Legacy AGE thoughts
118 RepliesJump to last post
hydeho…u need to give it a break. There is no one happy on the AGE side and certainly they are not celebrating the fact that 450 WS people are now unemployed. AGE folks certainly didnt ask for that. I know the WS and AGE people as we work across the street…good fa’s in both offices. And as far as a bunch of 250k producers… at merger there were 290 age 1mm producers and 480 on the ws side (mostly pru). Ave prod was 565k on ws and 485 on age…remember age trained most of there producers and are on ave 10 yrs younger than ws advisors…also ws numbers are revenue per advisor…age numbers are gross commision per advisor…anyway sad day for the folks in Richmond…blame Danny and Bagby…sad news and more coming …wait about 2 more weeks and the layoffs will be in the thousands…and Wells is really going to put the hammer down…some disheartrening stuff coming next couple months
On the bright side…alot of these folks…the good ones that were actually still left…will find a home at SF down the block…we are on a hiring spree
Average production numbers are skewed by the fact that WS has paid big up front $$'s to recruit, and there are a lot of teams at the wirehouses, not because their brokers are any smarter or better. I wonder what % of WS's 1mm+ individual producers were hired as trainees?
WS laying off people and SF hiring, I guess just another indication of the success of the "universal bank" model.[quote=mnbondguy]
I wonder what % of WS's 1mm+ individual producers were hired as trainees?
[/quote] I am going to guess 0![quote=nestegg][quote=mnbondguy]
I wonder what % of WS's 1mm+ individual producers were hired as trainees?
[/quote] I am going to guess 0![/quote] You would be incorrect. Personally know of 23 on the east coast that were trainees with either Wheat, First Securities, Butcher and Singer or IJL[quote=mnbondguy]
Average production numbers are skewed by the fact that WS has paid big up front $$'s to recruit, and there are a lot of teams at the wirehouses, not because their brokers are any smarter or better. I wonder what % of WS's 1mm+ individual producers were hired as trainees?
WS laying off people and SF hiring, I guess just another indication of the success of the "universal bank" model. [/quote] Hiring in ST Louis........Richmond displaced knew for months 3/31 was end date. Got a very, very good severence bonus to stay to the end.I'm just tired of hearing how great AGE back office is. Well it isn't, its not bad but the people there don't know how to adapt to change because they have never had any. I understand they are trying to learn new systems, but come on no need to be rude and fail to return emails or calls. I have several dept managers apologize to me for there associates actions. Yes these were Legacy AGE. So lets all work to make things work better in future and all of us stop our whining. If you are not happy and can't work to make thinks better the pack up your FRIGGING desk and move on.hydeho…u need to give it a break. There is no one happy on the AGE side and certainly they are not celebrating the fact that 450 WS people are now unemployed. AGE folks certainly didnt ask for that. I know the WS and AGE people as we work across the street…good fa’s in both offices. And as far as a bunch of 250k producers… at merger there were 290 age 1mm producers and 480 on the ws side (mostly pru). Ave prod was 565k on ws and 485 on age…remember age trained most of there producers and are on ave 10 yrs younger than ws advisors…also ws numbers are revenue per advisor…age numbers are gross commision per advisor…anyway sad day for the folks in Richmond…blame Danny and Bagby…sad news and more coming …wait about 2 more weeks and the layoffs will be in the thousands…and Wells is really going to put the hammer down…some disheartrening stuff coming next couple months
The way this place is run I cannot imagine it surviving more than a year or two without the banks money. Every single broker here was bought with the banks money.When they got in trouble the bank bailed them out, I.E. ARS. Now the owner wants WS to help them to pay back TARP. How is that going to work??????????
[quote=Blue2]
The way this place is run I cannot imagine it surviving more than a year or two without the banks money. Every single broker here was bought with the banks money.When they got in trouble the bank bailed them out, I.E. ARS. Now the owner wants WS to help them to pay back TARP. How is that going to work??????????
[/quote] ARS was booked against WacSec LLC not Wac Corp. That why there was a forth Qt loss and bonus cuts at home office.No they had a buyer on the other side and WacSec took the loss vs earnings. Thats why they had a 4th qt loss.But the 8 billion diddn’t come from WachSic.
[quote=I’m just tired of hearing how great AGE back office is. Well it isn’t, its not bad but the people there don’t know how to adapt to change because they have never had any. I understand they are trying to learn new systems, but come on no need to be rude and fail to return emails or calls. I have several dept managers apologize to me for there associates actions. Yes these were Legacy AGE. So lets all work to make things work better in future and all of us stop our whining. If you are not happy and can’t work to make thinks better the pack up your FRIGGING desk and move on.[/quote]
There are a lot of problems with HO service. I no longer call to the departments - I try to only call the Premier Advisor hotline. They are extremely friendly and will get an answer back to you almost immediately. If you have access to them - that should be your first call every time. I still find it interesting though - that there is still a big distinction to Legacy AGE and Legacy WS. And what is up with the 'A' number? I thought DL got the message on that and we were moving away from it.Hydeho…back office was superb 2 yrs ago…its been destroyed the last i8 mos by the current mgt team…here is the issue…1) Many of the best AGE back office people have jumped to SF, Eddy Jones, and Tad Edwards new deal. 2) remaining and new hires had to learn a new system
3) Only 450 came from Richmond and they expected well above a thousand
4) double the FA population with the merger…leaves the legendary back office operation a shell of what used to be.
Biggest concern is Wells next month…think we have some wake up calls coming in the area of add’l layoffs and slash and burn expenses and they arent going to spare any of the branches in my guess.
Hydeho…by the way…
A liberal is a person willing to believe something preposterous and congratulate himself on his sophistication. …very well said.
At least you are conservative. Difficult days ahead…good luck
tdude,
So...you think they will cut branch support? or, do you think they will cut actual branches?
that pretty much sums up everything.[/quote] AND Ticket charges are chaged to NET!!!!! what a RIP OFF!!!!! What about the F-ING "PAPERLESS OFFICE" ?????????????????????????? WTF WTF WTF WTF WTF WTF I'm personally responsible for the destruction of acres of the rainforest just 're-papering' my few clients. WHERE ??????????????????????????????????? Is the magical one signature takes care of all account options?????? Is it stupidity? lies? ignorance? that we were told this utter nonsense? Only the shadow knows.[/quote][quote=Gaddock][quote=stocksandblondes][quote=tdude]poboy…great koolaid…stuff is giving u quite a buzz.Can u get me some. Lets see.
1)We have a money market that sux compared to AGE
2)We have a 401k that sux compared to AGE (note the y/e pop we had off of that joke
3)We have a stock plan that sux compared to AGE (remember WB wat a winner)
4)We have a huge haircut coming in Jan for most of advisory accounts compared to none at AGE
5) We have a br managers bonus about half of what age paid
6) We have twice the amount of work as a mgr than at AGE
7) We have another loser stock called WFC. No telling where that disaster will end
8) We have no sales bonus anymore like at age
9) We have ticket charges now that we didnt have at age
10) We dont get paid on mony market trails like AGE
11) We have a bureacracy eating off our plates called middle mgt.
12) We have a back office that has been destroyed
13) Our clients are quite happy with all the -0- statements. not
14) total annual cost to me will be 6 digits.
15) not even minimal retention from wfc…list goes on ad nauseum
One statement I agree with…since Im still here in my seat I better quit yappin or I need to move. No one to blame but me for still sittin
But to call this amagamam of puke better? Dont think so.
Why are you re-papering accounts? You find it easier then calling clients!
[/quote] Umm all options accounts mapped over as level 2. If you want them at the lever they were at before you have to get new paperwork. Not to mention the people who had margin now have to have at least $50 large or they get a monster margin call. Any change to a wrap account requires reams of new paperwork. etc etc. "You find it easier then calling clients" Don't get your point, care to elaborate?
No they had a buyer on the other side and WacSec took the loss vs earnings. Thats why they had a 4th qt loss.[/quote] Any idea what the loss was, because I get tired of heering WS management trying to convince me that without thier help AGE would have gone under. How big was the haircut ?[quote=Blue2]But the 8 billion diddn’t come from WachSic.
No they had a buyer on the other side and WacSec took the loss vs earnings. Thats why they had a 4th qt loss.[/quote] Any idea what the loss was, because I get tired of heering WS management trying to convince me that without thier help AGE would have gone under. How big was the haircut ?[/quote] Yeah I heard that BS too AND it's just that ... BS. All the other firms had the same issues and they are here as well. It seems to me most things that come from WS are some kind of spin for the kool aid drinkers. If Bagby hadn't sold us out for his own cheap little gain we would be the last of the breed and on steroids![quote=Hydeho][quote=Blue2]But the 8 billion diddn’t come from WachSic.
folks…doesnt really matter anymore…we work for Obama…I love the universal bank model.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html