL would call that a "regretable"!
 
 
And we have already lost close to a Million to indi's...
 
Vodka's gone, time for bed...

nothappy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

Mucker wrote:This is a needed thread and it is probably my fault for starting the bitching in the retention thread....
 
 
I just didn't want to be the newbie that started his own thread!
 
 
Smart Staion is OK   or should I call it "Click Sation" as it takes 4 to 8 times the amount of clicks to get the same info... Some info cannot be found, some functions are gone and the Contact Management is an abamanation!
 
 
I truly can't believe that WB had AGE advisors in on the meetings when they desinged this software?
 
There is NO notepad.  Or at least there is not one that is functional...only a history of notes, which each must be opened individually to read....uuuughhhhh....F*ing IDIOTS!!!
And to change a date on a to-do takes 5 clicks instead of one...it's aweful, just aweful!!!  Best part is that the model already exist in Outlook.  I think these people actually want to make it worse!   I think that is their goal, to absolutely ruin whatever good AGE had and if so, they are succeeding!
 
 
OK, I'm done....I will continue to bark up the ladder while I look for a new home.  Either, they fix or I move...  Last straw!

nothappy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

I couldn't agree more.  You've nailed it.  Our whole office is furious about the Smart Station.  I just can't belive they did away with Broker Vision.  IDIOTS!!!

MrBig's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-05

go_huskies wrote: well mucker, you're only one day in. once you get accustomed, you may find it to be a worthy tool. 
 
i hated it when i first got here, as it's a far cry for smith barney's nextgen, but give it a few weeks. 
 
 

Really? It's even worse than Nextgen? I've been checking out my options lately and while I know that Nextgen isn't the worst of them I certainly don't want to regret a move that leaves me with helpless software.

Would you mind telling me what you could do with Nextgen that you couldn't with the system you're on?

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

WB knew the contact management system was going to be an issue back in the summer of 07. They were not going to be able to replicate what AGE had by the time of conversion.Trying to retro fit the the AGE contact management system would have required almost a complete rewrite anyway and would not be ready in time of conversion.Since WB was basically starting from scratch, the decision was to use AGEs system as a guide on what end product needed to do and focus on getting the underling infastructure correct for the first couple of releases. This would allow, in theory, IT to build out new functionalitly quicker and cheaper going forward. The bad part is the first  few releases, from a legacy AGE standpoint, are less than impressive.WB has tried in the past, of getting somthing out the door that matches a prior systems functionality but required short cuts on the underling design. This ment that any improvements brokers wanted took 4 times as long and were way more expensive. Many request were flat out rejected. From experiance, it was very frustrationg requesting obvios enhancments and being told the system was not designed to do that, it would require massive rework, etc. Hopfully this path will serve you better then the prior path served me.

stefany_t's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-01-10

Loving the Dune reference id, Paul Atreides

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

Thanks stefany_t , wondered if anybody on these forums would get the reference.

stefany_t's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-01-10

Love Dune, although I admit, it has been a while since I read it.

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

PaulAtreides wrote:WB knew the contact management system was going to be an issue back in the summer of 07. They were not going to be able to replicate what AGE had by the time of conversion.Trying to retro fit the the AGE contact management system would have required almost a complete rewrite anyway and would not be ready in time of conversion.Since WB was basically starting from scratch, the decision was to use AGEs system as a guide on what end product needed to do and focus on getting the underling infastructure correct for the first couple of releases. This would allow, in theory, IT to build out new functionalitly quicker and cheaper going forward. The bad part is the first  few releases, from a legacy AGE standpoint, are less than impressive.WB has tried in the past, of getting somthing out the door that matches a prior systems functionality but required short cuts on the underling design. This ment that any improvements brokers wanted took 4 times as long and were way more expensive. Many request were flat out rejected. From experiance, it was very frustrationg requesting obvios enhancments and being told the system was not designed to do that, it would require massive rework, etc. Hopfully this path will serve you better then the prior path served me.
 
Seems WB doesn't realize they are there for me, not vice-versa.  I;m barely a "regretable" so maybe they just don't give a rats ass!   I sure do miss Ben and his firm.

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous

PaulAtreides wrote: Thanks, wondered if anybody on these forums would get the reference.

just the dorks.

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

Mucker wrote:PaulAtreides wrote:WB knew the contact management system was going to be an issue back in the summer of 07. They were not going to be able to replicate what AGE had by the time of conversion.Trying to retro fit the the AGE contact management system would have required almost a complete rewrite anyway and would not be ready in time of conversion.Since WB was basically starting from scratch, the decision was to use AGEs system as a guide on what end product needed to do and focus on getting the underling infastructure correct for the first couple of releases. This would allow, in theory, IT to build out new functionalitly quicker and cheaper going forward. The bad part is the first  few releases, from a legacy AGE standpoint, are less than impressive.WB has tried in the past, of getting somthing out the door that matches a prior systems functionality but required short cuts on the underling design. This ment that any improvements brokers wanted took 4 times as long and were way more expensive. Many request were flat out rejected. From experiance, it was very frustrationg requesting obvios enhancments and being told the system was not designed to do that, it would require massive rework, etc. Hopfully this path will serve you better then the prior path served me.
 
Seems WB doesn't realize they are there for me, not vice-versa.  I;m barely a "regretable" so maybe they just don't give a rats ass!   I sure do miss Ben and his firm.Prior to the AGE deal I would say yes, DL knew for him to be #1 by 2010 he had to worry about the brokers. That is what drives DL. With the new deal I am not as sure. Ultimately he knows he needs you guys, but with a larger FA base he can have more people pissed off. I spoke with an operating committee, last year and asked how they were going to pull this merger off. This person said the OC knew there were going to be as lot of mad FAs, but was confident the OC could keep the anger from boiling over. Have not heard the lastest attretion numbers so I do not if this person was correct.As an aside, I am sure DL is tring everything he can to get you guys a check. The part I find unblievable is he has not delivered. Says alot about where you guys stand with WFC. Under WB you would have gotten paid already.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

Paul,
Why not just use the AGE system instead of the WS system? I was better no question. I do not get the logic to step down all the AGE guys and upset them so badly. Why not step up the WS guys. Clients hate the online access compared to the AGE stuff as well. Another miss. When we were told that we would use the best of both systems was that just BS or did something change that made that not possiable.

shredder's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-04

albert wrote:Paul,
Why not just use the AGE system instead of the WS system? I was better no question. I do not get the logic to step down all the AGE guys and upset them so badly. Why not step up the WS guys. Clients hate the online access compared to the AGE stuff as well. Another miss. When we were told that we would use the best of both systems was that just BS or did something change that made that not possiable.
Welcome to the club...it was ALWAYS BS. Nothing but a sales job (and a good one at that).  Look at the outcome.  Can you really say many of the AGE practices have been incorporated? This firm is very unfriendly to both clients and the FA's.
I'm just mad at myself for believing it might work out.

mnbondguy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-13

Has DL told  the truth about anything to you guys in the last 18months? Anything??

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

PaulAtreides wrote: Mucker wrote:PaulAtreides wrote:WB knew the contact management system was going to be an issue back in the summer of 07. They were not going to be able to replicate what AGE had by the time of conversion.Trying to retro fit the the AGE contact management system would have required almost a complete rewrite anyway and would not be ready in time of conversion.Since WB was basically starting from scratch, the decision was to use AGEs system as a guide on what end product needed to do and focus on getting the underling infastructure correct for the first couple of releases. This would allow, in theory, IT to build out new functionalitly quicker and cheaper going forward. The bad part is the first  few releases, from a legacy AGE standpoint, are less than impressive.WB has tried in the past, of getting somthing out the door that matches a prior systems functionality but required short cuts on the underling design. This ment that any improvements brokers wanted took 4 times as long and were way more expensive. Many request were flat out rejected. From experiance, it was very frustrationg requesting obvios enhancments and being told the system was not designed to do that, it would require massive rework, etc. Hopfully this path will serve you better then the prior path served me.
 
Seems WB doesn't realize they are there for me, not vice-versa.  I;m barely a "regretable" so maybe they just don't give a rats ass!   I sure do miss Ben and his firm.Prior to the AGE deal I would say yes, DL knew for him to be #1 by 2010 he had to worry about the brokers. That is what drives DL. With the new deal I am not as sure. Ultimately he knows he needs you guys, but with a larger FA base he can have more people pissed off. I spoke with an operating committee, last year and asked how they were going to pull this merger off. This person said the OC knew there were going to be as lot of mad FAs, but was confident the OC could keep the anger from boiling over. Have not heard the lastest attretion numbers so I do not if this person was correct.As an aside, I am sure DL is tring everything he can to get you guys a check. The part I find unblievable is he has not delivered. Says alot about where you guys stand with WFC. Under WB you would have gotten paid already.
 
AGE is down to 5800 brokers from 7200, but only about 20% of them are "regretables"...
 

shredder's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-04

mnbondguy wrote:Has DL told  the truth about anything to you guys in the last 18months? Anything??
Lets see: "the 5 stakes in the ground, the bond desk is not a profit center, we will take the best of both firms, you are managements clients, I'll only put it half way in..."
awww, NO.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

He has said things were going to get worse before they got better. I did not realize he ment things that we could controll!

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

mnbondguy wrote:Has DL told  the truth about anything to you guys in the last 18months? Anything??
 
Let me check my notes from the weekly "ahhhhh call" as we call them and I'll get back to you, but at this point I would say no....
 

shredder's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-04

Mucker, where did you get the 5800 # ?
I thought we were at 6800 at the merger, not 7200...

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

shredder wrote:Mucker, where did you get the 5800 # ?
I thought we were at 6800 at the merger, not 7200...
 
Manager

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

I think more like 5500 left by my count.

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

albert wrote:I think more like 5500 left by my count.
 
Wait till FY AGE bonuses are paid...  And those will be regretables!!!

shredder's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-04

these guys are "pros", I'm sure they will find a way to spin this into gold....

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

albert wrote:Paul,
Why not just use the AGE system instead of the WS system? I was better no question. I do not get the logic to step down all the AGE guys and upset them so badly. Why not step up the WS guys. Clients hate the online access compared to the AGE stuff as well. Another miss. When we were told that we would use the best of both systems was that just BS or did something change that made that not possiable.Three reasons:1) How the AGE system was built did not meet the Bank ie Charlotte's requirements so it had to be rewritten.2) It would have required moving Envision to the AGE platform. That meant no new enhancements to Envision for almost 2 years. That would have really made the WB brokers mad . Managment realies to much on that product to allow the competition two years to catch up.3) Wach Sec outsources a lot of the development and maintenance to third parties. One in particular. This allows them to have a huge cost savings on systems. They would not be able to do this with the AGE system.What you are experiencing is what every other acquired firm faced. What DL found out is he would lose some people but most would just complain but not move. Meanwhile they would keep improving SS to placate the brokers who stayed.This one has gone a lot better than when Pru lost the BOSS system. I have not seen any articals in the Journal about the entire system being down for a couple of days 

cmein1999's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-07

This has to be the worst system ever. There is no way this is a merger of equals, best practices coming together, taking the best things from each firm and combining them,etc, etc, etc.
 
For the guys that have been around for a while, we are back to the days of QP, QS, QA. Tell me how you run a report that isn't 30 pages in length that shows portfolio holdings, when it was purchased and exclude reinvestment costs from mutual funds.

 
I can't find one.
 
Contact management: there is no way in hell it should take 3 minutes to find a phone number, enter a note or just look at previous notes. Bring back Brokervision. It is better by leaps and bounds. Bring back Portfolio Diversification, Bring Back OTPP. They were simple to use and the client didn't need to take home 25 pages of disclosures and information they really didn't want. Don't get me wrong, when your putting together a complete financial plan this system is better than OTFI. But if you have a client come in and want to just print off a simple portfolio holdings page, its 10 pages at the least. 
 
If anyone else feels this way please let your higher ups know. This is 5 steps backwards compared to what we had. Don't let them tell you anything different.
 
Its a PIG with Lipstick. 

BukiRob's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-06-23

cmein1999 wrote:This has to be the worst system ever. There is no way this is a merger of equals, best practices coming together, taking the best things from each firm and combining them,etc, etc, etc.
 
For the guys that have been around for a while, we are back to the days of QP, QS, QA. Tell me how you run a report that isn't 30 pages in length that shows portfolio holdings, when it was purchased and exclude reinvestment costs from mutual funds.

 
I can't find one.
 
Contact management: there is no way in hell it should take 3 minutes to find a phone number, enter a note or just look at previous notes. Bring back Brokervision. It is better by leaps and bounds. Bring back Portfolio Diversification, Bring Back OTPP. They were simple to use and the client didn't need to take home 25 pages of disclosures and information they really didn't want. Don't get me wrong, when your putting together a complete financial plan this system is better than OTFI. But if you have a client come in and want to just print off a simple portfolio holdings page, its 10 pages at the least. 
 
If anyone else feels this way please let your higher ups know. This is 5 steps backwards compared to what we had. Don't let them tell you anything different.
 
Its a PIG with Lipstick. 

 
It helps to be familar with the new op system before you boldly proclaim what it can and can not do. 
 
You want to print off a client holding report?  Its simple to access that right off smart station.  You can print for just an account or for an entire household.  Its right there at the portfolio insights tab.  You can just print equity, fixed income, funds or all.  Realized gains and losses, estimated income and a eff frontier for the account.  It can be as detailed or generic as you want. This system is no where near as good as Boss 300 was but that said, it does a lot of the things you claim it doesnt do.  Not perfect by any means but you really need to know the full capabilites of the system before you make the kinds of comments you are making.  No way do you know what it can and cant do in 3 or 4 days of using it.
 
Contact mgt is new and Im not impressed but then, Ive never been impressed by any firms contact mgt system.

shredder's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-04

cmein1999 wrote:This has to be the worst system ever. There is no way this is a merger of equals, best practices coming together, taking the best things from each firm and combining them,etc, etc, etc.
 
For the guys that have been around for a while, we are back to the days of QP, QS, QA. Tell me how you run a report that isn't 30 pages in length that shows portfolio holdings, when it was purchased and exclude reinvestment costs from mutual funds.

 
I can't find one.
 
Contact management: there is no way in hell it should take 3 minutes to find a phone number, enter a note or just look at previous notes. Bring back Brokervision. It is better by leaps and bounds. Bring back Portfolio Diversification, Bring Back OTPP. They were simple to use and the client didn't need to take home 25 pages of disclosures and information they really didn't want. Don't get me wrong, when your putting together a complete financial plan this system is better than OTFI. But if you have a client come in and want to just print off a simple portfolio holdings page, its 10 pages at the least. 
 
If anyone else feels this way please let your higher ups know. This is 5 steps backwards compared to what we had. Don't let them tell you anything different.
 
Its a PIG with Lipstick. 

It is not as bad as you make it out to be....just narrowed a client review to 7 pages.
Been w/ AGE 20 yrs and this system will be a step forward, not backwards....you'll just have to invest some time to get used to it.

Blue2's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-05

Mucker wrote:albert wrote:I think more like 5500 left by my count.
 
Wait till FY AGE bonuses are paid...  And those will be regretables!!!
 
At the end of Jan it was 5400> and dropping like WFC stock.

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous

"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration, sir, I've come to the conclusion that your new defense system sucks."

Client1st's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-18

Smartstation isn't so bad but not nearly as good as folks were lead to believe.  Way too many tabs and  especially too many drop downs layered upon drop downs.  There is a real need to consolidate and simplify.
 
Contact management leaves a lot to be desired.
A much worse situation and more serious issue is a back office, that used to be one of the finest in the industry, that is almost universally inept.  People on the other end of the line just have no clue what they are doing. An issue that should be about a one minute affair ends up taking hours.   Speak to 3 people and get 4 different answers.  Or you may get transferred around like a hot potato for half the day.  That is extremely inefficient and the phrase "best practices" should be banned until further notice.  A complete mess that alone, justifies strong consideration of an FA moving his/her practice.
 
People were made a lot of promises about what kind of firm and culture would emerge from the WS/AGE merger.  "Give us time. Give us a chance".   Many promises made, far too many undelivered.
 
WS is in trouble and mgt needs to step up, show some leadership,  fix a lot of things before the wheels come completely off.   
 
What a shame.  A HUGE opportunity has been missed.  Instead of nickle and diming the client, squeezing the FA payout, and letting the backoffice fall into shambles... they could have moved in the direction of AGE and had THE best firm on the street for both clients and all employees not just FA's.  
 
Mabye it's time to clean the WS leadership out, find some old school AGE people, and turn this thing around.

Sam Houston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-01

I can live with Smartstation, even think it might be a step up.  As mentioned earlier, Contact Management is horrible, back office is worthless for support, and looks like yet another name is about to be drug through the mud.  Gotta love it.

Hey Kool-Aid's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-30

Ferris Bueller wrote:"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration, sir, I've come to the conclusion that your new defense system sucks."
 
Wargames?  

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

Thanks for the detail Paul.
Sam  Can't understand how you give smartstation such a pass. It is the same disease as your complaint about back office support. They do not get it and do not care as far as I can tell. Count me in with Cmein. It just plain makes it harder to do your job. Also, the best of both was obviously a LIE because nothing of the AGE world survived.

Sam Houston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-01

albert wrote:Thanks for the detail Paul.
Sam  Can't understand how you give smartstation such a pass. It is the same disease as your complaint about back office support. They do not get it and do not care as far as I can tell. Count me in with Cmein. It just plain makes it harder to do your job. Also, the best of both was obviously a LIE because nothing of the AGE world survived.
 
I am not saying everything about Smartstation is better, many things are not.  However, there are many upgrades as soon as you learn the tricks to operating it.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

I would settle for an easy way to look at an account.

Sam Houston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-12-01

albert wrote:I would settle for an easy way to look at an account.
 
If 16 clicks is not easy for you, I can't help.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

Thanks anyway.

Mucker's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-27

Feedback from the fine Smart Station folks...
 
"BV wasn't scalable"
OK, so this justifies having info you need for the same client in 4 different tabs?  This justifies no notepad, this justify's 5 clicks to change a date on the calander?  This justifies the click madness.  You can't even enter a to-do or task while looking a a clients positions without toggeling back and forth while adding 16 clicks!
 
"We ran a Contact Management pilot program with 1,500 WB advisors and they like it"
This shows what they think of us AGE people.  Of course the WB FA's like it, they had nothing!   Had they used BV they would be screaming bloody murder like the rest of us!!!
 
There is more, but I'm so fired up I can't even type....Keep using Excellence First, e-mail your regional, e-mail DL...  I HAVE!   I'm not letting this go!   Either they FIX it, change it or improve it or no amount of retention will keep me there!!!
 
Again, I can buy my own software and use Outlook and save 40% of my gross by going indi!

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

Mucker wrote:Feedback from the fine Smart Station folks...
 
"BV wasn't scalable"
OK, so this justifies having info you need for the same client in 4 different tabs?  This justifies no notepad, this justify's 5 clicks to change a date on the calander?  This justifies the click madness.  You can't even enter a to-do or task while looking a a clients positions without toggeling back and forth while adding 16 clicks!
 
"We ran a Contact Management pilot program with 1,500 WB advisors and they like it"
This shows what they think of us AGE people.  Of course the WB FA's like it, they had nothing!   Had they used BV they would be screaming bloody murder like the rest of us!!!
 
There is more, but I'm so fired up I can't even type....Keep using Excellence First, e-mail your regional, e-mail DL...  I HAVE!   I'm not letting this go!   Either they FIX it, change it or improve it or no amount of retention will keep me there!!!
 
Again, I can buy my own software and use Outlook and save 40% of my gross by going indi!It depends on who they ran the contact management pilot program with. Remember WS guys never had a system like that so anything to them would be an uptick. The bad news is given their turn around time, you will not see fixes to your current complaints until next year at the earliest and that is if you are lucky.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

Why do you think it will take so long to make obvious improvements to the system? I can not understand what the  WS brokers have been using to manage accounts. I get your info about why brokervision had to go. Same story with ontrack?

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

albert wrote:Why do you think it will take so long to make obvious improvements to the system? I can not understand what the  WS brokers have been using to manage accounts. I get your info about why brokervision had to go. Same story with ontrack?WB has 3 releases each year Feb, June, Oct. They are testing the June release right now, developing for the October release and and finishing up requirements for next feb release. At least thats how it was always explained to me. That means the issues you have right now at earliest won't get queued up until next June. Those enhancments have to fight for funding along with everything else and there is never enough funding. Hopfully your issues were already known and in an exisitng queue otherwise it will be a while.On track was not integrated with envision, portfolio ensight is. I heardthere were a few gaps between the two systems but portfolio insights was suppose to be upgraded to do those things.  To be honest I do not know a lot about on track, but the portfolio insight tool was pretty powerful, especially in the bond area. When gold was shut down, the old pru fixed income system, I was not happy. I could not believe it when WB actually put someing in Smart Station that was better than what was on BOSS, pru's broker desktop system. Boss rocked.If on track was better than portfolio insights it must have been one heck of a product.

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

Stupid station, info minimum & excellence lost. I've always used Act. Why they would build their own POS from scratch instead of going with a decent CRS will always be a mystery to me.

NCGNTO's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-31

I will send a "service request" to ask for ClientOne/Broker vision to be returned.....

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

I am really sorry for you guys that are still there. If you are worried/scared to move DONT BE!I made the jump in Jan , andafter reading this forum now, I am sooooo glad I did. People try to scare you into thinking moving is a nightmare, and I am sure it can be depending on teh advisor, clients and firm, but mine has gone so much smother than I couldn have ever imagined...just do it! I wasnt worried about waiting for a retention...it wasnt important to me...no money could have kept me at WS before let alone now....so those that are unhappy, get out while you have someplace to go or get used to the new reality.

albert's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-11-04

nestegg,
How does the SF computer system stack up to ontrack and brokervision? 

brokergirl's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-19

I am an AGE legacy CA and I have to say that after years of using BV I hate Smartstation.  Being human, I detest change of most sort, but this change is ridiculous.  It takes me at least 20 clicks to get the information I need. But worse than Smartstation is what has happened to our back office. I have spent more time taking the "scenic route" of St. Louis trying to find someone who could and was WILLING to help me than I have doing what I am paid to do "service customer requests".  I spent a total of over 2 hours on Friday being switched from dept to dept and finally got the response "you will have to tell your customer to be patient, we have just been through a big conversion and it is tax time".  I told that person that now is not the time to tell a client they have to be patient, they will sign transfer forms faster that I can blink.  I think it is horrible that when I call St. Louis I am placed on hold forever and the lack of competence on the other end is frightening. One person gives you one answer and other person gives you another answer. They dont give a sh*t and it is reflected in their attitude every time I call.  I might as well be calling Comcast about my personal cable bill, what happend to the competent support and attitude that was AGE? We used to have a contact in each dept that we dealt with, now we get a call center. The hold mesg says the calls are recorded, I wonder if anyone in St. Louis is bothering to listen to the responses that are being given out and to the sh*tty attitude that goes along with the responses.  Is this the way Wachovia did business before the merger with AGE? I take pride in the quality of my customer service for our clients, I used to take pride in the fact I worked for AGE, now I am embarrased to tell people where I work.  I have been concerned for awhile that my brokers would leave the company and wondered where that would leave me...now I am hoping they leave and take me with them.  I do not want to be connected to a company that I see us being, I am ashamed of our company.  But at the same time I wonder, is it any better at any other companies right now?  

PaulAtreides's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009-02-14

brokergirl wrote:I am an AGE legacy CA and I have to say that after years of using BV I hate Smartstation.  Being human, I detest change of most sort, but this change is ridiculous.  It takes me at least 20 clicks to get the information I need. But worse than Smartstation is what has happened to our back office. I have spent more time taking the "scenic route" of St. Louis trying to find someone who could and was WILLING to help me than I have doing what I am paid to do "service customer requests".  I spent a total of over 2 hours on Friday being switched from dept to dept and finally got the response "you will have to tell your customer to be patient, we have just been through a big conversion and it is tax time".  I told that person that now is not the time to tell a client they have to be patient, they will sign transfer forms faster that I can blink.  I think it is horrible that when I call St. Louis I am placed on hold forever and the lack of competence on the other end is frightening. One person gives you one answer and other person gives you another answer. They dont give a sh*t and it is reflected in their attitude every time I call.  I might as well be calling Comcast about my personal cable bill, what happend to the competent support and attitude that was AGE? We used to have a contact in each dept that we dealt with, now we get a call center. The hold mesg says the calls are recorded, I wonder if anyone in St. Louis is bothering to listen to the responses that are being given out and to the sh*tty attitude that goes along with the responses.  Is this the way Wachovia did business before the merger with AGE? I take pride in the quality of my customer service for our clients, I used to take pride in the fact I worked for AGE, now I am embarrased to tell people where I work.  I have been concerned for awhile that my brokers would leave the company and wondered where that would leave me...now I am hoping they leave and take me with them.  I do not want to be connected to a company that I see us being, I am ashamed of our company.  But at the same time I wonder, is it any better at any other companies right now?  
For WS it is all about scale and scope. They want the brokers to serve themselves and not bulk up home office. They will put the tools in your hands, but expect you to do the work. As for the back office issues, what do you expect St Louis has to learn a new system as well.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×