Inertia is EXACTLY why the biggest wirehouse producers don't all go Indy (and of course the Kool-aid).  But every year more of the big wirehouse advisors go Indy than the year before.  Also, the Indy B/D's are currently growing faster than the wirehouses, and have been for years.

Of course, the whole reason that there are so many different business models is that different types of advisors thrive best under different environments.  Some people prefer to work for a company; some people prefer to start their own.

There is no one right way, only different paths to the same goal...

[quote=Big Easy Flood][quote=Indyone]

Put, you're dating yourself with that tired old political gem.

[/quote]

Gems never lose their impact.

"You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time" has been around for a long time too.

Golden Oldies.

[quote=joedabrkr]
I find it arrogant to believe that Todd Robinson count an arrogant horses' behind like you amongst his friends.....
[/quote]

There are few more arrogant than Todd Robinson.  Or is it excessively confident?

[quote=FreedomLvr]

Inertia is EXACTLY why the biggest wirehouse producers don't all go Indy (and of course the Kool-aid).  [/quote]

Nonsense.  A big hitter has a small staff that can handle the paperwork and even physically move the practice from one location to another.

It could happen while he's on vacation.

The independent firm he's with would be more than happy to do most of the work.

The reason that so few huge hitters leave wirehouses is because wirehouses are a better place to work.

What is the percentage of independent brokers who leave the industry before retirement age?

[quote=Big Easy Flood]The reason that so few huge hitters leave wirehouses is because wirehouses are a better place to work.

 You just keep believing that...

What is the percentage of independent brokers who leave the industry before retirement age?[/quote]

Not sure what the thrust of the question is, but if I'm physically and mentally able, I hope to be doing this on a reduced hours basis when I'm 80...not out of necessity, but out of the sheer love of the game.  As far as being ABLE to retire, I fully expect that I could retire at 55 if I wanted to...I just can't imagine not being able to do what I love to do.

Nonresponsive.

My point is this.  I believe a great many experienced brokers end up making the indy channel their last stop on their way out the door.

They went indy in an attempt to make their mediocre gross more acceptable because they would retain more of it.

There are two ways to net more in this biz.  Increase your gross or increase your net.  The former requires a huge amont of effort with a healthy dose of good fortune.  The latter is far easier--just listen to the siren song of a higher payout.

[quote=Big Easy Flood]

[quote=joedabrkr]

Somehow I get the image of a lazy broker who was unable to earn enough at UBS so he broke away because of the siren song of a higher payout, only to find that they're actually too lazy to make a living in this business period.

Ok so now not only am I a whiner, but I'm also lazy?  Then why would I have done all the work to set up my own shop?  OH that's right I'm looking for 'the easy way out'.  You crack me up. 

Ever seen statistics on how many ex-wirehouse brokers who left for the Independent channel ended up leaving the business as their next step?

When you're not making it at 37% payout the idea that you would make it at 80% is certainly appealling.  But serious thought needs to be given to the realities of why your gross is not very high in the first place.

And how do you know how high or low my gross is?
[/quote]

I know who you are generically.  I have no idea what your name is, but I have known hundreds of guys just like you.

As I said, the siren song of a huge payout is very attractive when you're convinced that the problem is that your broker/dealer is being unfair with you.

Every year RR magazine profiles some of the business's "Big Hitters."  Most are with the wirehouses.

Why do you suppose a $5 million dollar producer is not bright enough to understand what a bad deal working for a wirehouse is?

[quote=joedabrkr]

Fact of the matter is that at extremely high production levels(multiple milllions) the payout differences are not as big because large indy producers are spending big bucks on infrastructure and marketing, and the wirehouse guys are getting enhanced payouts.
[/quote]

If you are talking to a customer saying nonsensical things like, "Too bureaucratic" may have a ring.

But those who are also in the industry know that the reason the indy channel even exists is because there are enough journeymen brokers who are doing good enough to not toss in the towel who will fall for the higher payout argument.

I'll bet that a larger percentage of indy brokers wash out for various reasons than their career length peers who stay at the wires.

In other words, two guys from the April 1996 class at Merrill. 

It's now ten years later and they're both doing essentially the same--same basic product mix, same basic type of clients, same basic practice.  It needs to be that way in order to ask the next questions.

Today, 4/20/06 one of them resigned from Merrill to join LPL and the other stays at Merrill.

Which do you think will be able to save more of their income during the next ten years?

If one of them is destined to wash out completely do you think it is more likely to be the indy or the guy who stayed at Merrill?

Forget the intangibles like whining about a boss who expects you to not pick your nose in front of his wife--just measure the numbers.

What portion of the brokers who leave Smith Barney to go Indy do you suppose Smith Barney really hated to see leave?

Well I’ll give you credit Put for your persistence.  Some things never change.

Your respresentation as to why the indy channel exists has SOME basis in fact, but largely is completely off basis.

I’ve noticed you don’t quote any actual FACTS to support your assumptions.

Personally, based on tax advantages, the ability to control expenses, higher payout, and the possibility of selling his book one day, I’d bet on the indy guy having more money.

Once again you accuse me of whining but cite nothing to support the accusation.  Seems to me you’re the one doing the whining because you don’t want to accept that your business model is a dinosaur, a structure built long ago when stock quotes were posted on blackboards in the bullpen.

Don't forget the question about the portion of brokers who leave Smith Barney to go indy cause Smith Barney to think they lost a good one?

Do you think PaineWebber much cared that you left?  Not the men or women  who may miss you around the office, the firm. Do you think UBS as a corporate entity regrets your departure?

[quote=Big Easy Flood]Nonresponsive. I think I was as responsive as I could be, given the lack of clarity in the question…

My point is this.  I believe a great many experienced brokers end up making the indy channel their last stop on their way out the door.  That is my intention.  I don't ever intend to go back to an employmnt situation and I have no desire to support layers of bureaucrats that don't add anything worthwhile to my business beyond what I can get at a good independent B/D.  That sounds too much like big government to me...

They went indy in an attempt to make their mediocre gross more acceptable because they would retain more of it.  Well, some may, but that's not at all why I went independent, and given the indies I've met thus far, I don't believe that's why most folks migrate...it sure isn't what I'm hearing.  Most folks are migrating to have the freedom to run the business as they best see fit (within the guidelines of full compliance, of course).

There are two ways to net more in this biz.  Increase your gross or increase your net.  The former requires a huge amont of effort with a healthy dose of good fortune.  The latter is far easier--just listen to the siren song of a higher payout.  That's probably the only thing you and I will agree on here...[/quote]

Put, you and I may not see eye to eye on many issues, and I doubt if we'll ever see eye to eye on the wirehouse-indy debate, but I enjoy sparring with you and I may be in the minority on this, but I'm glad you're back...

[quote=Big Easy Flood]

Don’t forget the question about the portion of brokers who leave Smith Barney to go indy cause Smith Barney to think they lost a good one?

Do you think PaineWebber much cared that you left?  Not the men or women  who may miss you around the office, the firm. Do you think UBS as a corporate entity regrets your departure?

Wow.......did this thread get off topic or what? 

Now all that that needs to happen is for a Jones basher to 'steer' the conversation into a debate about revenue sharing and the ethics of 'being a stockbroker'. 

Lovin' it.

[quote=dude]

Wow…did this thread get off topic or what? 

Now all that that needs to happen is for a Jones basher to 'steer' the conversation into a debate about revenue sharing and the ethics of 'being a stockbroker'. 

Lovin' it.

and I am excited for every minute of it!!!

I’m waiting to hear back o an interview I went to today and if aythig, this thread has gotten me excited!

This is a great thread!!