Top producing transitioning advisers should expect to receive two and one-half to three and one-half times their trailing 12 month production, while top producing reps at Morgan Keegan reportedly are expected to be paid a mere 65% to 70% of their trailing 12. This disparity prompted Investment News this week, and several pundits, to begin speculating as to how many top producing reps will leave Morgan Keegan for greener pastures. Investment News went so far as to run a lead story on the matter, “RJ Buy May Be Tough Sell to Keegan Reps.” No doubt, Investment News and the pundits may be right. Indeed, Raymond James has built in clawback provisions in the deal to remedy any rep departures.
But there is much more to the analysis than just the mathematical, bonus percentage comparison. Beyond comparing the math, one needs to compare the terms of the promissory notes, the new firm’s employment agreement restrictions on solicitation, competition, confidentiality, and, of course, termination and TROs (court injunctions). That’s the starting point, for an analysis that we frequently are retained to conduct on behalf of reps contemplating a move. A move may make sense, but only after careful attorney analysis, as well as negotiation with the new firm (well in advance of the move date) to improve upon the always-one-sided contract provisions that firms try to have unsuspecting reps sign.
