Wish me luck...

I would be willing to bet there are more lawyers in this country than financial advisors.

Also, the law of supply and demand has little to do with what we can charge. It has far more to do with lawyers and politicians dictating to our industry what they think is fair for our industry to charge. We are far more regulated than the law profession. So to equate the two is ridiculous... especially when your industry polices itself.

If clients refused to pay the price we charge, we would 1, starve or 2, be forced to lower our prices.

Its called the FREE MARKET!
 
I dont see how you could sue someone in the financial industry for doing that as long as it was part of the contract the customer signed and as long as such arraingements are legal.

Gee, I wonder what could make those types of contracts illegal for us... could it be that wonderful group of lawyers we know as politicians?
 
Gee, I wonder what could make those types of contracts illegal for us... could it be that wonderful group of lawyers we know as politicians?

If you dont agree with the law, vote for someone else... thats not my fault. I did not set it up that way. I love contengency fee araingements and would love to have my financial advisor get paid via one, then there would be no CHURNING!
 
If clients refused to pay the price we charge, we would 1, starve or 2, be forced to lower our prices.

Its called the FREE MARKET!

Wrong... when your entire industry charges in the same manner, the client doesn't have a choice... unless they can afford to pay hourly fees, which most in this country cannot. Thus they are forced into paying a percentage of the "winnings".
 
Wrong... when your entire industry charges in the same manner, the client doesn't have a choice... unless they can afford to pay hourly fees, which most in this country cannot. Thus they are forced into paying a percentage of the "winnings".

Clients are free to negotiate what percentage they will pay. Some firms, those that are less busy, are willing to lower the fee. Some firms, those that have a great reputation can get court approval to charge more, if the client is willing.
 
Its not stealing, my clients are free to go to someone else. They are free to represent themselves. They are free to attempt to negotiate a fee.

How is that stealing you idiot!
 
If you dont agree with the law, vote for someone else... thats not my fault. I did not set it up that way. I love contengency fee araingements and would love to have my financial advisor get paid via one, then there would be no CHURNING!

Funny you should bring up churning. Fee based accounts were created to avoid churning to create commissions. But now the idiots in DC have decided that if we do not trade "enough" in a fee based account that we are not doing our jobs or earning our fees. Hmmm.... so in essence they are telling us that we should know in advance how many trades we will be doing per year in an account and thus know whether a fee based or commission based account would be in the clients best interest..... friggin lawyers.
 
Funny you should bring up churning. Fee based accounts were created to avoid churning to create commissions. But now the idiots in DC have decided that if we do not trade "enough" in a fee based account that we are not doing our jobs or earning our fees. Hmmm.... so in essence they are telling us that we should know in advance how many trades we will be doing per year in an account and thus know whether a fee based or commission based account would be in the clients best interest..... friggin lawyers.

I see, because voters vote more for lawyers than anyother profession for polititians.. you blame all lawyers for all the laws you dont like.

I see, good luck with that.

You are blaming a guy that things commission based financial advice is a great idea and I would support it!
 
Last edited:
My client was run over by a forklift at a major big box store.

The driver was moving forward with bags of mulch stacked so high in front he could not see that he had run my guy over.


So was that the fault of the driver or the store ?
 
A lot of times employees nowadays are required by laws passed by Liberals to have protection for their ears when operation any machine that uses noise. I bet the guy operating the forklift neither heard the forklift beep missing or the victim screaming.
 
I am doing another trial this comming week.. Unlikely to be as big as the last but it could be a big one anyway.

Wish me luck!

I hope you're suing a big corporation, you get a record settlement, they go out of business, you donate several millions dollars of it to John Edwards, he becomes President, and trial lawyers end up on Mount Rushmore!

Good luck!:)
 
A lot of times employees nowadays are required by laws passed by Liberals to have protection for their ears when operation any machine that uses noise. I bet the guy operating the forklift neither heard the forklift beep missing or the victim screaming.

Of course. this is the fault of liberalism. How could we have all been so blind before?
 
A lot of times employees nowadays are required by laws passed by Liberals to have protection for their ears when operation any machine that uses noise. I bet the guy operating the forklift neither heard the forklift beep missing or the victim screaming.

This guy had no ear protection.
 
I hope you're suing a big corporation, you get a record settlement, they go out of business, you donate several millions dollars of it to John Edwards, he becomes President, and trial lawyers end up on Mount Rushmore!

Good luck!:)

Thanks, its a LARGE nationwide store... while we may get several million out of it, it will not put them out of business.
 
Back
Top