Edward Jones advisers complain targets are 'unrealistic'

The degree to which a business target can be achieved is totally dependant on how many appointments an adviser completes.

The number of appointments is dependant on two basic factors BOTH of which are required if the target is to be easily achieved.

ONE - Good 'focused and relevant' marketing to new and existing clients. (This includes good pre qulaification of a clients needs initiallly by phone so as not to waste time).

TWO- streamlined QUALITY office support

for the adviser from preparing the first appointment file through to initial strategy letters, research, draft suitability report and contract documentation.

Take ONE and TWO above out of the daily domain of a well trained adviser and guess what you have most probably doubled his production overnight.........

So what does the Towry Law model look like. I wonder. Is it as streamlined as was the Edward Jones model. Je ne sais pas.

Well when TL was bought by Palemon most adviser's targets were to "migrate" in excess of £10m across to the new platform, which the vast majority of us did.

I understand that the current targets for those advisers still there are on average, £800k per month which is just short of £10m pa. Of course some will be a bit less and some a bit more.

Whilst targets of 3, 4, £5m will seem high to some current EJ advisers, to me they are not, taking into account it is not a new asset target, just moving existing assets. New assets would be a different kettle of fish altogether.

Now I point this out because targets of say £6m and below are small targets by TL's standards. What happens after a year when the adviser has migrated it all ? My concern is that he/she would then be out on his/her's ear. With a restrictive covenant to boot.

My advice would be to either set up your own business or move to a good quality, local IFA and continue to service your clients in the correct manner. Look after them and they will look after you.

EJ Advisers are being forced into making a strategic decision about their future.

Don't feel you are being squeezed between a rock and a hard place! There are some fantastic alternatives out there with firms such as ours offering:

- No targets apart from being totally compliant.

- Full admin and para-planner support.

- Working flexibility - work from home or an office.

- Centralised marketing support.

- Discretionary management of your client assets.

- A great buy out of your client bank on retirement.....

And much more......

Look around before you make your decision...... and good luck to you all.

There was me thinking that TL was an independent adviser.

An independent adviser surely cant have a target for putting assets on a particular platform (particularly if it owns it).

I'm sure there are better platforms than TL's (and if there arent, its possible that there will be) and any decent adviser would choose the best platform for clients, rather than the one owned by his employer.

So, surely, TL's targets go against the concept of independence (they clearly arent independent of their own platform and there is an obvious conflict of interest) and are clearly in contravention of TCF.

Will the FSA act? I doubt it; they have much less important things to make a big fuss about and upsetting TL might upset a potential gravy train move for people at the top of FSA.

It is about time that this situation in our industry was ended once and for all.

How it is acceptable in this industry when it is not accepted anywhere else in employment to simply alter targets, working conditions etc without proving that the tools the employees/advisers require to do the job are in place.

Companies which want client banks or to reduce or expand their empires simply alter targets to avoid employment and working condition rules.

Other industries just pay redundancies and do everything above board, they factor in redundancies in to the costs.

This industry is in the victorian age with working conditions. Some companies still force employees to drive home for 6 hours after a full days meeting or training at headquarters.

All of this needs cleaning up in one go and all of the trash at the top of these companies who wouldnt get a supervisors role in outside industry need dispensing with. Get some professional industry leaders and maybe the quality of the industry would improve.

A succesful employee/employer relationship should be similar to a marriage, based upon the fundamental that you treat each other with understanding and respect. I can only asssume that either the senior management are still single or have acquired mail order brides.

Yes its your company, yes you can set whatever targets you want, and if its your intention to drive the advisers out of the door you have done a great job. If it isn't can I suggest you learn some humility and at least try courtship before moving straight to divorce. Unfortunatley for you its too late...

Nope.

"Independence" applies in the rulebook to 'packaged products'. Whilst certain wrappers on a platform might be packaged products (e.g. pension wrapper or bond wrapper), the Platform is not. As long as the platform can then give access to 'whole of market' in terms of investment funds...

At a firm level, if you know your TCF outcomes, TL should be looking at available platforms and/or the design of its own and assessing these against the profile of its clients to ensure a good fit between the platforms it chooses to adopt (or design) and the segments its targeting.

The *key* issue, I would suggest, is that these targets have probably been put together with little regard to where it is now e.g. unwrapped funds or stocks or within existing insured bonds/pensions - the latter generating all sorts of potential bad advice issues [and potentially "spoiling it for the rest of us"]

As an ex-TL'er (I left in early 2008) I can only speak of my experience in which targets can and indeed did change.

TL like many employers set their remuneration structure around a number of Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) and the list of these can and did in my time increase, with these not purely based on fees and assets (i.e. number of meetings arranged with Solicitors and other centres of influence etc).

Even for those with client money that would potentially make sense to migrate you do have to wonder what happens after this has ended and how to cover future targets once this is exhausted. Taking into account TCF, existing client relationships that may not fit the TL 'proposition', and future restrictive covenants my suggestion to those from EJ is to indeed be wary and consider your options in the open market, or indeed set up your own business either by yourself or with some of your colleagues who are in the same postion.

I wish those affected the best of luck and hope they look back in a year's time with a great deal of relief that they made the right decision (as I indeed am very sure I did).

This is shocking, I've heard first hand that targets for AUM are 'generically' equal 90% of the adviser's assets under management i.e. in EJ Nominee service. This could include shares, fixed income securities and OEICs. So in order to meet this target...which will run into millions as pointed out...the adviser will be 'encouraged' to transfer the client portfolios into the in-house TL models and charge the client 2% a year (on first £100k) + hourly advice fees - assuming they can justify tearing up the existing portfolio which was fine on the 22nd October. And if the adviser (with a conscience) doesn't do this then they will need to achieve 90% of their current AUM through new business - fail to do this? Watch their 'attractive' salary ratchet down...then what? Adviser leaves - TL have the assets one way or another. Those that have worked this out have already left and the clients are following. Good luck guys

I would echo Mark Wood's comments and if any advisers in Essex/East Anglia are looking for a new home, we would be very happy to talk.

Thank heavens I'm unlikely ever to need to have anything whatsoever to do with Andrew Fisher or Towry Law. It sounds like a horrible place, the financial services equivalent of a Far Eastern sweat shop or a Victorian workhouse.

Considering that TL picked up the whole show (and probably a few million in annual trail) for just a quid, such slave-driving tactics are disgustingly exploitative.

The FSA has expressed strong disapproval of sales target driven cultures in financial services firms (well, non Bank ones, that is). This sort of corporate policy at TL shows it is as out of touch with FSA thinking on this subject as it evidently is with regard to taking £6m in annual trail commission whilst considering itself under no obligation to do anything for it. Bugger TCF, just get as much money as possible into TL funds.

If I were ex-Edward Jones, I'd be looking for the best alternative offer out there.

Agree completely with Mark Wood and Nigel Castle.

If you're looking at your options, then please send me an email and let us prove to you the grass is greener on the other side.

ajaynaik@bankfield.net

Mr Wise, well said. We are supposed to look after clients, not just assets. I was with EJ, I tried to point out that their declared ethos and their delivery did not match, this seems to be the same MO of TL. No wonder they did a deal!

Want to earn more then you did at EJ, without asset targets but just looking after what your client needs? Go it alone albeit with a GOOD network . Contact me, I will help, anything to counter the evil intent of firms that masquerade as IFA's that care. A co-operative of ex EJ advisers, delivering the service standards promised, in local areas, cannot fail, provided correct, moral standards are maintained. The needs I care about are the clients, not the company, that's what EJ did not like about me. To recruit me; I was sold a dream. EJ delivered a nightmare! Probably sounds familiar to many now. Good luck, your training was good, just look at your clients as people who need help, you have to look after their holistic financial needs not just sell them investments. They will then become loyal clients, not the pate in a burger!

you may be quoting the rule book verbatim, but to move existing business from elsewhere on to a platform that the firm has an interest in, certainly does not fall in to the simple camp you imply, but then to have a target or campaign running to advisers within your firm to direct business towards this one platform is definately on the wrong side of the rule book.

I presume this interest is all declared in their client agreements?

There may be trouble ahead..

Another large firm who is an IFA, made the mistake of running a campaign to a product with which they had no connection and they certainly found themselves in hot water with the FSA, they did not even set a target, they just thought it was a good product underutilised by their advisers.

I know you are right factully MIB with what you have said as it is the same conclusion I came to, but if you follow Ron's thought processes through, then the moral issue and the TCF issue mean that TCF wins over the FSA rules....

I use Fidelity, Fundzone, Selestia and Transact because as a general IFA, my client base is so wide I do not currently think Transact suitable for some although it would be my preference to Transact only...... There is also the issue of inability to re-register away with Fidelity and Selsetia at present. Were I an ex EJ adviser considering going to TL, one of the issues I'd need to make sure for my clients is that they have the ability/right to re0register AWAY from Tl's platform if they do not like it or find it suitable for them as clients.

As a current TL adviser I can confirm that both fee and FUM targets are very hard to achieve. We were consulted at the end of the year as to what our own targets should be, and we all responded with what we thought fair and reasonabe. Sadly this consultation was a worthless management exercise, as were then told the branch target is X, so your target is Y. Following complaints similar to those of you EJ advisers, we were told that a target has to be stretching and we had to be more commercially aware. It is worth knowing that of the 100 or so TL advisers, less than a a quarter of advisers are on or close to target. The big guns with a select client bank are never going to struggle, as they have established client banks, and excellent professional connections to acquire new FUM. This does leave the rest of us floundering though, and we are constantly threatened with various strengths of disciplinary actions. I need not explain that this makes work unpleasant, encourages sometimes dubious advice/fees, and makes a lot of people feel very bitter for giving so much for so little. It would be tolerable if at least there was some support or concern for our plight, but there is none. I am likely to be disappearing soon I suspect...

I am struggling to see what difference there is between a retail bank and Towry Law's current business model.

High Fees

High Targets

Bespoke (really model) portfolios

Yet every now and then we are subject to Mr Fisher's preaching on how to run a successful FEE BASED business.

Something doesn't sit well here. I wonder if there is a bigger suitor in the background which looks very much like a retail bank?

Interesting commnets from current TL adviser and i do hope the FSA is reading what he said about " encourages sometimes dubious advice/fees"

The target setting which appears to be in practice here sounds similar to what NatWest did to it's IFAs in the late 80's early 90's when commission targets were £100k commission per annum in return fro a basic salary of £17k, company car (which NatWest sold every six months and made a profit on!). At that time probably only about 20% of advisers were on target and everyone else felt under continual pressure to sell when if we'd bee allowed to advise, persitancy would have been better and complaints less.

this is where the FSA fails big time, likely it may take action against TL but does not against banks, yoiu say approx a quarter are on target, but really less than 75% on target and being threatened with job loss unless they produce more business is a failing of an adviser firm, the adviser firm is promoting poor advice practice.

When it comes down to a choice of family or client people are being placed in the wrong if not an impossible situation especially during a recession, this happens in many firms over many years and they only choose disciplinary action when it suits them.

All staff in a firm should have all of their team, regions and the total on target numbers out of all staff and this should be commented on each year by HR and compliance. Also be available for the FSA if a complaint is issued.

This is major in banks.

This practice wants stamping out. Other businesses are trying to tempt advisers with client banks which provide trail and promising them the earth too.

Enough is enough.

As a current TL adviser I have to respond to the nonsense that is being spouted.

There are targets like any business, however they are not all linked to fees/FUM. Every business has targets - The TL targets in addition to commercial activities relate to further professional development, compliance, client satisfaction and how we treat our collegues.

I moved from a succesful regional IFA to JS&P/TL in 2004. Not all advisers will be successful in making the move from commission to fees or to furthering their professional qualifications. My own personal experience has been excellent and my clients have benefitted tremendously, particularily in the last 18 months. Clients pay fees if they get value for money - and they do. It is transparent and fair. Can every critic say the same about their business ?

It is easy to throw stones at an organisation when you know little of our proposition. It is even easier when you are unsuccessful at any job to critizise others. For those who have left - best of luck. Over the past 5 years I can only think of 2/3 good advisers who have left to pursue their own business interests - the rest were unable to make the change.

Why do so many people not employed by Edward Jones or Towry Law feel the need to stick their oar in?!

I have yet to be made a job offer by TL but if I get the chance I will take it.

If an EJ adviser wishes to take the offer of a job with TL why shouldn't he/she? If the targets are too high or they don't enjoy the working environment then they have the choice to leave.

If clients do not wish to move onto the TL platform then they won't.

EJ have pulled out of the UK so unfortunately the rug has been pulled out from under our feet. It is not TLs fault that this has occured. Nor am I saying that Fisher & Co are the shining knights in armour they claim to be. But to all the other IFAs out there who insist they know best WAKE UP!

I wonder how many of you IFAs out there have actually bothered to take the time to actually read the 100+ pages of the RDR? Fee based advice will be the norm in a few years as will DipPFS as a minimum qualification.

Rather than spout your detritus on here why don't you go and spend some time with your clients? Me thinks you doth protest too much!

Have you read the RDR? You imply that most of us have not, but if you look on the list of respondents you will find as a Directly regulated firm I responded to most RDR papers and I did read it before responding. Many Ntework members did not respond in their own right, which is a pity.

Any EJ adviser that goes to TL should be ashamed to call themselves a financial adviser.

Have you released that you will be paid less than half what the EJ package offered and that was an insult.

I intend to target as many Towry Law clients I can find. There is no hiding place for them not even behind their chartered status.

Any one know how many advisers have left seeing as they were holding out for pay and bonus today.

I did read the RDR thank you, but I ALSO read TCF.

I suggest you do the same.

My business is both TCF and RDR compliant today.

I also know people who have worked at TL and none of the criticisms are out of place with what they told me, in fact there were a few more.

One left because they werent happy about the way the meter had to run.

Of course I am sure all of them were lying to me even though I have worked with them previously and some after.

I can't believe you didn't already know all this...TL is an asset 'gatherer' pure & simple. Always has been since re-modelled and will be until the goal of selling up is realised. It does have a great business model and arguably a great proposition but there are some big blanks and being under the pressure of these targets does not set the tone TL would like to lead everyone to believe exists....

TL sent me an email saying I was being made redundant the following day and to make sure I will be near the telephone at the ready....The problem here is not that I am being told I will be made redundant (BRING IT ON!) but that I was on annual leave for which they hadn't checked & that I had not had my 1-1/interview/consulation/call it what you like either. From start to finish the TL experience stinks & I will gladly leave if they offer me a decent redudancy package as proposed.

EJ advisers have stopped working anyway and have a long way to go to meet targets.

So TL have become asset gatherers now and imposing ever increasing asset attraction targets?

Well not exactly news is it.

So TL take £6m commission without providing service to those clients and keep it quiet, despite their public speeches to the contrary and earlier public confirmations otherwise, until forced to reveal?

Well, news definately, but not exactly surprising is it.

So TL now focussed purely on flotation and stuff TCF and the clients/advisors?

Not exactly news is it.

So TL pick up EJ for £1 to garner the firms assets in their drive to flotation, and stuff TCF and the EJ advisors in the main?

Well not exactly news or surprising is it.

(You see a pattern here...)

TL changing the rules as they go, alleging bad acoustic and being misheard when something Fisher King says to EJ advisors doesnt fit with the 'public' image, spinning a yarn, spinning the starting salaries for EJ and, now it seems, not checking that a prospective EJ advisor had even had a consultation to be notified of redundancy?

Is anyone, current TL, ex TL, never TL, ex EJ, IFA's nationwide really surprised, honestly, given the thoughts and experiences posted via Citywire and elsewhere in the last few months and the accompanying press on many separate issues at separate times?

It doesnt take a genius to follow this thorugh to its natural conclusion.

A banking culture now exists within the walls of Towry Towers. What once was is no more. Fisher and Co are priming the pump for the final push over the wall for the troops, whilst sitting back counting the value of their share options.

Stuff the clients, the staff. Stuff TCF.

EJ, you cannot say you werent warned, and those that have moved /signed up have committed suicide for the short term and made their long term more difficult.

The only thing Fisher & Co seems to care about is squeezing more fees / assets from clients, squeezing more work from staff until such time as the widely reported flotation or big sell off occurs.

TL can't lose in the short term since according to Fisher they 'own' the clients and the assets. EJ stay or go, it makes no difference. Odds are that TL only want a handful of the advisors with the biggest client banks, and only the handful of biggest clients. That seems to apply to current TL advisors as well as the taken over EJ ones.

The rest, advisors and clients can disappear anyway once the milking is over, although would be more money to add to the £6m unserviced trail income i suppose.

In the longer term, what is TL going to be once it has floated or sold? Who owns it? What happens if the FSA do grow a pair and have a look at the firm from a TCF perspective? or a one trick in house portfolio pony? Any outcome doesnt look good for anyone except the biggest clients and advisors of the biggest clients. and those with the biggest amount of share options.

And let us also not forget the collateral damage to the unsung heroes, the EJ support staff. In the main competant, qualified, diligent and hardworking back office support that TL dont really want anyway.

It would appear from the blogs that some of the current TL support don't want to be there really, so why would the EJ support wish to join in anycase?

It would appear from the blogs and comments of the 'EX TL'rs that they are much happier since leaving, and arent exactly positive about the working environment and management approach, so why would the majority of advisors from anywhere want to join in anycase?

It would appear from the blogs that some of the more insightful current TL'rs are not painting a rosy picture or one that seems to match the public message espoused by the TL marketing department.

Even Fisher King cand now that Middleton chap, cant make a public statement without appearing to contradict something they said some time ago. Obviously DEFRA did not totally solve the Foot in Mouth outbreak as far as Berkshire is concerned.

There does seem to be very few people not touched in some way by TL ,and the apparant lack of 'humanity' demonstrated by the firm towards staff, current, old, new and the lapparant ack of 'TCF empathy with certain clients should also come as no surprise.

Ex banking leaders now at the helm with banking cultures towards financial services business, all with their greedy little noses in the trough.

Given that sooner or later it would seem, advisors and clients eventually wake up out of their brainwashing and mantra spouting induced coma and see what is really going on, this banking culture must then surely be unsustainable.

So what shall be will come to pass, and the eventual casualities cannot say that the signs were not there. The letters are in the alphabetty spaghetti, they just need re-arranging, and it isnt even as complicated as an obvious Dan Brown novel.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time.....

I am really enjoying some of these comments.

I work at Towry Law and I am Chartered. I choose to work at Towry Law because it is a professional, progressive company and has a robust business model. I have fantastic colleagues, we have a real team ethic and, when I have needed support, the company has supported me.

Towry Law has paid for all of my exams, it pays my salary (yes, salary - not commission/over-ride or whatever spurious sales related mumbo jumbo you care to call fees) and it provides me with a benefits package.

Towry Law expects me to work hard in return - but isn't that how it works in the real, corporate world? Life is about rights and responsibilities. I think people forget that.

If someone doesn't want to work at Towry Law - that's fine - go and do something else, get on with your life and enjoy yourself. Best of luck in whatever you chose to do. If someone chooses to be my colleague, I look forward to working with you.

I wouldn't work anywhere else.

You'll have to look for somewhere else to work when the shorters drive the share price to zero pence if TL ever IPO.

I put TL in the gutter with SJP

Can't see them hitting a stretch after the recent months carry on.

All TL will end up with is a bag of spanners (liabilities) and a fraction of EJ managed assets, don't bank on the £6million trail as it won't be close to that in a few months.

I bet you're looking forward to adding let's say 50% of EJ losses £17.5 Million to the £15 Million transition fund ontop of TL losses over the past 12 months.

Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!

1 step forward 4 back, put that in years and you're back to the pre fisher days.

Good Luck you'll need it

Thanks for your insight, but I really am very happy where I am.

As the first current TL adviser to comment about targets I would challenge my supposedly happy, fulfilled and holier than thou TL colleagues not to hide behind anonymity. Openly display the courage of your convictions and put your name to your comments. I choose not to as I am well aware that TL would take swift action to make my life more miserable than it already is. Surely you need not fear such a supportive employer? Or are you part of the TL positive spin/management society? Tell us all whether YOU are 100% to target. Tell us all whether YOU are paid fairly for the amount of work / time / effort that you put in. Let us assess the figures for ourselves. Is this not the be all and end all of life at TL, figures?

Firstly, may i start by saying, as an ex TL adviser (successful one to boot) that Nostradamus is bang on the money. I couldn't have put it better myself.

So let's discuss the TL package. A salary of a fraction of the overall income you bring in. And not a big fraction at that. A bonus, potentially. Although not seen or heard of for 3 years.

Ah yes a company car.....oh no sorry, they were scrapped in 2006. Oh yes a car allowance to replace it......oh no, thats all included within your basic salary.

Well your pension contributions.....oooops sorry, forgot they were scrapped in 2008. Out of pocket expenses.......only if you submit your claim each month....if you forget, tough !

Ah yes but there is a gym and subsidised canteen in Bracknell. Nice one. Shame most of the advisers don't have time to use it.

But you wil have some shares i grant you, and having swallowed the pill, the Matrix that is Senior Management will tell you "that you will all be millionaires". Rodney

oooooooooooooooooooops silly me.......totally forgot........you probably still have PHI and DIS benefits. Probably essential as you will either be driven mad or worked to death. Or more likely both.

Your concern for my wellbeing is most touching. However, I really do remain quite happy. Having perspective is an important part of getting on in life.

You, on the other hand, may wish to take up meditation or some gentle walking perhaps. Get out, a bit.

Current happy on target employees surely would be more than happy to apply their names to the Blog?

It is strange out of all of the IFA firms out there this one keeps getting the same accusations time and time again.

As do some tied banks also often named on here.

Why out of all of the distribution businesses out there do these ones keep cropping up?

Why do all of the accusations always remain similar?

It wouldnt take Miss Marple to detect a pattern.

Why do you stay and work somewhere if you patently don't like it? Why not do something different then?

Is it not fascinating that any blog mentioning TL always seems to get an awful lot of responses, notably most anonymous, and notably most negative.

I left in March 2008 as I no longer enjoyed what I was doing and felt I would better serve my clients working for myself with my own self-imposed 'targets', TCF strategy and desire for a good quality of life.

Whilst I am one of many who has some negative things to say (although not in print) the fact that I was put in a position I was not happy with is what eventually led to me now doing things my own way.

I can categorically say that I have never been happier, both in and out of my work life, and no longer feel any need to worry about the 'work/life' balance as I enjoy both. Balance is usually needed for a positive to outweigh a negative.

For anyone who is unhappy with their current role with any employer, or the fact that their employer has been bought by someone else, my advice is take the bull by the horns and set up on your own. I use Personal Touch as my Compliance Network, as an Appointed Rep as opposed to Directly Authorised, and this gives me plenty of time to see clients rather than just be an 'office monkey'.

Just as a closing point, I charge fees and am Diploma qualified so did not leave TL because of any issue with these factors, but I do charge much less than I used to be charged out for!

What was the old phrase 'Fell the fear and do it anyway' - in my case this was very worthwhile and I do not know of any of my colleagues who also left that are regretting their decison.

Following on from the earlier comments I too would love to know the names of those who love TL so much as surely this is not something they need to be 'Anon for'.

Why do you need to know my name?

Based on most of the childish comments on here I would rather not give it. If this were a more professional forum, then I would.

I really don't understand some of the points being posted on here?

If you don't work at TL why are you all so bothered about the firm?

As for all the negative comments, unless you actually work for TL or previously did I am really not that interested in all your comments!

I have been a EJ client for four years. I am not a financial wizard and now find myself in dilema over what to do with my EJ portfolio. I trusted my advisor but can I now be as sure my best interests will be served with TL? Can I keep my potfolio intact? Will I have to go to a TL platform? Interesting that I appeR to be the only client showing concern on this site. Professional advice please. Robbiepep

Hey Richard,

Whatever your concerns, Edward Jones advisers have always prided themselves on putting the client first and helping them meet their long term financial goals. If I was was you I would speak to your usual EJ adviser. If what Towry Law have to offer isn't right for you I am confident your adviser will tell you acccordingly and suggest a solution. Whatever the sorry situation doing the right thing remains doing the right thing.

Hope that helps set your mind at rest.

I had an interview with David Middleton on Monday. He seemed like a nice chap, and incredibly professional in his manner. I was a little surprised by one of his questions though,...

Can you tell me about a time and how you acted when you were set unachievable targets?

If we worked for a professional organisation there would not be this uproar in the first place. I don't recall a single occassion where the PWC's or similar had to defend themselves from such a tirade. Your unwillingness to disclose your identity merely confirms either your own lack of confidence in your employer or your own lack of performance to target, but most likely a combination of the two.

I think that the 'happy' TL advisers are frauds, probably management. There is no reason to withold their names, if they are top performers everyone will know they are and other advisers will know they are telling the truth.

Re Richard Pepperd, I imagine and hope that you longstanding adviser looks after you well, if however you feel 'pushed' toward a new platform for everything or anything, then a second opinion never hurts.

A free initial consultation with an IFA to have a quick look at your current holdings may give an indication if it is a good idea or not.

Plus I would always recommend comparing various charging structures relative to service offered.

My business operates on a fixed charge system with diarised preset reviews.

Others operate on a meter system, it depends which you are most comfortable with.

Fixed rates could encourage lack of activity, on the meter could encourage activity to earn fees.

Where have you got to my friend ?

Hopefully you have stuck to your principles and not turned up as a man on the deck of the Titanic dressed up as a woman ?

That's right Ron - a free initial consultation to see if it is right.

In your free initial "holier than thou" opinion you would tell the client to stay with EJ/TL or where ever else their clients monies are, if it was appropriate ?

I wonder how many clients you have that conversation with.

You are as bad a Liversidge,Lees, etc who are touting their wares for advisers.

Many conversations like those. Many of them result in very good long term clients, havent lost one yet.

Good clients transfer with honesty, I detect a cynicism in your tone which leads me to think you have had little experience of this technique?

Can someone explain to me why an employee who clearly doesn't want to be at a company attacks an employee who does? So what if someone likes it where they are. Good on them.

If I didn't like my employer, I'd find a new one. It can't be good for your health and wellbeing to be so bitter all the time.

Just a thought.

precisely the point.

EJ advisers chose to build their business with EJ and have found themselves sold like chattels to "the highest bidder". EJ was all about earning what you were worth through hard work and putting the client first. Inevitably this ethos appealed to entrepenurial types.Whilst for all I really know TL may be a very good company with a strong proposition, in essence its ethos is very different ie here's a salary here's a target, now do what your'e told for the good of TL.

More experienced FAs have a choice and those that dont like it can leave and pick up again elsewhere. However those who are less experienced and worldly wise dont have these same choices and are therefore angry and confused hence the vitriol on these message boards.

How can you say whether a target is too hard until you have actually started in the job?

How is working to a target for a salary unreasonable? It is the same of knowing how much you want to earn and then working out how much business you need to write to achieve it surely?

Its not unreasonable at all.

However, understand, its not what EJ advisers signed up for. We would much rather work and earn on our own merits. If wanted a salary we would have joined a bank assurer a long time ago.

But aren't the targets based on the merits of your previous efforts? If you work harder/be more succesful in writing higer levels of business then your salary increases.

It surely isn't the same as Bancassurance as your aren't pushing one companies products you are still whole of market?

If you are an experienced IFA who asks the new firm a few questions and find out what they are making available for their advisers to hit these targets, then it is very easy to assess if it is possible or not.

I once worked in a large office with a crew of people who had various sources of clients and business.

The financial turnover of advisers varied dramatically and I mean dramatically, form an average of £25k per month from advisers on superb client sources and banks, down to £5-6K per month on those who were virtually given nothing to work with, except their own clients and resources.

anon you really do sound like management not an adviser.

Yes that is correct Ron. Anyone with any sense ask some questions and things become clearer.

Also, Anon, how is it not the same as bancassurance since TL advisors are indeed apparantly pushing one product/service; the in house porftolios within a firm now with obvious bancassurance cultures and targets and management styles and pressure techniques.

As a % of the overall TL business would you Anon, as an 'obvious' member of the TL management / spin brigade, like to share how much of this has been non TL portfolios or crucial aspects like protection etc?

Probably not i guess since in all likelihood 99.5% will probably be from one of 3-5 in house portfolio models and/or a rudimentary cash flow report designed to demonstrate how capital ought to be in the in house models.

And yes i agree that TL can run its business however it likes, it is essentially no-one else business what they do. The reason though that so much negativity is directed towards this firm is the apprant difference between what is said and what is done. The public message that then has to be constantly spun, every time something is mistakenly admitted or carelessly contradicted, so as to try and make an apple look like the orange TL try and convince people it is.

Those that know, know. Those that dont ought to. Then the position is clear and real choices can be made instead of the constant attempts at hoodwinking and speaking in tongues.

TL would make a good political party with such skills and be about as trusted. The fictional Malcolm Tucker would be envious.

Actually I am not management but an existing Edward Jones adviser that has yet to be offered a role.

I am just being pragmatic about the whole situation.

Whoever you talk to thinks they do the best thing for their clients. I have worked both in bancassurance, as an IFA and with Edward Jones and never once have I thought I have done things that weren't in the best interests of the client in that situation.

I meant "management" not managament! lol

Depending on experience and AUM I have heard of targets ranging from 3-11.5 million

If we had been bringing that in as EJ then they wouldnt have shafted us and given us away like an unwanted christmas present.

Does this make the targets unfair?

It would appear that about a 100 advisers think so - they have said no to the offered contracts (though low salary offerings and a completely different method of working will have played a part in this).

TL are in business and making hard nosed business decisions; that doesnt feel right to the average adviser who probably spends some of the time feeling like a social worker for their clients. But it is right for a company with designs on a FTSE 100 berth, and I didnt ever want to be a social worker.

So pass me a target, realistic or otherwise, after my teams excellent victory today I am remided that all I need is hard work , phenomenal luck and, for now, another very large whisky.

What an absolute farce, TL have absolutely no idea about effective communications.

I sit here at home for over a week now wondering if I will get a contract or indeed contacted!

No contact from TL, no contact from EJ.

"Ask Andrew" is a pointless exercise as it is clear he couldn't give a straight answer and stick to it if his life depended on it.

Why don't you get up and use the phone, then?

Just a thought!! If they told you who you need to speak to, it would simplify things!

Have tried to speak to a number of people to get answers!

I have picked up the phone on many occasions

perhaps some one at Towry Law could do the same.

Not much to ask, a little bit of communication for Christmas!!

Interesting. Mr Fisher likes to constantly bang on in public about TL being fee-only (apart from the £6,000,000 per annum coming in from trail commission from clients the firms apparently don't know about). Obviously.

Yet, his firm apparently sets "targets" for sales of investment business. What about where the advice should be Deposit based savings only? That advice can be charged as a fee, but wouldn't mean putting investments onto a platform. Seems to be a contradiction there.

Also, if all/most investments have to go onto the TL own platform, is that Independent advice? What if another platform is cheaper? (I'm sure some probably are).

I appreciate many other firms face similar question, but due to Mr Fisher's constant outspokeness (and often quite aggressive tones), it makes people look at TL particularly carefully. I'm not sure they are doing themselves many favours.

Keep your money in deposit based accounts IS sometimes the advice from TL advisors. As for independant, TL are. They have sourced their IIM platform from over 3,000 global mutual funds to get what they believe is the best possible formula. How many IFA's have studied that many funds in order to give best advice or do they continually use the ones they favour,...

On no silly me - they use life company bond wrappers as they pay the most commission,...

Clearly even you are mistrustful of your employer as even you do not post your name when attempting to defend the indefensible.

I do not print mine as my comments are personal and i may not have the same view as my employer.

now let's get this straight - if i worked for Barclays and virtualy soley recomeneded a Barclays fund-of-funds, i would not be independant, regardless of how much research had been done and how many individual holdings that fund-of-funds held.

If i worked for UBS and virtualy solely recomeneded a UBS fund-of-funds, i would not be independant, regardless of how much research had been done and how many individual holdings that fund-of-funds held.

If at TL you recommended your own broker funds say 10% of the time you might get away with it - but 99% ?

And i would like to see how much research is done on those 3000 funds - how come most of the funds in the TL portfolios are passive funds ? is it to bring down the costs from being really really really expensive to really really expensive ?

And if you look at the top performing funds in each sector, how many are passive funds ? So your reseach team spend all their time trawling through funds only to pick under achievers. Quality.

And as for the bond wrapper, does Towry Lie have one available ? if so, then your corporate stance must be that they are appropriate in certain circumstances, and as i know for a fact that you can access via Aviva and AXA, then you are demonstrating a lack of knowledge and professionalism if you avoid them in all circumstances.

Question 'though - why does TL not have a link with a provider for an onshore bond - as the TL broker funds are based in dublin, they have offshore income - so basically every client that has money outside of an ISA recieves offshore income and needs to complete a tax return. Do all of your clients know this ?

I don't work for Towry Law,...

But I believe passive funds are used as they suffer less volatility in down markets, which can help increase the compounding effect over time, leading to greater gains than otherwie might have been achieved.

Oh, and all my clients are self employed and are used to completing tax returns, so if I was to work for Towry Law, it really wouldn't be a problem

If you wish to make comments and debate, all well and good, but quite how you, and other posters, advance your argument or our profession by calling Towry Law 'Towry Lie', 'Toady Law' , or Andrew Fisher 'Fish Face' and so on, really does you no service.

I am sorry that you are so upset by something.

I feel it important for all concerned that you explain yourself in more detail re offshore and need for tax return.