[quote=compliancejerk][quote=spikedkoolaid]Because I haven’t done a Secrets Revealed Topic in awhile I thought you might want to hear from the horse’s mouth the Secrets (Brutal Facts) that Edward Jones is currently facing.

  The Executive Committe (Doug 3Mil Hill, John Bachman, Jim Weddle, etc) believes these brutal facts must be addressed in order to move Edward Jones forward.   1.  Increased pressure from competitiors to recruit our financial advisors. - We have a lot more successful, veteran advisors than we did 10 years ago.  They are a lot more valuable to other firms.  However our attrition rate is actually lower than everyone thinks.    2.  High attrition rate of new financial advisors. - That's news?  I've been here 11 years now and this has always been an issue.  I don't think it's going to change. 3.  Financial advisor growth has been slower than planned since 2002. - Good!  I don't want any other FAs in my region.  4.  International operations are NOT profitable. - How many new start ups are?  It takes a long time for a startup operation to create profit.  It's not like the AGE/WB merger where WB gets a lot of already fully functional FA's they can just assimilate.  We have to wait for years for all of those offices to become profitable before the operations as a whole can be profitable. 5.  Low market share and low brand recognition. - We're not as well known as ML, but as better know than a lot.  6.  Dated technology and infrastructure. - I'll bet this one isn't an issue 5 years from now. 7.  No formal long-term planning process. - Relatively easy to fix. 8.  We are late to offer financial planning. - Biggest mistake we've made so far.  But we're on the path to fixing the problem. 9.  Product pricing and financial advisor compensation are out of date. - This one is interesting.  I think they are talking about fee based planning.  I'm hoping they bump the payout. I'm not holding my breath. 10.  Clients are more aware of markets and investments - Not just an EDJ issue 11.  Thin Management depth. - More GP opportunities. 12.  Escalating competition for the client. - Not just an EDJ issue. 13.  High-Cost business model. - Trade off they always recognized.  14.  Highly regulated industry.  - Not just an EDJ issue. 15.  The firm is getting sued much more now than ever before. - Not just an EDJ issue.  The bigger you get, the bigger the target on your back gets. 16.  NO diversity in key leadership positions -  This one actually stated we have not increased diversity among individuals in key leadership positions.  There's a big difference. 17.  ONE PRODUCT REPRESENTS 60% OF NET REVENUE - No secret here.  Jones is a mutual funds first firm.  Mostly American Funds.  I believe this will change in the next few years as the fee based platform evolves.  It will in my office.      This is straight from the upper management at EDJ.  [/quote]   The sad part is that all these points have been known and discussed ad naseum on this forum at least the past 6 years.  (just like the field was suppose to get email back in '98).   If these problems so long why is the EC only admitting to it now? How will they address international operations (sell them off) will they sell, will they merge will they cut GP payouts (you the reader decide which will occur first)????[/quote]   These aren't problems the EC is just admitting to now.  They've always know about them and for most of them would address them publically from time to time.  This is just the first time I can remember seeing the EC make up this list and put it out there.  I think it's a great move.  It makes everyone accountable to fix these things.  If I'm the GP in charge of technology, you have to know that my name just got put on everyone's radar screen.  I'd better come up with some ideas to fix whatever issues everyone thinks we have.    It will be interesting to see what happens to Jones in the next 5-10 years.  I don't think the firm will sell out to BAC or some other bank.  But I'll bet a lot of guys at AGE said the same thing.

I’m no EDJ supporter, and am thankful every day that I am gone.  However, I will say in their defense that I think I was seeing a true changing of the guard with Weddle.  Hill was never intended as anything but a placeholder, they just had to get rid of him a few years earlier than planned. 

  Weddle appears to "get it" that the EDJ model isn't competitive.  For the most part, the only advisors staying when I was there were either already big producers and comfortable or still learning.  The "up and comers", the seg 3 & newer seg 4 guys who were above expectations consistently, were leaving at a rapid clip, unless they inherited an office or had some other issues keeping them there.  It was hard to justify staying when you knew you were leaving so much money on the table.    And the "grass is greener" publication they had (still have?) was a joke that just added to the perception that it really was better elsewhere.  It's kind of like telling your kid if they smoke pot it will kill them.  When they try and it doesn't, then they assume everything else you say is crap too.  This publication is at least honest, and lets people know that they recognize the problems (which they didn't 2 years ago, at least publicly).    I think they are going to be a more competitive firm in a few years, which is a shame for me, because they are my main competition in my part of the country.

Spiff…your words…

  3.  Financial advisor growth has been slower than planned since 2002. - Good!  I don't want any other FAs in my region.    Can you say see yuh to GP. You are on the other side now, it won't be long....

[quote=Spaceman Spiff[/quote]

  These aren't problems the EC is just admitting to now.  They've always know about them and for most of them would address them publically from time to time.  This is just the first time I can remember seeing the EC make up this list and put it out there.  I think it's a great move.  It makes everyone accountable to fix these things.  If I'm the GP in charge of technology, you have to know that my name just got put on everyone's radar screen.  I'd better come up with some ideas to fix whatever issues everyone thinks we have.    It will be interesting to see what happens to Jones in the next 5-10 years.  I don't think the firm will sell out to BAC or some other bank.  But I'll bet a lot of guys at AGE said the same thing. [/quote]   spaceman,   c'mon 11 years with the firm and you've only recently gone into the field????? This is usually an option for head office who can't cut it for one reason or another (under performance or can't handle the "pressure".   Check the 10-K and you'll see who two of the highest comped GPs are (please note what areas these two are in charge of makes one wonder......hmmmmmm)   http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ID=40868&ipage=5071152-216222-219657   If they've been talking about these changes for a while as "YOU" allude to why for god's sake has nothing been done about it before?  If the GPs knew previously weren't they put on notice then.  What is the notice now "double secret notice" to paraphrase Dean Wormer?   space-entity boob again you'd be better off just saying   "....... one day in band camp"

Oopsies, thanks ms!

space geek entity it should read     "..........one time at band camp"

[quote=compliancejerk

  spaceman,   c'mon 11 years with the firm and you've only recently gone into the field????? This is usually an option for head office who can't cut it for one reason or another (under performance or can't handle the "pressure".   Check the 10-K and you'll see who two of the highest comped GPs are (please note what areas these two are in charge of makes one wonder......hmmmmmm)   http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ID=40868&ipage=5071152-216222-219657   If they've been talking about these changes for a while as "YOU" allude to why for god's sake has nothing been done about it before?  If the GPs knew previously weren't they put on notice then.  What is the notice now "double secret notice" to paraphrase Dean Wormer?   space-entity boob again you'd be better off just saying   "....... one day in band camp"[/quote]   At what point did you hear me tell you when I left the home office?  What gives you the impression that those who leave the home office to become an FA are failures?  Most of the time it's the other way around.  You go to the home office because you can't take it in the field.  You're the first person that I've ever heard that said that the field is an escape route.  Maybe you misspoke.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.    And spears, I've not been in the field 11 years.  I still doorknock, but only when I want to.  When I stop bringing in new clients with the technique I'll stop.    I don't know why they didn't make a lot of changes before.  My guess would be that there had to be enough change in management and pressure from the field for them to realize that some major changes needed to happen quickly.  Weddle hasn't even been at the reigns for 2 years yet and there have been some major changes in our business practices.  And there are a lot more on the way.     The 10-K info is dated.  Malone is gone.  Vinny Ferrari is now the GP of IS.  I don't know what his compensation package looks like, but it's probably not the same as Rich Malone's.  I do know that he is the reason our technology is changing at such a rapid pace.  Gary Reamey is Jim Weddle for Canada.  I would guess that in most companies the guy who runs the biggest division is the one who gets paid the most.  So, I'm still looking for your point.   

compliancejerk:

[quote=Spaceman Spiff

These aren’t problems the EC is just admitting to now. They’ve always know about them and for most of them would address them publically from time to time. This is just the first time I can remember seeing the EC make up this list and put it out there. I think it’s a great move. It makes everyone accountable to fix these things. If I’m the GP in charge of technology, you have to know that my name just got put on everyone’s radar screen. I’d better come up with some ideas to fix whatever issues everyone thinks we have.



It will be interesting to see what happens to Jones in the next 5-10 years. I don’t think the firm will sell out to BAC or some other bank. But I’ll bet a lot of guys at AGE said the same thing. [/quote]



spaceman,



c’mon 11 years with the firm and you’ve only recently gone into the field??? This is usually an option for head office who can’t cut it for one reason or another (under performance or can’t handle the “pressure”.



Check the 10-K and you’ll see who two of the highest comped GPs are (please note what areas these two are in charge of makes one wonder…hmmmmmm)



http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ID=40868&ipage=5071152-216222-219657



If they’ve been talking about these changes for a while as “YOU” allude to why for god’s sake has nothing been done about it before? If the GPs knew previously weren’t they put on notice then. What is the notice now “double secret notice” to paraphrase Dean Wormer?



space-entity boob again you’d be better off just saying



“… one day in band camp”[/quote]



Why the hell would you be reading EDJ 10-K’s?? Why would you even care??! Get a life.

B-24,

I've always said my leaving EJ was like a bad divorce.  If you've ever been in one or had a close friend or realtive go through one you may understand what I've been  through.  You're correct about me needing to getting a life.   I was approached by the same WSJ reporter that contacted uwec but declined at the time due to a non-disclosure agreement.   I'm just trying to get even in my own way by providing info to my former colleagues in my own way.  Sorry if you don't approve but I'll do my thing and you can criticize or ignore my posts.  Thanks for for your view point.

So I’m interested in the WSJ reporter stuff.  Do Tell.  What were they fishing for?

  Please stay on task people, let's get away from the ad hominem attacks.

[quote=compliancejerk]

I'm just trying to get even in my own way by providing info to my former colleagues in my own way. 

[/quote]   Exactly what are you trying to get even for?    BTW, the 10 people who read this board at Jones and give a rip what you say aren't going to be convinced by people like you or spears that EDJ is an evil empire.  They already know that Jones has some faults.  You aren't telling us anything new. 

Spiffy–

You are classic.  I am not trying to bring the evil empire down.  I'm trying to uncover the truths "brutal facts".  I have been posting on these message boards for 1 1/2 years and I kind of find it therapeutic.  I agree with you that there are probably 11 people reading these things but something about exposing the truth about, the holier than thou, approach to helping people with their money makes me want to post these "brutal facts."   On a side note, I don't now, nor have I ever felt that the GP's were making too much money.  Does George Steinbrenner make too much money?  No.  I just don't care about what the GP's make.  What I do care about is the GP's not making the kind of changes that were necessary for me to stay at EDJ.  I will say it again, "Jones was a great place to start...It is a horrible place to be a producer at."    Right now when I turn on my lights on January 1, I am grossing $330,000.  I don't have to sell a thing....How wonderful is that.  Now I sell a few things every month and I'm gonna do $650,000.   The phone hasn't rang once this morning and I've been here for 4 hours.  It's beautiful. 

Spiked-

  Spiffy is coming. He's fighting it, but he will leave, just as we all have. And he will then understand.