[quote=maybeeeeeeee]

Big Easy Flood

You are exactly where you belong.

A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.

You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.

Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

[/quote]

You're right, ever since the firm dropped First Boston from the name I've experienced some anti-Swiss bias for some reason.

It's as if the clients think the Swiss and the French are the same thing.

[quote=maybeeeeeeee]

Big Easy Flood

You are exactly where you belong.

A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.

You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.

Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

I 'interviewed' with Ameriprise - that place was like a scene straight out of the movie 'Boiler Room'

thirty some odd people on the phone, couple of guys walking around shouting random stuff at the top of their lungs, etc, etc

didnt seem like I'd fit in so... thanks but no thanks...

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=maybeeeeeeee]

Big Easy Flood

You are exactly where you belong.

A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.

You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.

Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

[/quote]

I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.

Then again my dear you sound like you're getting a mite big for your britches for your limited tenure.....
[/quote]

 . . does my butt look big in these jeans?

yes… it does… in fact it looks horrible… completely repulsing…you have definately let yourself go… get yourself into a Ballys Total Fitness and tighten up woman!!!

[quote=joedabrkr]

I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.

[/quote]

What would be an example of "abusive behavior?"

 . . . I promise that if I can set aside the time and money I will start to work on my body.  Actually, I need a butt.  Have you ever seen a frog's butt?  Just kind of that bulge at the top of the legs?  That is me.

And speaking of rear ends- - - here is Big Easy Dud

[quote=maybeeeeeeee][quote=joedabrkr] [quote=maybeeeeeeee]

Big Easy Flood

You are exactly where you belong.

A loser with a losing company.  You could never work at a place like Raymond James.  We wouldn't take you.

You actually believe your own lies.  I am not surprised you can sell lies.

Your career in this industry will be short lived.  You better pray your customers never talk to a real financial advisor.

[/quote]

I agree with you that Big Easy's act is wearing thin.  He rather reminds me of Put Trader, but even Put wouldn't stoop to defending Ameriprise and their abusive behavior.

Then again my dear you sound like you're getting a mite big for your britches for your limited tenure.....
[/quote]

 . . does my butt look big in these jeans?

Ameriprise has without a doubt had it's problems in the past, especially under the name American Express Financial.  There have been mass changes at the company since the spin off and it does appear that things are improving.  About their small/bad selections of funds...Their Diversified Equity Income Fund received the 2006 Lipper Fund Award in the Equity-Income Category.  They have recently disposed of one of their largest and poorest performing funds, The Riversource New Dimensions Fund, and folded it into their Large Cap Equity Fund which was in the top 3% in its category last year.

And to the Maybeeeee, the staunch Raymond James supporter.  I understand you like your company but you need to get over the "Homer" bias you posses.  You do know this is the same RayJay that reported they owed customer $6.875M in breakpoint discount they should have provided.  This is also the Raymond James that was probed by the SEC in 2002 after $12.5M entrusted to an account was missappropriated by the company.  This is also the Raymond James that the SECs Division of Enforcement charged with fraud in 2004.  The Enforcement Division alleges that, in 1999 and 2000, Herula [a Raymond James Investment Advisor] and others fraudulently solicited a number of investors to deposit approximately $44.5 million in a Raymond James brokerage account held in the name of Brite Business, promising them astronomical returns with no risk if they did so.  The money was then transferred to the Reps wife's account at Raymond James and never returned to investors.  The Order also alleges that Raymond James, J. Stephen Putnam, the firm's former president and chief operating officer, and David Ullom, Herula's former branch manager, failed reasonably to supervise Herula. According to the Division, Putnam and Ullom were aware that Herula was conducting activities for a suspicious business venture and was making or had made misrepresentations on behalf of Raymond James in connection with that business venture, but failed to take timely or adequate steps to address those misrepresentations or to stop Herula from making further misrepresentations. The Order also alleges that Putnam and/or Ullom facilitated the dissipation of the investor funds raised in the scheme by approving the transfers from the Brite Business account to Herula's wife's account. In addition, the Order alleges that Raymond James and Putnam failed to establish and/or implement procedures concerning the supervision of registered representatives who worked away from the office (as Herula did), heightened supervision of registered representatives, monitoring or auditing operating accounts of branch offices, and investigation of suspicious fund transfers.

I could also go into how RayJay was sued again by investors who were being placed into fee-based accounts who clearly didnt not have the assets necessary to be in such an account and were over charged on an annual basis. 

So go on thinking your company is a perfect angel.  Your naivete will make it easier for us other brokers to get clients.

There's a lot more than what was mentioned above.

Years ago the firm was one of the sleaziest players in the game, really bad stuff that would make what is detailed above look tame.  Almost taken down by the SEC on more than one occasion.  Especially when all Tom was was the boss's kid.

Tom is well liked in the industry and has been very active with the various groups and as a result the image has improved but the reality is that nobody in this business is a vestal virgin.

They have left a lot of ruined lives in their wake.

You say that there have been "mass changes at the company since the spin off and it does appear that things are improving".

What has changed? And by that I don't mean what is Ameriprise now doing that was forced upon them by regulators. What are they doing voluntarily to clean up their act?

Have they lowered fees? Have they changed the whole hiring process (the scripts are sickening, BTW). Has the training vastly improved? Have they gone back and cleaned up client portfolios that are a mess?

From a Morningstar article:

"The biggest strike against Ameriprise is the hushed tone it has maintained throughout this investigation, and that it is adopting even now. ....  It's clear from Ameriprise's statement that it is more eager to comfort shareholders in the company rather than address the concerns of fund investors. What's particularly unfortunate though, is that the funds' board of directors, the group that represents fundholders, has also not come forth with the much needed disclosures. "

http://advisor.morningstar.com/articles/doc.asp?docId=4278

Have disclosures now been made?

I would love to see this shop clean up it's act. Please tell me how it is doing that.

A couple things about these guys:

1. I completely disagree with the assertion made earlier on this thread that it is somehow a good idea to be unselective with regard to hiring practices.  Do you really want to be associated with a firm that gladly hires losers?  I know I don't.

2. I've always found it odd that Amex cultivated this sophisticated image for high-end clients on their charge card and operated such a schlock brokerage firm.  Of course this may be why they dumped the brokerage.