Year end pay out changes at MS
52 RepliesJump to last post
i hear there is a meeting tommorow mourning for the managers to discuss the new comp changes. the managers will then present it to the brokers.
i hope someone will post the news.
[quote=aldo63]
i hear there is a meeting tommorow mourning for the managers to discuss the new comp changes. the managers will then present it to the brokers.
i hope someone will post the news.
[/quote]
There's a "town meeting" with Gorman tomorrow. I'm sure managers will meet before it.
ms usually waits to the last minute to make changes. the fiscal year ends in november. It will be a happy thanksgiving meeting. In 2001, they raised the minimum from 150 to 300 on dec 21st. MERRY CHRISTMAS! If you we not at 300k, you started the next year out at 25% payout. I dropped trades under another broker to get him to the level. Others were too far away to get it done in a few days time.
Remember this is was the second year of the collapse and everyone was hurting for business.
[quote=Cowboy93]Wrong...nothing came of it--a big non-event.[/quote]
Yep. No lay-offs, increased payout levels near the bottom, more to follow...
[quote=aldo63]
In 2001, they raised the minimum from 150 to 300 on dec 21st. MERRY CHRISTMAS! If you we not at 300k, you started the next year out at 25% payout. [/quote]
When did they change that from the $300k you mentioned to the $200k it is now?
This was taken from a recent IN article (10/5 I think)...not sure what is meant, but I thought it might be relevant to the topic as long as it survives...
A top wirehouse executive is calling for renewed ruthlessness in eliminating low-end stock brokers from broker-dealers because they serve as a drag on corporate profits and reputations, according to a Dow Jones press report.
"We are defined by the bottom half," said James Gorman, president of Morgan Stanley's global wealth management group in his keynote address to colleagues at the Security industry Association's sales and marketing conference today.
"You've got to be brutal in defining the bottom half of your organization," he added.
they changed it to 200k in april of the next year becuase they were losing people
The question really is not weather you are doing 200k or 300k, to determine you have a job. Bottom line you must up your game. If you listend to Gorman, we will be training again 1200 in 2007, which is in line with everyone else. Does MikeButler have a real job in managment or is he low hanging fruit?
QUOTE=betterdays]
The question really is not weather you are doing 200k or 300k, to determine you have a job. [/question]
Very insightful, since that's a proposal that no one here’s advanced. The only time the 200k/300k number has come up in this thread was over the issue of the “penalty box” 25% payout for higher LOSs, and not whether or not you‘d have continued employment at MS at those production levels.
There’s that reoccurring rumor that everyone below $300k was to be cut, but that continues to look like a baseless talking point.
[quote=betterdays]
Bottom line you must up your game. [/quote]
I wouldn’t disagree with that, otoh, increasing the payout at lower levels and the productivity bonus appear to show that management will be using a carrot and not the rumored stick to get people there
[quote=betterdays]
If you listend to Gorman, we will be training again 1200 in 2007, which is in line with everyone else. [/quote]
I must have missed him putting out that number. At what point did he do that?
[quote=betterdays]
Does MikeButler have a real job in managment or is he low hanging fruit?
[/quote]
Neither.
ugh... take two....
[quote=betterdays]
The question really is not weather you are doing 200k or 300k, to determine you have a job. [/quote]
Very insightful, since that's a proposal that no one here’s advanced. The only time the 200k/300k number has come up in this thread was over the issue of the “penalty box” 25% payout for higher LOSs, and not whether or not you‘d have continued employment at MS at those production levels.
There’s that reoccurring rumor that everyone below $300k was to be cut, but that continues to look like a baseless talking point.
[quote=betterdays]
Bottom line you must up your game. [/quote]
I wouldn’t disagree with that, otoh, increasing the payout at lower levels and the productivity bonus appear to show that management will be using a carrot and not the rumored stick to get people there
[quote=betterdays]
If you listend to Gorman, we will be training again 1200 in 2007, which is in line with everyone else. [/quote]
I must have missed him putting out that number. At what point did he do that?
[quote=betterdays]
Does MikeButler have a real job in managment or is he low hanging fruit?
[/quote]
Neither.
I agree with mikey that if anything takes place with the lower producers, relative to their LOS, it will simply be a lower payout and a relegation into the penalty box so that the owness is on the producer to step things up.
[quote=BrokerRecruit]
I agree with mikey that if anything takes place with the lower producers, relative to their LOS, it will simply be a lower payout and a relegation into the penalty box so that the owness is on the producer to step things up.
[/quote]
Onus is the correct spelling. What a shameful sack of human biowaste you must be BrokerRecruit.
Tell me now BrokerRecruit, is your mommy proud of her biggest mistake? How do you live with yourself knowing what an embarassment you are to your gene pool?
[quote=aldo63]did they changed anything or not? was there a comp meeting?[/quote]
Geez, I'm away for a couple weeks and the primordial ooze ends up getting all over the place. I'm not even going to waste my time on this prime example of evolutionary hubris.
Shut up aldo63. You're not welcome here. Migrant workers have no place as Financial Advisors.