been dupe   funny

We will be a JV with UBS Americas very soon…

I just met with a prospect who said his Wachovia mortagage broker said the new name will be annouced tomorrow!

Be patient. It is not Friday end of the day yet is it. Please reserve negative coments until then. I will also say, I truly believe UBS/WS still in the works as others have mentioned. I will sleep great tonight, I hope you will as well.

BM told the office today Tuesday…

I will say that I wasnt happy to read that Stumpf made 33 mill over last 3 years, LARGE portion of that in bonuses. But still being patient till end of the day Friday

lets face it guys. This is not gonna end well. When my manager says its not gonna be good its gonna be disappointing. he is well connected and has not said much till today. I think we are in for a big surprise.

Merging two zombie banks is like have two drunks trying to help each other to stand up.

“The JPMorgan takeover of insolvent Bear Stearns and WaMu; the Bank of America takeover of insolvent Countrywide and Merrill Lynch; and the Wells Fargo takeover of insolvent Wachovia show that the too-big-to-fail monster has become even bigger. In the Wachovia case you had two wounded institutions (Citi and Wells Fargo) bidding for a zombie insolvent one.”

UPDATE 3-Stanford Financial eyed by regulators - source

Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:51pm EST Email | Print | Share | Reprints | Single Page [-] Text [+]

(Adds source confirming regulatory probes, background on Stanford)



NEW YORK, Feb 11 (Reuters) - Stanford Financial Group, which says it oversees more than $50 billion of assets, is being investigated by U.S. regulators over its business, a person familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.



The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) are looking into the company, the person said.



Earlier Wednesday, BusinessWeek said in its online edition that the SEC, FINRA and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation were investigating Stanford’s ability to pay high yields on CDs, even as it invests CD money largely in stocks, real estate, hedge funds and precious metals, many of which have lost value in recent months.



The report comes as investors, politicians and regulators focus more on the returns that investment firms promise and actually provide, in the wake of accused swindler Bernard Madoff’s alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme.



“This is a rehash of old gossip and unsubstantiated allegations,” said Stanford spokesman Brian Bertsch, referring to the BusinessWeek article. "The Stanford Financial Group is rigorously managed and fully compliant with all U.S. regulations."



With respect to the regulators, he added: "All three agencies have stated to us that they were visiting our offices as part of routine examinations."



The SEC declined to comment. The other regulators did not immediately return calls seeking comment.



Citing people close to the investigations, BusinessWeek said regulators are also looking at how Stanford could lavish large bonuses, luxury cars and expensive trips on employees by selling CDs, which are usually low-margin products.



According to its website, Stanford has more than 50 offices in North America, Latin America, the Caribbean and Europe. Founded in 1932, the firm offers services including private wealth management, investment banking, equity and policy research, sales and trading, and consulting, the website said. (Reporting by Rachelle Younglai, Jonathan Stempel and Julie Vorman; Editing by Bernard Orr)



rut row BernieII

Let’s talk about what the Bear and Lehman brokers got. And WFC is going to pay us nothing!? F… them! I didn’t interview or want to work for these tight SOBs . I will not work for them after this treatment! On top of that the SB mgr called me and said they raised the deal to 240% t12, all cash. See ya, best of luck to all.

Just curious.  Since so much has been decided and confirmed on this board, I have a question (and maybe this has been covered).  Is there different retention scenarios for different channels?  Are PCG advisors hearing different things than ISG advisors or Finet?  I read these posts and have no idea whose PCG, ISG, Finet or just disgruntled home office employees messing with everyone.  I get it that it’ll be bad news no matter what channel your in until the UBS hookup…just wondering if some of the negativity is coming from one channel in particular.  Good luck to everyone.

FB Good one

anyone else getting the feeling that management is just laughing away, while pissing on our backs and telling us ‘it’s just raining’?

DL should tender his resignation effective yesterday! How much cred does he have? The stammering POS.

I asked this question before but I have never received an answer that makes sense. Why on earth would there be different retention deals for Legacy AGE and Legacy WS brokers. It doesn’t make sense. WS bot AGE and we got paid. Wells Fargo bot the merged WS so everyone should be paid the same. I don’t understand why the Legacy WS guys got paid when they bot AGE. It shouldn’t make a difference that the AGE guys received retention form WS. Wells Fargo is not WS.

[quote=20yrVet]

I had dinner again with stumpf and danny which was nice.  Few cocktails discussing the retention and both of them indicated that the retention will be the best in the industry.  Any other rumors?  LOL  

Been a lurker for a couple of weeks and just wanted to comment on a few things. I am in the ISG channel.   Had conference call today with manager (who is also a good friend) who just got back from St. Louis. He was very candid in saying retention was never mentioned. He said he wished there would be one, and he is still hoping, but at this point it’s not likely. He even said he was very surprised and disappointed that it wasn’t even brought up. He told me he understood that we all have offers and that I have to do what’s best for my family and my practice.   I’m not a million $ guy like everyone on this forum (LMAO), but I’m at 700, which is very profitable for the firm, particularly in the ISG channel, so he sure doesn’t want to lose me. He gave me the schpill about how great the firm will be going forward, blah, blah, blah, but he was very honest about no retention news. That told me all I need to know. Now, that’s for ISG only.



I think the reason for so many different rumors is that we are dealing with a number of channels and number of different folks - AGE, legacy WS, Pru, ISG, Finet, etc. It is likely that, if there is a retention, it may look different for everyone, depending on where you fall. So, several folks on here may be correct. It may be a mix of different things.



On another note, I do find it funny that y’all talk about how many FAs are tuned in to this situation. Although I’m sure we are all, indeed, concerned, if you go back and read the 226 pages of this thread, it’s really just the same dozen people posting over and over - and half of them don’t even work for Wachovia.   I’m not sure that that many FAs really tune in to this forum. I may be wrong, but it is kind of funny.



Lastly, some of the math on here seems to be wrong. Yes, it is cheaper to pay a good producer 50-100% T12 to stay on board than it is to replace him with a new recruit that has to be paid 150%+ . But, what many are forgetting is that, regardless of what happens and what many think, the firm is betting that no more than 25-30% of folks leave, and some of those they don’t care about. So, paying 150% to replace 25% of the FAs may be cheaper than paying retention to 75% of the FAs. You can’t think individually. You have to look at the big picture.    Everyone on this forum may be ready to go, including me, but you’re kidding yourself if you think that is the same for the entire sales force. Many FAs are scared to death to make a move in this environment, period. I work along side 3 guys doing $1mm plus, and none of them are going anywhere.   If you don’t believe me, look at all the posts on here telling certain FAs to quit complaining and make the move. If all of these firms are paying all of this money and it’s such a “no brainer”, then why isn’t EVERYONE gone? It’s because those other offers come with big handcuffs and folks are just scared to take that leap. Wells knows this and my manager pointed the math out about paying retention to everyone vs. recruiting a few replacements, which means it’s been discussed in a managerial setting.     So, looks like ISG is SOL. I’m pulling for the rest of y’all though!

trust me.   no one on this board have any clues to the retention.