Ok. I know our firm has been sponsoring random people in my department. If I get the opportunity I would take it, but sounds like it’s not worth asking for.
Hey, if they’re willing to sponsor you, pay for the registration and exam fees and give you study materials, then I’d say go for it. Certainly won’t hurt. I just wouldn’t go out of my way to find a sponsor.
[I remember taking this exam. I scored in the 90s but I significantly overstudied. You have to be sponsored by a broker-dealer to take it. I am no longer employed at a broker dealer so I lost my license (I think it is good for two years).
You don’t want the series 7 you want the 7 series. The long one.
Kidding, but good luck.
The Series 7 is so 90’s.
Personnel issues.
Here are Jon Henschen and Josh Brown on financial advisors’ scores on regulatory exams like the Series 7. Henschen:
Regarding test scores, wirehouse data has concluded that reps that passed in the 70% to 80% range were far more likely to be successful advisors than reps that tested at 90% or above. Those that scored unusually high generally lacked the social skills necessary to build and maintain a book, and were better suited to becoming CFAs working in more technical roles that require less social interaction.
Brown:
I chalked it up to the fact that they weren’t deep thinkers, which enabled them to slip further into the necessary brainwashed condition that all successful salespeople must. If you’re thinking too much about something you are supposed to sell, then doubt enters the equation. Doubt lessens the degree of aggression with which you go about your appointed task.
Probably true for most.
I too can copy & paste from levine lol, but yes this was an interesting topic. Nothing that everyone didnt already know. The 7 is a joke, most FA’s are salemen that are loosely related to finance.
Thats why the industry is pushing so hard against a fiduciary standard for FA’s. Claiming it will hurt info for clients, when in reality it will keep them from their high pressure insurance/annuity sales that are only held currently to a “suitability” standard. Based on what I have seen, you are deemed suitable if you are 1 of the following:
A) Breathing
B) Have some money
the point wasnt about the series 7 but more about how the high scorers really suck as advisors
Im aware of that, because high scorers arent idiots like my cousin who is making out quite well as an FA. She is pretty stupid but sure can convince people to put their money into shit. That is what they define as a successful FA. JB’s article is right on the spot, the industry is generally toxic. They are coming at my parents now as they are older and I have had to sit them down and explain exactly what these people are trying to do.
not required.
Wow my english was just god awful there… but yea thats why I said only need to meet 1 of those criteria. My first job out of college was at a call center for a major insurance company. Whats that? You are 90 years old? Why not put you in a lifetime income annuity that you cant touch for 10 years without penalties! Suitability passed.
Really? I hope that wasn’t encouraged. Criminal if true.
I doubt it was encouraged. Im sure it just wasnt NOT encouraged. Again, I wasnt part of the sales channel, I was involved in customer service, mainly dealing with the FA’s who would bring their crying clients on the line. Most of the FAs were either too stupid to actually realize what these products were or worse yet, deliberately misleading these investors.
The FA would play victim on the phone as well like dude its your fucking JOB to do this. Working that job really was soul sucking, having to hear shit like that day in day out. Really showed me the ugly side of the industry, as I am sure there are many FA’s who put client needs first and do a great job, but the selection bias in that job is towards hearing from the pissed clients and shitty FA’s.