Edward Jones Segment/Production Levels
45 RepliesJump to last post
Actually, they ARE ironing out the details of how to make the segments “fluid”, or basically set you back to previous segments if you aren’t performing within your segment. That’s a fact, not speculation. There is a serious problem in the segment 3 area (and segment 4’s performing seg 3 numbers), and too many people have become complacent doing 10-15K per month. Yes, they may “technically” be profitable, but doing 5K annually in profit basically contributes nothing to the bottom line, and there are vast areas where you could have much better performing FA’s replace “warm bodies”.
You have a low goal if you start from scratch. If you accept a Goodknight which are assets given to you then you have higher goals you must hit, usually by churning the assets you were given in addition to doing the doorknocking that all new reps must do. [/quote] It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN. The churning the assets comment was a bit harsh. I won't go into the inner workings of the GKN compensation plan right now, but all of the GKNs that I know of, when looking back at it, would just as soon have started new/new or taken over an existing office. They said the GKN assets weren't enough to really do much more than give them warm bodies to talk to. [/quote] Just some perspective - I got a small Goodknight ($5mm), which basically translated into 3 accounts adding up to $4.5mm (of all-stock). I have made very little off those accounts. I probably have 5-10 Goodknight accounts left (out of maybe 150). I have closed most of them (about 25-50 near-zero balances, and then another huge chunk had a few hundred to a few thousand). I did make a handful of them "real" clients, so it has been nice. However, my standards are pretty high. I looked back at month 36, and my "Meeting" expectations number was about $19K per month. My "minimum" was about $12K. So not HUGE numbers, but those aren't nothing. And in a commission world (they didn't have Advisory my first 2.5 years), nearly all of that is NEW business each month. Doing 12-19K in NEW business per month is not easy. My strategy is to start wrapping a lot of business, and I have at least $5mm in assets identified to do that. But even that only translates into maybe $5500/mo.[quote=BerkshireBull][quote=Curious1]As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
Nothing has changed. [/quote] Wrong. Check your facts then get back to me.I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN.[/quote] When my Goodknight numbers went into effect, exceeding goals jumped 56% in one month. Since that's how you make those $7000 bonuses, I'd say the required production is nothing to sneeze at. I've got no excuses for not making bonuses. But I don't think anyone at Jones really makes that clear to GKNs.[quote=LockEDJ][quote=Spaceman Spiff]
It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN.[/quote] When my Goodknight numbers went into effect, exceeding goals jumped 56% in one month. Since that's how you make those $7000 bonuses, I'd say the required production is nothing to sneeze at. I've got no excuses for not making bonuses. But I don't think anyone at Jones really makes that clear to GKNs. [/quote] Milestone bonuses are in place for new/new and legacy FAs. Not some guy that gets 5/10/25 million handed to them and start churning accounts and calling warm leads. I know they are there but they are really going to stretch you to get them and rightly so. Not saying it's easy for a GK but it's EASIER. You need those bonuses a whole lot less than new/new. With that said, I think there should be different grids and payouts for the first 2 years for both type of produces to make it easier to understand and so new/news don't burn out so easily.Volt-
In theory life should be easier for the GKN but really what you have given the goodknight is 2K a month in gross along with 15 hours in customer service.2k in gross is better than zero, yes? Exisiting clients that have not been touched in years are better than no clients, yes?
I know the grass is greener ... but let's be honest. There are a TON of GK and people that got exisiting offices that would have never made it without the leg up. Cold hard truth and good for them but I'd sure like to hear them stop complaining about being given a 1 to 2 year head start. Question for the GKers - Do they push insurance at your training? I have to think that's a heck of a way to leverage those clients.Oh puhleeze. The net effect of GK’s (for me) was about $12000 in GDC over a year’s span - or $5K in my pocket. I also wound up whiffing on three bonus hits; more than $20K.
You tell me which you’d have rather had.
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
That, my friend, is one of the many reasons I moved on. I looked at the rolling averages, and looked at the people who were out many years and doing the same production or a very small percentage more than I was and thought…wtf. Do I want to be doing 250k per year at year 10…NO…But the majority between 10-15 years were doing exactly that. We had, out of 55-60 brokers, 5 who I thought wow…but they started in the early 80’s. All of them moved to offices with assets, 1 moved after failing at two locations, into a 40mil office in 1987.
I have seen a lot of mention on here about GK and about taking over existing offices. I understand from what i have read that requirements are different for a GK. What about when you take over an office with existing assets? Are requirements to acheive bonuses, general production, etc. different since you are starting with a fixed amount of assets?
As a follow-up, for those who have taken over an office, how true are the figures between when they asked you to take over an office and when you got into it? I have read elsewhere that some folks have been told they are taking over offices with $X and when they arrive, half the clients are gone, along with half of the assets. Does that happen often or is assuming an existing office a good way to go if it is offered? Also, what does it take in order to be offered such a set up? Thanks!Just my opinion here - but I think a lot of the low producing vets has to do with the A share culture. Until recently they’ve not been able to annuitize their business at all. Hard to run fast all the time. They just got tired and found a pace and income they could live with.
Worry about the same effect for new guys and until they figure out a way to give additional production credit for advisory solutions its going to be an issue.
I recall reading that Advisory Solution (if I am thinking of the right thing) has a fairly high entry threshold compared to the general Jones account. How is Jones planning to reconcile this so that they can move more clients to this annuitized model- or is that an issue for them? I suppose it is a little more FA by FA specific, but still, it seems like it would be in any FA's best interest to try and move business in that direction. Of course that would require a consentration on higher networth accounts, and that seems a little contrary to the Jones bread and butter. Thoughts?
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.[/quote] There's no bubble to burst here. I read the same suggbox wire that you did. I didn't call any GPs to confirm it, but I don't doubt it. Still, I'm not wrong on this one. As of right now, you can't move back a segment. That may change later in the year, or go into effect for next year, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm still right, perhaps only on a technicality, but still...[quote=Spaceman Spiff]I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
Are segments used for any purpose other than to denote production level and the associated trainings/meetings one attends? For instance does someone have to be at Seg 4 to be considered for a limited prtnership?
I believe if hit a certain level of profitiablity, you can get LP at segment 3.
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.[/quote] There's no bubble to burst here. I read the same suggbox wire that you did. I didn't call any GPs to confirm it, but I don't doubt it. Still, I'm not wrong on this one. As of right now, you can't move back a segment. That may change later in the year, or go into effect for next year, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm still right, perhaps only on a technicality, but still... [/quote] Yeah, we're splitting hairs. I heard about this weeks before that SuggBox wire came out. I am simply saying it IS going to happen, not that it already has.[quote=B24][quote=Spaceman Spiff]I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
You MIGHT, and that's a very big might, be able to get enough profitability at the upper ends of seg 3 to qualify for LP. Realistically, probably not. And it would only be possible if your office expenses were extremely low. As far as I know, in my region, the only LPs we have who earned their LP in the field were seg 4 when then got their first offering. However, the LP offering would have nothing to do with your segment and everything to do with your profitability and atta boys from your RL.I believe if hit a certain level of profitiablity, you can get LP at segment 3.
Thanks for the insight into the LP process/factors.
I want to tahank everyone who has responded to my initial post and my various questions!