I agree with you ice.  I am seriously looking into going indy.  I think 100% of my clients would love it if I did.

[quote=frickster][quote=gauge26]no

You seem pretty certain of this. Do these numbers apply to both PCG & ISG? 

I also heard, not from a “source”, but from regional who is and has been very close with DL, following grid

T12 1/1/08-12/31/08

0-200k - 10%
200-499k - 20%
500-750k - 30%
751-999k - 40%
1mill+ - 50% w/25% backend

He said DL had to fight for the 0-200k 10% because it was going to be zero, but DL said due to the stress from WB name w/ clients everyone deserved something

[quote=kowachovia]

Jesus - turn the wells buyout of WB into a positive. If you think its any better at any other major firm you are an idiot. If you want to go back to the AGE way go to Stifel, Baird or RayJ.

SEC, FINRA, Hit Hard by Markopolos Testimony

Most RIA firms were already understaffed when it comes to compliance. According to data collected by the Investment Adviser Association in the summer of last year, 64 percent of firms have no more than one full-time employee who works in legal or compliance. And 79 percent of chief compliance officers wear two or more hats—they are responsible for many non-compliance tasks. Meanwhile, only 44 percent of firms indicated that they had "fully sufficient resources devoted to compliance."

[quote=bocabroker]

You are the exact reason why the independent channel gets no respect. Permission to do trades, are you making this stuff up as you go along? The indy channel is about to get hit with a massive amount of red tape and regulations, good luck with that.

Do you have poor reading comprehension, Quagmire, or are you simply ignorant of the legal framework in which you operate? ANYONE who does not have discretionary authorization from their clients, and in the case of reps also the approval of their b/d, MUST legally get permission from their clients before making any trade in their account, otherwise you are making an unauthorized and illegal trade. This describes probably 98% of the reps in business today that do not have their clients in Advisory (discretionary) accounts.



OTOH, the vast majority of RIAs have discretionary authorization from clients as part of the legal agreement with the clients. So instead of having to call every client to get permission to, say, sell everyone out of a given position, we can and do simply make one block trade for all accounts involved. Zero client calls, zero client discussions, one trade, done for everyone. No further discussion or permission needed.



Oh, and as for your initial point, I can’t imagine how I or any of my independent brethren will ever be able to look at ourselves in the mirror again if Quagmire doesn’t “respect” us. Whoa is me! <>

Preach it Morph!

Even the wirehouses are barking about discretion and managed accounts these days.  You know how many CD buyers at wirehouse firms never get a phone call?  “Oh–the client just wants his CD’s to be rolled over.”  Or, “the client told me he wants the dividends continually reinvested into this other fund.”  And so on.  All unauthorized.  In most markets nobody cares, nobody lawyers up to have a third party go over their statements.  This isn’t one of those markets.  Right now CPA’s are looking over statements and asking their tax clients, why did you buy oil stocks at the very peak of the market?  Was that your idea?

Smile and dial!  Or, try another way.

Wells Fargo & Co., which received $25 billion in bailout money, waited until Tuesday to cancel events at two high-end Las Vegas hotels that included a plush four-day employee sales conference."

Brokerage is STRICTLY about retail production at this point.  The off set that Investment banking provided is long gone in todays brokerage firm.  Because of that reality,  if you do not lock up talent, talent leaves.  In a best case you lose a small percentage but when your broker force gets jerked around for 4 months and if you do not pay they will see it as management making bold faced blatant lies.  In that scenario, you have massive levels of production leaving.

If Wells does not pay retention at this point people who would normally not consider leaving will leave because of the way this was handled.  It would paint a very clear picture of dreadfully poor management and communication.  How could even consider sitting in the light of a company that flat out doesn’t care what you do regardless of your level of production.  Wells will not make infrastructure investments nor will they commit capital to position the firm to compete as the best, top tier level firm.   You would have to be a stone cold idiot to believe that things will some how get better when the economy gets better…  I have said all along what Wells does or doesn’t do in this situation will tell you all you need to know about how they view you, your business and paints a crystal clear picture of what kind of environment you will be working under going forward.

There is a big difference DixieDog between canceling a junkette in this environment and getting your producers under contract.  Executive compensation is about paying people like Thaine and the corporate excesses.... and not about retention packages to keep your business alive.  At the end of the day in today's world retail production IS brokerage.  If you do not pay them you are out of business because they are not under contract and as unrestricted free agents, they can and will move teams.

isg call summary…“grab your ankles”…

[quote=QB]

Buki, I’m in agreement with you as far as talent goes.  The political landscape has changed.  I do think that retention will be paid in some form.  Yes, there is a large difference between a junket to Vegas and paying your sales force to stay put.  So far, MSM has not caught on to the differences between bonuses to management that ran a bank into the ground, and bonuses to salespeople.  My concern is that the story breaks that “fat cat brokers get millions!” in the headlines.  I think it is important to acknowledge the real pressure the bankers are facing.  They don’t want bad headlines.  They do want their salesforce to stay.  Those are the real tensions they live with at this point.

Inside some companies, including Morgan Stanley, executives have grumbled
about the government’s growing involvement. Especially prickly are executives
at firms that didn’t want or ask for TARP but were persuaded to take the
money. TARP recipients Bank of America Corp., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and
Wells Fargo & Co. declined to comment.

 In the words of Terry C ( koolaid king) this past summer in Europe, “Wachovia is going to be fine” also one other top WS exec, guess who said something like, “the worst is behind us” watch out for that WF Stagecoach!!!

Retention is Friday February 13th. All I know is 1 mill+ is 50-75 upfront. I am not going to say “I heard” or I have someone higher up, lets just say I know. Details of under 1 mill still sketchy so I do not want to get hopes up or dissapoint with estimates

MGT can't kick the can down the road forever. There will be retention becuase other firms are paying retention and becuase signing bonuses are being paid byother firms -- not to mention that reportedly WS is als0 paying FA's to join them.  So retention makes sense and will happen.

BE PATIENT - Are you hearing this is just PCG or are they including ISG in this retention package?

Have they announce the deal yet…not going through 2 million pages to find it…