Just a point of clerification, but CPN is a NYSE stock. Thus it is traded by a specialist, not market makers. Thus Raymond James DOES NOT make a market as you keep stating. As Raymond James does not provide research coverage on CPN, thus they do not recommend it. Many brokers (RJFS) pay for RJ's services such as execution and research, but they are NOT employees of RJ. They are free to use outside recommendations. By restating the same ignorance you are simpling exhibiting your own lack of knowledge which probably is the reason you are in your current situation.
Disadvantaged in terms of recruiting? Is this your way of bringing up the $6.6 Million fine? If so you it's in poor taste. Every newsreport depicts that the ruling was totally against the evidence. ValueFinder - did you go to a school with GhettoStreet?
My understanding is that RJF only gets paid on insurance products if they are sold through their in-house general agency. My guess is that there is little benefit from a Reps perspective of doing insurance through RJF rather than going direct. If RJF were to compel independent Reps to do all their (non-security) insurance business with the firm, then they might become disadvantaged in terms of recruiting.
In terms of your second point, not sure that I agree with your comment regarding U4s. My sources tell me that a bad U4 will exclude you from either RJA or RJFS. That being said, there are both independent firms and employee firms that cater to umm, shall we say less reputable brokers.
Again I reiterate a prior post of mine. Since when does a broker's situation of employee vs independent contractor impact that broker's function? A stock broker is a stock broker. No matter how you cut it it's a snicker's bar folks. I think we all need to use a little more intelligence here.
Poppyseedstupidity, you are missing the point. Saying that Bozeke makes your panties wet doesn't really address anyone's discussion points. No one here is arguing that this particular broker might have given poor advice. The issues that all of us are trying to address are:
1)Bozeke is condeming an entire firm for the actions of someone that, for all anyone knows, is an independent contractor. Moreover, based on his own admission, the research he relied on was not even from RJ. RJ's research happens to be among the best in the industry. Nobody really cares if you say the broker did not do his/her job properly. That may be the case. The issue is you've and he condemned the entire firm for the actions of one broker. Would you have the same response for a correspondent firm (a registered broker-dealer that clears trades through RJ)? How about another firm that just utilizes a piece of RJ research that happens to be off the mark.
2) Bozeke failed to exercise even a modicum of judgement nor is he willing to take any responsibility for an investment that didn't work out. The worlds a harsh place. Suck it up. What would your reaction have been if this particular investment performed better than the Dow, S&P, or NASDAQ but still had a negative performance? Performance should always be evaluated over a period of time on both a absolute and relative basis. It is also important to look at performance in the context of a clients' situation, the information given to a broker, and his/her entire portfolio. Is it the brokers fault that the market collapsed? For all we know, Bozeke told his broker that he was looking for some high risk, high reward type investments. Or, perhaps CPN was the only transaction where Bozeke lost money. He still has not provided any context for his relationship with the broker other than to say, he relied completely on this guys word yet he usually does all his research on his own.
3) Bozeke does not recognize the difference between a research analyst's responsibilities and a financial advisor's. You want to condemn a broker for relying on a research analyst's missed call? Moreover, you are attacking RJ for a research call made by Goldman. Either you lack a basic understanding of the business or any semblence of critical thinking abilities. I wish I could tell you that analysts are always right. That's not the case. Do you actually think that this particular broker was trying to get Bozeke to execute a trade for the money? If the commission was $100, then the broker (assuming he/she were an employee) would earn about $40. Would anyone be that short sighted when dealing with a client as wealthy as Bozeke (lmao)? Bottom line this business is about relationships. People that churn accounts don't make it very long.
Addressing your comment regarding independents vs. employees. Generally speaking, you are correct with regard to selling a stock. Not much of a difference in the function of one vs. the other. There are some very important distinctions though. Independent FA's have the ability to sell certain products without going through RJF. A perfect example is insurance. As long as it is not a security, then it does not need to go through the firm. Also, it is widely acknowledged that independent FA's own the client relationship while employees do not. If an employee jumps to another firm, then RJ can vigorously attempt to retain the client accounts. If an independent affiliates with a different firm, RJ would never think of going after the client accounts.