yeah yeah yeah whatever!

And your firm got to pay

$75 MILLION

I never said revenue sharing is illegal, but the NASD, SEC etc, would prefer that firms do inform the clients hence the finds that the other firms you mentioned.....

hey candy bar how come none of the other firms had to pay as much as your firm.

oh and why is Doug Hill stepping down in 8 days??????

CJ,



MANY great firms both in our industry and outside our industry have paid substancial fines over the years. It is the reality of the litigious society that we live in today. No one, not even Edward Jones is perfect. It shows how strong a firm is when they can get past these challenges though. In spite of the challenges EJ has faced over the past year we have many good things that have happened. Please don’t make me post all the links to Sart Money, JD Power, Reg Rep, etc.,etc., etc. In terms of revenue at the firm it was our best year ever. We passed AG Edwards like they were standing still. Others are looking over their shoulders as we speak. We’re com’n whether you like it or not.



BPD

PigPayDay, please don't mention any Registered Rep articles.  I think they are just shilling for Jones and AGE.  These two firms have to be the most hated and most crooked firms on this forum.  Just read the posts.  I think the editors of this mag must have their head up their ass.  I mean you Kevin Burke and Kristen French.  Read the posts, see the fraud and you put these two POS firms at Number 1?

[quote=BigPayDay]CJ,

MANY great firms both in our industry and outside our industry have paid substancial fines over the years. It is the reality of the litigious society that we live in today. No one, not even Edward Jones is perfect. It shows how strong a firm is when they can get past these challenges though. In spite of the challenges EJ has faced over the past year we have many good things that have happened. Please don't make me post all the links to Sart Money, JD Power, Reg Rep, etc.,etc., etc. In terms of revenue at the firm it was our best year ever. We passed AG Edwards like they were standing still. Others are looking over their shoulders as we speak. We're com'n whether you like it or not.

BPD[/quote]

"substantial"

Litigous society refers to the tendency that folks have to SUE each other these days.  You folks were FINED by the GOVERNMENT because you broke the law.  I believe you will be learning more about the litigation part in California, from what I am reading...

OK, so your revenues were higher than A.G. Edwards.  Apparently, from their report this week, fees are a MUCH higher percentage of their revenues year over year.  So their growth should be considerably more consistent.  We'll see how y'all do compared to AGE next time the market hiccups a bit.

[quote=BigPayDay]Ex,

Revenue Sharing has been around for a long time. It is obviously being more fully disclosed now. To my knowledge EJ was the only firm sharing their revenue sharing with their advisors. This along with a three month period where they were allowing only preferred funds to count towards the diversification program is why they got into trouble. Several firms have revenue sharing disclosures on their public websites now. This is the the industry as we know it and will only become more and more so. We will be run, if we are not currently being run now, by lawyers. So be careful for what you wish for.

A couple of sites for you:

14 Brokerages pay $34 million in fines:
http://www.ajc.com/money/content/money/0605/09mutfunds.html

Royal Alliance Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.royalalliance.com/language/RAARSLong.pdf
/URL">

HD Vest Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.hdvest.com/investor-mutualfunds.html

LPL Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.lpl.com/html/disset.html

Wells Fargo Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
https://a248.e.akamai.net/7/248/1856/195919ec7640a8/www.well sfargo.com/pdf/online_brokerage/mf_disc.pdf

SunAmerica Securities Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.aigfinancialadvisors.com/public/disclosures/reven ue-sharing.htm

FSC Securities Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.fscorp.com/EPProgramDisclosure.pdf

Securities America Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.securitiesamerica.com/downloads/Premier%20Fund%20 Families%20Rev%2011.05.pdf

RBC Dain Raucher Revenue Sharing Disclosure:
http://www.rbcdain.com/DRP_1.0/Public_Site/Common_Pages/DRP_ 1.0VContentIndex/1,37981,1-5-12-9,00.html

There are MANY more, I think you get the idea.

And a question for you: If we were so into selling just the preferred funds because they were paying us revenue sharing, then why is American Funds our top selling Mutual Fund (Which is the one we receive the lowest amount of revenue sharing on.) and the second best selling fund family is/was Franklin, even though it wasn't even on our preferred list? You know why? I'll tell you why, we believed as EJ advisors that that is what was best for our clients. That's why! Not because of the revenue sharing. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!!!

BPD

P.S. Try and come up with a firm that does NOT do revenue sharing. I bet you can't.
[/quote]

Exdrone,

BigPayDay had a good challange for you. Have you come up with a firm that does NOT do revenue sharing yet? How about your firm?

Didn't think so.

Oracle

ExDrone,



Still looking?



BPD

Oracle and BPD,

Do you know of any other firm that compensated their advisors for steering clients into certain fund families?  Do you know of any other firm that provided bonuses and trips to its sales force because of the assets they placed into specific fund families?

These are specific differences between jones' rev. sharing and most other firms.  Jones just happened to be the biggest abuser of it while doing what's best for its clients (sales force) and making sense of investing.  Hold on a second..... I just threw up in my mouth a bit.

How did I miss this dialogue?  I never claimed that other firms don't have rev sharing.  HOWEVER, anyone with any perspective knows that Jones is in a class of its own when it comes to rev sharing.  Having only 8 pref fund families, that are exclusively promoted within Jones creates more conflict of interest than anywhere else.  The fact that Jones shares the rev sharing with the rep makes it even worse.  This just encourages the brokers to sell those funds because they are paid more!  This is made more repulsive by the pious attitude of most Jones brokers, that they are the only "ethical" firm.

The almost exclusive sale of A shares at Jones makes IR's more likely to sell sub performing funds in an attempt to reach coveted breakpoints.  This makes fund companies all the more willing to pay to play at Jones....they don't have to have a full line of quality product across asset classes.  The Jones IR's will sell funds "down and across" regardless of how the funds stack up in each category, because after all A shares and break points are what is ultimately best for the client.

All in all.......great for clients of course.

Ex

Three words: “Merrill Lynch Funds”

[quote=proudlp]Ex

Three words: "Merrill Lynch Funds"


[/quote]

Exactly,

At least Merrill is up front about their connection to those funds.  Why doesn't Jones just come up with their own funds subadvised by their pref fund families.  Then you could sell all the A shares you want, clients would get breakpoints and multiple managers, and it would be clear that Jones is making more money from those funds.  You could also switch managers without charging another load. 

Or you could do what Jones does now.  They feign objectivity while receiving huge kickbacks for recommending only a few annointed fund families.  What is better for "Mr Client?"

The continued Ed Jones/AG Edwards, my firm can beat your firm up banter is unmeasurably pathetic.  So here is my response to it all.

My D*ck is bigger than your D*ck, my mama can beat up your papa and my sh*t smells as sweet as a rose and is worthy of being served as a feast for royalty.  Neener Neener Neener.

[quote=dude]

The continued Ed Jones/AG Edwards, my firm can beat your firm up banter is unmeasurably pathetic.  So here is my response to it all.

My D*ck is bigger than your D*ck, my mama can beat up your papa and my sh*t smells as sweet as a rose and is worthy of being served as a feast for royalty.  Neener Neener Neener.

[/quote]

LOL dude you are now obsessed with the obsessions of others.  It's a second-derivative obsession!

I’m waiting for someone to get obsessed with my obsessing.  Maybe we can get MikeButler in on this one? (love ya’ mike)

[quote=dude]I'm waiting for someone to get obsessed with my obsessing.  Maybe we can get MikeButler in on this one? (love ya' mike)[/quote]

excellent idea!

That would be a third-order obsession!

Is there a new group forming?  That of the "Jones-hater" hater.  What would make the Jones lover happier?  After all, isn't the enemy of my enemy my friend?

If the hatred of Jones has enough behind it to create the new Jones-hater haters what does that say of the passion of the original haters?  Who is worse, the passionate hater or their counterpart lover...or is it the hater hater or the lover hater.  I gues a lover hater is really just another hater.