Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Why I Fired My Broker

Posted on 4/21/09 at 4:30 am
Posted by Rivers
Florida
Member since Nov 2008
3256 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 4:30 am
With his 401(k) in ruins, our correspondent visits investment gurus, hedge fund managers, and a freakish Arizona survivalist with one question in mind: How can the ordinary investor recover?

quote:

It turns out that my crucial mistake was believing that the brokers and wealth managers and cable-television oracles who make up the financial-services industrial complex actually had my best interests at heart. Or so say the extremely smart—and wealthy—people I asked to help me figure a way out of my paralysis. One of these people was Robert Soros, the deputy chairman of the fund started by his father, George. I went to see him at his office, where he spent two hours performing an autopsy on my assumptions.

“You think a brokerage should be a place you go to pay commissions for fair and unbiased advice, right?” he asked.

“Yes,” I said.

“It’s not. It never has been.” He then cited another saying of Buffett’s: “‘Wall Street is a place where whatever can be sold will be sold.’ You are the consumer of their dreck. What they can sell to you, they will sell to you.”

“But they told us—”

“They lied.”

He went on: “You should be disheartened and disappointed. But don’t kid yourself. You’re a naive capitalist. They were never your advisers. Do not for a moment think that a brokerage firm is your friend.”

“So who’s my friend?”

“You don’t have one. This is the market.”

“Okay, that’s Merrill Lynch. What about the others?”

“They’re not your friends,” Soros said patiently.

“What about Chuck Schwab?”

“All brokers move products based on volume and commission,” he said.


and...

quote:

“If the head of Merrill Lynch and every other investment firm had their way,” he continued, “no individual broker would ever recommend an individual stock or bond to a retail client again. They have essentially gotten out of the brokering-and-advising business and gone all in on the ‘wealth management’ business. The new model is to gather assets from wealthy people and then place those assets with a whole bunch of managers who will manage different pieces of it in diversified styles so you don’t lose it all at once. And by the way, people with less than $10 million need not apply.

“People like you are in a sort of purgatory because no one would ever come out and tell you that he doesn’t want your business anymore,” he said. “You had to figure that out by yourself.”


and...

quote:

Well, goodbye to all that. I took a random walk down Wall Street and got hit by a bus.

How am I sure it’s goodbye? The signs are rampant, but one has become stuck in my mind: a video of Richard Bernstein, the chief investment strategist for Merrill Lynch (sorry, I mean the Merrill Lynch division of Bank of America, which, by the time you read this, may be the Bank of America division of the United States Government), advising Merrill clients such as myself that one of the best financial strategies to adopt now would be to extend my “investment time horizon.”

“If one were to trade the S&P 500 for one day, the probability of losing money is about 46 percent,” Bernstein states. “However, as one extends that time horizon from one day to one month to one quarter to one year to 10 years, the probability of losing money decreases as the time horizon lengthens.”

To which I would add this observation from Keynes: “In the long run, we are all dead.”

This is what I heard Bernstein say: give up. You’re not going to make money on your investments in the next 10 years, or 15, or 20, so you should stop worrying about your portfolio and go to the movies like everyone else.

I called Bernstein and asked him if he was, in fact, advocating a form of Stoicism. He said I was misinterpreting his views. “This is not some sort of psychological compensation device. What I’m saying is that in looking for investment ideas, we should be looking over a five-, six-, seven-year time period. You have to give an investment strategy time to reach gestation.”

But my investment strategy gestated for 15 years. And then it died.


LINK


Posted by amsterdam
In His Word
Member since Jul 2008
1036 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 7:23 am to
I wonder where all the "Brokers are crooks" articles were when the market was at 14000? Where were all the investors that had been taken advantage of?

I cant imagine why someone could feel taken advantage of after the market has droped as much as it has. Probably the easiest article to write at the bottom of a bear.

I want to see how many of these articles are around when the market recovers and all is well. Just curious....
Posted by ForeLSU
The Corner of Sanity and Madness
Member since Sep 2003
41525 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 7:42 am to
quote:

I wonder where all the "Brokers are crooks" articles were when the market was at 14000? Where were all the investors that had been taken advantage of?


they were in the offices of their investment advisers being told that selling now in order to lock in gains would be a big mistake.
Posted by Rivers
Florida
Member since Nov 2008
3256 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 8:48 am to

quote:

I’m not complaining, by the way, and not only because I have no right to complain. I make more money than most Americans. I will ungrudgingly pay more taxes if it means keeping people in their homes—even the schmucks in overleveraged McMansions. My wife and I are lucky. We have substantial equity in a small but perfectly nice house in Washington, D.C., a city that is now, among other things, America’s financial-services capital, which should help keep real-estate prices steady. I have a late-model minivan. Most important, I have a job (and in the thriving magazine industry, no less!). If I lose my job, then I’ll complain (at which point, of course, I’ll no longer have a public venue for my complaints). But for now, no whining: just confusion and bemusement and fear, along with an uncharacteristic sense of paralysis. In the past six months, I’ve bought and sold virtually no equities. And I rarely take the pulse of my 401(k).

I called a psychologist to find out what could explain this weird passivity. Daniel Kahneman is a Nobel Prize–winning innovator in the field of behavioral economics. He explained that my feelings of paralysis were to be expected.

“You no longer know the world you live in,” he said. “You played by the rules, the rules benefited you. The world functioned according to some regularities. Right now, it’s unclear what rules apply. There is a new regime. What seemed prudent earlier has disappeared. I’m surprised Americans aren’t more panicked. Americans seem to accept a level of insecurity in their lives that Europeans wouldn’t tolerate. Paralysis is one response to this level of insecurity.”

This might explain why my wife and I have taken no action to fix our finances. Although it’s also the case that we haven’t heard from our Merrill broker in nine months. The last time he called was well before the day in September when the government encouraged the shotgun sale of Merrill to Bank of America, to keep Merrill from collapsing.



quote:

I should have seen the signs of dysfunction much earlier. It was more than a decade ago that our first Merrill Lynch adviser put us in a company called Boston Chicken. A Merrill analyst described it as “the restaurant concept of the ’90s.” It went bankrupt in 1998. Only later did I learn that Merrill had underwritten the initial public offering for Boston Chicken stock, and so had an interest in selling the company to its customers. There were other brilliant pieces of advice—long-term “buy and hold” recommendations that emerged from the Merrill analysis factory: Qualcomm; Sun Microsystems; Nokia; and Citibank, of course, which has recently dipped as low as a dollar a share. The full-service trading fees at Merrill—$80, $100, $130, for modest chunks of stock—were high, but we were told that we were paying a premium for quality research.

In many cases, we were. Bernstein, the chief strategist, has actually been bearish for much of the past decade. Given his recent disposition toward market pessimism, I asked him why he didn’t tell Merrill’s clients to dump their equities seven months ago. “I said it as best as I could within reasonable professional standards,” he said. “I’m not going to yell ‘Sell, sell, sell!’ I’m not going to go out and be irresponsible.”

I imagine that many of Merrill’s clients are now wishing that Bernstein had been more irresponsible. Of course, even if he had said something, my financial adviser might not have relayed the message
.

LINK
This post was edited on 4/21/09 at 8:49 am
Posted by ForeLSU
The Corner of Sanity and Madness
Member since Sep 2003
41525 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 9:11 am to
wife's friend's husband works at Merrill and I honestly can't figure out what he does. He apparently has clients, but works about 5 hours a day. In the few times I've met him I couldn't really get a grasp if he had much industry knowledge, or not. Maybe he brought of couple of rich relatives with him as clients...
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
110020 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 9:12 am to
quote:

I wonder where all the "Brokers are crooks" articles were when the market was at 14000? Where were all the investors that had been taken advantage of?


This is really the best response you've got to this? Hell, I've never had a broker, and I had absolutely no problem riding along on the 14,000 point wave.

Wow.
Posted by Camp Randall
The Shadow of the Valley of Death
Member since Nov 2005
17366 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 9:41 am to
quote:

Maybe he brought of couple of rich relatives with him as clients...


He could have inherited his book from someone who left or he could be a good SALESman
Posted by tirebiter
7K R&G chile land aka SF
Member since Oct 2006
10767 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 9:46 am to
quote:

they were in the offices of their investment advisers being told that selling now in order to lock in gains would be a big mistake.


Or advising the clients to borrow money against their investment accounts instead of selling as the cost to borrow would be cheaper because the investments would continue to go up, and not repping the collateral calls if the value went down just like buying on margin. Know multiple people who did this and ended paying the equivalent of ~ 40% cost of funds. Never would I utilize a broker.
Posted by Cold Cous Cous
Bucktown, La.
Member since Oct 2003
15345 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 11:21 am to
quote:

I wonder where all the "Brokers are crooks" articles were when the market was at 14000? Where were all the investors that had been taken advantage of?

You're smarter than this, so I'm not even going to go through the motions of explaining why this makes no sense.
This post was edited on 4/21/09 at 11:23 am
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
110020 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 11:28 am to
quote:

You're smarter than this,


I really want to believe this, but, frighteningly have my suspicions otherwise.

The dude almost comes across as a shill for some group who wants to assure I NEVER consider giving dime of my money to an individual broker. I'm not sure who that would be, though.
Posted by amsterdam
In His Word
Member since Jul 2008
1036 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 2:43 pm to
quote:

This is really the best response you've got to this?


Responding to the nature of the article, not the article itself. My point(I have to explain myself a lot to you guys) is that it does not surprise me to see a bunch of brokers suck articles at the bottom of the market. My other point is that there were not many brokers suck articles when the market was at 14000. Its not a coincidence
Posted by amsterdam
In His Word
Member since Jul 2008
1036 posts
Posted on 4/21/09 at 2:49 pm to
quote:

they were in the offices of their investment advisers being told that selling now in order to lock in gains would be a big mistake.


That makes zero sense. Think about it for a moment...

If all brokers are crooked and...
If they get paid per transaction as many of them do...
Wouldnt the crooked broker do much better telling everyone to sell at the top (ton of transactions), and then buy again at the bottom (again ton of transactions).

Your comment makes no sense therefore, b/c if the broker was only in it for themselves as you proclaim then they would actively encourage as many sells as possible.

Your problem is you assume brokers knew we were at the top, but advised against selling anyway. The more likely scenario is that they didnt know we were at the top, and then doesnt try to call market tops/bottoms, but rather stick to a long term strategy.
Posted by Rhizome
north kenner
Member since Apr 2009
10 posts
Posted on 4/22/09 at 8:17 am to
quote:

"Buy a house...get a good mortgage from Fannie or Freddie..."


These guys just don't get it. Fannie and Freddie are part of the reason we're all paying for somebody elses mortgage. (no child left behind = no homeowner left behind = financial disaster)
Posted by tirebiter
7K R&G chile land aka SF
Member since Oct 2006
10767 posts
Posted on 4/22/09 at 9:25 am to
quote:

Your comment makes no sense therefore, b/c if the broker was only in it for themselves as you proclaim then they would actively encourage as many sells as possible.


Well, you left out the part about 12b-1 fees paid on assets under control and/or other trailers to the broker, and if the customer went to cash they might decide to go elsewhere with the money after watching the market implode to buy hard assets or CD's from credit unions. Maybe paying off a mortgage or buying a ahack in Provence.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram