[quote=YHWY]

You got beat man, just admit it and go home.

 Does that work with your employees? Because declaring victory from your back is funny here.

[/quote]

Ahh the PeeWee Herman defense "I know you are but what am I? Infinity!"

You got nothin, I'm just gettin warmed up!

Go home.

You two are hilarious and a good reason for the “other” forum.

conveniently ignored again....

Secondly, there are facts. The first FACT is that I commented on sales technique. The comments are independent of the veracity of the story they are related to the content as displayed.

Pimp, Fair enough. You are a master of sales technique. On that topic, bluestar has specifically offered to give you this million dollar prospect (fish who's shown herself) as a referal. Are you man enough to take it? (I got that from an early 18th century business text, not Glenngary Glen Ross.)

 It's a yes or no question.

 Lastly:

[quote=YHWY] Amen, Exprop! I am way too easily irritated by the troll people.

[/quote]

Don't have to worry about it now, BANNED, till tommorrow at least.

Thanks Exprop. I need to learn my lesson, though. I get dragged into sh*t way too easily.

[quote=Indyone]Blue, I think you did the right thing.  It’s easy to play monday morning quarterback here, but I think you read this lady correctly (albeit belatedly) and I think you handled the break with decorum, despite what some would have you think.  Your biggest mistake was in how you started the relationship, but I assume you’ve learned something from that…

I guess we're to assume that your response would be better at your advertised site.[/quote]

...and your four paragraphs of blather were better?!!!  If you're such a master of the debate squad, why don't you come on over and tackle me there, coward?  If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

You're a whiny little b*tch arguing about semantics...it's not surprising that the admin got tired of you.

[quote=banned][quote=Indyone]Blue, I think you did the right thing.  It’s easy to play monday morning quarterback here, but I think you read this lady correctly (albeit belatedly) and I think you handled the break with decorum, despite what some would have you think.  Your biggest mistake was in how you started the relationship, but I assume you’ve learned something from that…

I guess we're to assume that your response would be better at your advertised site.[/quote]

...and your four paragraphs of blather were better?!!!  If you're such a master of the debate squad, why don't you come on over and tackle me there, coward?  If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

You're a whiny little b*tch arguing about semantics...it's not surprising that the admin got tired of you.

He love to use a fancy turn of phrase to demonstrate his (allegedly) superior intelligence, and then he is confused when people don't understand the meaning he is trying to convey...generally he blames it on others not having the intellectual horsepower to understand his "profound arguments".

You can't "win" by destroying the opposition or fleeing the forum. To grow, you have to integrate the opposition. If the ego dies, you die. If it grows, you become deluded. You'll see.

are you kidding???  way to much time spent!!

[quote=fluor]

He love to use a fancy turn of phrase to demonstrate his (allegedly) superior intelligence, and then he is confused when people don’t understand the meaning he is trying to convey…generally he blames it on others not having the intellectual horsepower to understand his “profound arguments”.

You can't "win" by destroying the opposition or fleeing the forum. To grow, you have to integrate the opposition. If the ego dies, you die. If it grows, you become deluded. You'll see.

God bless you and God bless us all each and every one. -Tiny Tim 

Won't do it, just like none of the other firms are going to do it. Advisor productivity tends to follow a power law, so you have a fairly long tail of low producing producers and a few hot shots. Given how bouncy the GDC is, its much too risky to cut out people around the minimum.

Since we're off topic, I am going to reply here where I can post to what Allreit said over there.

This whole idea of advisor productivity and the marketing mix which is profitable to the firm is interesting. You could see these "marginal" 200-300k producers as helping pay the fixed costs for the firm - no way are they going to be cut, especially potentially going into a recession, if they are closer to 300k.

Every name brand wirehouse and broker dealer needs to be working on cutting costs now, but those costs are going to be more back office related.

Since the independent b/ds can make smaller producers profitable, this represents and competitive threat which some wirehouses will answer with taking good care of the lower end producers in the marketing mix.  Other wirehouses will just cut the bottom and focus on selling proprietary products (like packaged subprime debt) to higher net worth clients.

You need some marginal producers around to put pressure on the breakout producers, and to help feed their egos.

[quote=fluor]

 You could see these "marginal" 200-300k producers as helping pay the fixed costs for the firm - no way are they going to be cut, especially potentially going into a recession, if they are closer to 300k.

[/quote]

Yeah, well, if only it worked that way in reality. Like I said on the other thread, $300k producers are safe (largely due to how much of the firm they really represent, think the difference in mean, median and mode when dissecting the producer base), imho, but there is a production level at which low producers aren’t helping enough with fixed costs to overcome the legal liability they represent.  The cost of each desk isn’t just the desk itself, the support staff etc., the real cost includes the liability in terms of arbitration each rep represents. As it turns out, lower producers are involved (we’re told) in more arbitration and other legal action.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

That may be a function of the type of clients they bring to the firm or the kind of corners they’re willing to cut to keep making that minimal production that they feel keeps their job. Either way, they, percentage wise, represent a liability to the firm that well outsizes their percentage of producers on the whole.

Good point, no question new business is expensive and sometimes dangerous.

And, the whole idea of bringing along the next generation of producers is unpleasant but necessary.

LPL cherry picks assets under management and avoids the cost and liability of training and gathering iffy new money, for that matter, and cuts back office costs - ultimately forcing branded platforms to cut costs and provide better more motivated personal service, or just stop serving the mass affluent altogether.

I guess wire houses going up market and LPL and such serving the masses is a win for all financial advisory professionals. So just face the music, is your production level is below 300k, embrace the change.

[quote=YHWY]

bluestar, go rent Boiler Room and Glenngary Glen Ross. You'll get all of whomitmay's cliches AND be entertained.

 Whomit, I coulda sworn you took your ball and went home a few months back, vowing never to return.

[/quote]

I rented Boiler Room last night to see if I could get a little nugget or two.

A big fat nada, don't bother. (No, I don't have a life beyond my business if you were wondering. I'm all in and it's all consuming to me)

Gaddock,
 I promised cliches (i.e. A sale is made on every call. Either you close them one why they should buy stock or they close you on why they shouldn’t.) not legitimate sales ideas. Hopefully you were at least entertained!

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=fluor]

 You could see these "marginal" 200-300k producers as helping pay the fixed costs for the firm - no way are they going to be cut, especially potentially going into a recession, if they are closer to 300k.

[/quote]

Yeah, well, if only it worked that way in reality. Like I said on the other thread, $300k producers are safe (largely due to how much of the firm they really represent, think the difference in mean, median and mode when dissecting the producer base), imho, but there is a production level at which low producers aren�t helping enough with fixed costs to overcome the legal liability they represent.  The cost of each desk isn�t just the desk itself, the support staff etc., the real cost includes the liability in terms of arbitration each rep represents. As it turns out, lower producers are involved (we�re told) in more arbitration and other legal action.[/quote]

I'm not sure there's any solid evidence for that.

The main reason to keep the $300 producers around, is that a good number of the higher producers are hot shots who will flame out and vice versa with reserve pool.

Ultimately it is the firms economic interest to retain the marginal producer (e.g they should keep everyone who generates even $1 over the cost of keeping him)

The wirehouses (at least mine) use a number somewhere around $270k as what they need to break even on a producer. Dont ask me what goes into that, I have no clue.

It goes beyond that tho, its all about the metrics, if $300 puts you in 5th quintile at a wirehouse, you have problems, if based on the rest of the firm, or your LOS , 300k puts you in third quintile, you are ok.