Podcasts about ubs

No Arauto Repórter UNISC de hoje, você confere:* Câmara de Santa Cruz debate nove projetos na sessão ordinária de hoje* Troféu Brasil de Patinação arrecada cerca de uma tonelada de alimentos em Santa Cruz* Rio Pardo vai ter complexo com EMEI para 400 crianças, UBS e novo CRAS* Em destaque na segurança pública: Morre jovem de 23 anos ferido em acidente na RSC-287 em Santa Cruz

No Arauto Repórter UNISC de hoje, você confere:* Câmara de Santa Cruz debate nove projetos na sessão ordinária de hoje* Troféu Brasil de Patinação arrecada cerca de uma tonelada de alimentos em Santa Cruz* Rio Pardo vai ter complexo com EMEI para 400 crianças, UBS e novo CRAS* Em destaque na segurança pública: Morre jovem de 23 anos ferido em acidente na RSC-287 em Santa Cruz

What does it take to build a luxury tented lodge in the middle of the Okavango Delta? To engineer a fabric structure that withstands a category five cyclone on the Australian coast? To convince a Swiss banker to walk away from a 20-year career and move to Bali to manufacture tented villas? Or to take a chance on a stretch tent made from horse-riding trouser fabric on a film set in Namibia, and turn that into one of the most innovative tent architecture firms in the world? It takes the kind of people you're about to meet. This is Titans of Tents... a brand new series inside the Glamping Business Podcast... and this first episode is where it all begins. I'm Sarah Riley, and I've spent years watching this industry grow from a niche curiosity into a globally recognised asset class. But one conversation I've never heard - not once - is the one where the people who actually build the foundations of this industry sit down together and speak honestly about how they got here, what they've learned, and where they think it's all going. Until now. In this episode, I'm joined by four of the world's leading glamping structure founders: Brendan O'Molony of Tenthouse Structures in South Africa, Ueli Wick of Escape Nomade in Bali, Tom Butterfield of Eco Structures in Western Australia, and David Patrick Court of Bushtec Creations, operating across Africa and the Middle East. Between them, they have delivered tented structures in over 55 countries, worked with some of the world's most prestigious hospitality brands, and built their reputations in some of the most remote and challenging environments on earth. What makes this conversation different isn't just their collective experience... it's the combination of genuine competitive respect, deep friendship, and a shared mission to raise standards across the industry that brings them together. They are four founders with hard-won knowledge, strong opinions, and the kind of honesty that only comes from having actually done the work. In this first episode, we hear their origin stories, and they are not what you'd expect. We talk about whether glamping is truly a global industry or a collection of very different regional stories. We explore what COVID really did to the outdoor hospitality sector, why an AI-disrupted world might be the best thing that ever happened to tented structures, and what is still... even now... misunderstood about what these buildings can actually do. This is the conversation the industry has been waiting for. Welcome to episode one of The Titans of Tents.  ____________ Who are the Titans? Brendan O'Molony - Tenthouse Structures (South Africa / Singapore) Brendan founded Tenthouse Structures in 2010, and over the past 15 years it has evolved into one of the industry's most innovative full-service tent architecture firms, delivering luxury tented camps and lodges across Africa, the USA, the Middle East, Europe and Australia. Headquartered in South Africa with an international sales and marketing office in Singapore, Tenthouse has developed over 60 international properties, and Brendan leads a 40+ strong team of tent-tensile architects, engineers, technicians, and lightweight building specialists. His personal mission is engineering superior wilderness fabric structures that are optimised to site... low-impact, high-comfort, and built for some of the world's most remote locations https://www.tenthousestructures.com/  Ueli Wick - Escape Nomade (Bali, Indonesia) A Swiss national who spent most of his professional life in private banking with UBS and Credit Suisse, Ueli made a dramatic career pivot and now leads Escape Nomade, designers and manufacturers of luxury tented villas based in Bali, with a mission to bring the "living without walls" lifestyle to a global audience. Under his leadership, Escape Nomade has delivered more than 450 luxury tented structures across 55 countries. Their product sits at the haute couture end of the market... large, semi-permanent, fully furnished tented villas used in resorts, wellness centres, and private residences worldwide https://escapenomade.com/  Tom Butterfield - Eco Structures (Western Australia) Tom has been driving product and concept at Eco Structures Australia since 2012, and has since completed over 85 glamping projects worldwide. His international portfolio spans locations including the US Virgin Islands, Saudi Arabia, China, and several Class A World Reserves. Eco Structures specialises in cost-effective, environmentally sustainable glamping accommodation engineered for remote and challenging terrain... including their patented concrete-free eco anchors and prefabricated bathroom pods... and exports globally from their Western Australia base https://www.ecostructures.com.au/  David Patrick Court - Bushtec Creations (South Africa / Middle East) David heads up Bushtec Creations as an Independent Executive Consultant, bringing over 25 years of safari and tourism/hospitality expertise across Botswana, Saudi Arabia and the wider Middle East. Bushtec holds a current range of 1,300+ tent designs... more options than any other tent manufacturer... with a fully owned manufacturing plant covering all canvas and steel components. Their work spans luxury safari lodges, award-winning tented resorts (including Sharjah's Kingfisher Retreat), and turnkey solutions across Africa, the GCC, and the Far East https://bushtec.net/our-tents/   Sarah Riley - Inspired Courses ☆ The Glamping Academy ☆ Inspired Collective Sarah Riley is the founder of The Glamping Academy... part of Inspired Collective Ltd. With over 15 years of experience in the glamping, retreat, and unique hospitality industry, Sarah has supported more than 2,000 business launches across 18 countries. She hosts the Glamping Business Podcast and Glamping Americas Podcast. She is also the Conference Director for the Glamping Show Americas.

With Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Diamond Consultants Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak unpack today's IBD vs. RIA landscape, explaining what has changed, where each model excels, and how to determine which path best supports the business you want to build. In Summary The independent wealth management landscape has changed dramatically, making the decision between an independent broker dealer (IBD) and an RIA more nuanced than ever before. Louis Diamond welcomes Diamond Consultants' Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Josh Tomolak, for a practical discussion of how the independent space has evolved, what truly differentiates the IBD and RIA models today, and how advisors can evaluate which path best aligns with the business they want to build. The Storyline Not long ago, the decision to become independent was relatively straightforward. Advisors either remained with a traditional firm or pursued independence through one of a limited number of models. Today, the conversation is far more complex. Independent broker dealers have significantly expanded their capabilities, offering stronger technology, larger transition packages, greater flexibility, and even pathways to RIA ownership. At the same time, the RIA ecosystem has matured into a sophisticated marketplace supported by multiple custodians, outsourced service providers, institutional capital, and enterprise platforms that rival many of the industry's largest firms. As these developments have unfolded, the traditional distinctions between an IBD and an RIA have become less obvious. Advisors evaluating their options are no longer simply asking whether they should become independent—they're asking which model best supports the clients they serve, the business they envision, and the lifestyle they want to create. In this Industry Update, Louis and Josh unpack the realities behind the IBD vs. RIA decision. They discuss where the two models overlap, where meaningful differences still exist, and why factors like service, technology, economics, operational responsibility, enterprise value, and long-term optionality often matter more than labels alone. Whether you're considering changing independent firms, launching your own RIA, or simply want a better understanding of how the independent landscape has evolved, this conversation provides an objective framework for evaluating today's choices—and preparing for tomorrow's opportunities. Topics Covered Independent Broker Dealer (IBD) vs. RIA models The evolution of supportive independence Technology investments across the independent space Transition support and advisor mobility Capital solutions and recruiting economics Business formation and enterprise value Launching an independent RIA Multi-custodial platforms and open architecture Minority investments and succession planning Future trends shaping advisor independence > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why are already-independent advisors reconsidering their current model? (5:27) Josh explains why service, technology, economics, and growing optionality are causing advisors to reevaluate their existing affiliations. How have independent broker dealers and RIAs become more alike? (19:28) Louis and Josh discuss the growing convergence between the two models and why the distinction is becoming less obvious than many advisors assume. What really separates an IBD from an RIA? (25:04) A practical discussion of autonomy, compliance, flexibility, custody, economics, and advisor experience. What misconceptions keep advisors from launching an RIA? (36:29) Josh outlines the “Four Pillars” of launching an RIA and explains where advisors tend to either overestimate or underestimate the operational realities. Which advisors thrive most in each model? (33:12) The conversation explores why there isn't a universally “better” model—only one that's better aligned with an advisor's goals. What trends are quietly reshaping independence? (42:13) Minority investments, enterprise value, business formation, and changing revenue models may have an even greater impact than advisors realize today. Key Takeaways Independence has evolved from a destination into an ongoing strategic decision. Independent broker dealers have significantly improved technology, transition support, economics, and flexibility. The RIA ecosystem has matured into a highly sophisticated marketplace with broad outsourcing and support options. Choosing between an IBD and an RIA should begin with long-term business objectives—not industry perceptions. Building a valuable business depends more on business structure and scalability than simply growing assets. Advisors considering independence should evaluate models with an open mind rather than relying on outdated assumptions. The next decade will likely bring continued convergence between independent business models. https://youtu.be/jHDVso2TsmQ Quotable Moments “The question is no longer, ‘Do I want to go independent?' The question is, ‘What kind of independence makes the most sense for my clients, business, and goals?'” “Business formation is far more important than assets under management.” “The way you build your business will ultimately determine how valuable that business becomes.” “Everything in an RIA is going to cost you either your time or your money.” FAQs Is there still a meaningful difference between an IBD and an RIA? Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Why are more independent advisors changing firms today? Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Is launching an RIA easier than it used to be? Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. Does every entrepreneurial advisor belong in the RIA model? No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. What matters more: assets under management or how the business is built? Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. What's the biggest mistake advisors make when evaluating independence? Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Related Resources IBD vs. RIA Comparison Guide IBD vs. RIA Revisited: Two Independent Pathways for Advisors to Consider NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and goals?” Josh shares what he’s seeing across the landscape, the misconceptions that continue to shape advisor thinking and the factors that matter most when evaluating the next chapter of an independent business. There’s a lot to discuss, so let’s get to it. Josh, thanks for joining me today. Joshua Tomolak: Thanks for having me, Louis. It’s a real privilege to have come. This is a full circle moment for me going from being a student of your podcast, to working alongside you, to being a guest. So I appreciate you having me. Louis Diamond: Amazing. I’m excited for this one too, because you have a fresh and in the weeds perspective that a lot of our guests simply don’t have. So why don’t you start off, you spend your time helping advisors evaluate independence every day. So working with advisors who are already independent, for the most part. And to me, it feels like the independent space has really evolved dramatically over the last decade. I mean, this podcast is really the epicenter of that to prove that out, but give us a little background on your past roles in the space and then we can get into what you’re seeing right now. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I’d be happy to. So I took a very non-traditional path into wealth management. I spent a decade as a deep sea Navy diver, and upon completing my service there, I ended up working for TD Ameritrade. And in my role there, I spent about six years doing nothing but helping financial advisors explore the RIA space, whether that was to join or partner with an RIA, sell to an RIA, or in most cases, launch their own RIA. And one of the things that I ultimately came to terms with is it’s just not the right model for everybody. While I’m a huge advocate for it, we would often lose business to the major broker-dealers of the world. And at the time, I really didn’t understand why. In the last six years at Diamond Consultants has been a very interesting purview into what a lot of the broker-dealers have done and are doing to make themselves more RIA-ish and be very compelling to the right advisor. Louis Diamond: Perfect framing. Your background is incredibly germane to the folks you work with. So let’s start off with the softball here. What are you seeing right now? Joshua Tomolak: It’s not so different than the rest of the industry, the wirehouses, the regional firms, things of that nature, that if you took 10 firms, they’re all likely to go different directions, even if they were identical practices. That could be… A third would go from an independent broker-dealer to another independent broker-dealer. Certainly the supported RIA space is growing every day and has created a lot of very fun and unique solutions for advisors, very customized and curated. And then I think there’s still a lot of really great sophisticated teams and individual contributors that are making the decision to go hyper entrepreneurial and launch their own individual RIA. So the movement’s really all over the board from my perspective. Louis Diamond: It does feel like it’s no longer independence is an alternative option or it’s on the fringes. It’s very front and center whether for breakaways, which is a big topic on our podcast, but in general, the infrastructure has become much, much more sophisticated today than ever before. Advisors have way more tools in their toolbox to serve clients, whether in the private markets or through technology. And it’s no longer that if an advisor’s independent, they’re in the minor leagues where they don’t have the same ability to serve clients like they did if they’re at a big bank or a private bank or a wirehouse. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. And I’m reminded of a question I got one time from a great team that I worked with in New York. They asked me, “Are there really more options than ever before? Because all we see is one firm selling to another.” And I think that’s a really great point. There’s far less broker dealers on the street than there were even five years ago. But for every Commonwealth, for example, that sells to an LPL, up pops three or four really cool private equity-backed, sophisticated RIA platform firms that are built to service their own unique advisor base. Louis Diamond: I think that’s right. Sitting on the sidelines, sitting on top of everything going on in the industry, I feel like capital is always an interesting topic forever. If an advisor wanted to move within the independent world or break away from a big firm to go independent, the only way to get capital was to go to an independent broker dealer. So we still see that, but I feel like today between all these minority acquisition opportunities, we’re seeing firms acquire practices at time of transition, which is somewhat new. There’s debt solutions, recruiting deals are way up for firms that are paying forgivable loans. RIAs now would, in some cases, will pay a forgivable note. What are you seeing there as far as the availability of capital and just deals in general? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a great question and I didn’t want to take the low-hanging fruit, but capital’s been a huge innovation, I guess, in the last five years I’d say. Just to give you rough quotes, please don’t hold me to it, but traditional transition broker-dealer deals were five years ago, 40 to 60% of Trailing Twelve revenue today are somewhere between 90 and 120%, sometimes north of that for the right team. That’s really meaningful money for the team that is thinking about foregoing a wirehouse deal, for example. I’d also say a lot of these firms are getting hyper-creative in how they solve for capital. The minority investment piece that you mentioned is very interesting. We’re seeing a lot of privatized forgivable notes in the RIA space where third-party or private lenders are basically lending the money and the RIA is making the payments on that forgivable note as long as the advisor is affiliated with them. So there’s been a recognition among the RIA space to get away from the, “Oh, they just took a check” type of mantra, and to say, “Look, I understand there are capital needs. These people are taking a risk. We need to solve for that.” So we’ve seen a lot of that in the marketplace. Louis Diamond: Very interesting. I think another thing financially, and then we’ll keep the train moving, that I know I’ve seen, and maybe you can weigh in if you’ve seen the same, is the cost to an advisor or a business owner to join an independent BD or to join an RIA has come way down, probably in part because of Schwab going to zero on trading. That’s been a catalyst. But it feels like we used to say independent BDs were expensive relative to the RIA world. And in some cases, they certainly could be. And if you’re at scale, maybe you can pick up a point or two being in the RIA world versus a BD. But when you have some of these BDs that have a basis point admin fee or no admin fee at a certain size and the payouts I feel like are similar, maybe have gone up a little bit, but it’s more so like the administrator fees, the platform fees, the program fees. Anyone who’s not in that world, it’s like, “What are you talking about?” But basically the way that these broker-dealers make money, it seems like there’s been a pretty big differential in the exchange of value where advisors now get more services, better technology, get more money to join them and get it at a lower cost. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. I think that maybe that’s one of the larger changes that we’ve seen, and it’s probably one of the benefits from a lot of the industry consolidation on that independent broker-dealer side. The economies of scale of these folks have allowed them to increase their tech spend, increase their service capacities all while offering it to the advisors at a cheaper price. And when I was at TD Ameritrade, one of the biggest pitches was the idea of a 100% payout and you control the fixed expenses, your technology compliance, et cetera. But what’s changed is that broker-dealers are pretty darn comparable on the expenses. All of those admin fees and things you mentioned will still exist, but they’re on a much smaller scale. And I think the question a lot of advisors are asking is, “Am I getting congruent value from my broker-dealer for what I pay for?” And while that answer might’ve been no a couple years ago, today the answer is more often yes. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I would agree. A lot of times we work with advisors who are starting an RIA or affiliating with an RIA or going to a BD and they see how big the deals are in the independent BD world and the payouts are really high and the fees are relatively low. And honestly, it is a hard decision or calculus to make, like, “How does it make sense for me to turn down this extremely lucrative deal when my ongoing economics are going to be somewhat similar in the BD world versus in the RIA space?” I think it’s just an interesting dynamic and we’ll get more into that distinction. One of the stars of the show right here is we’ve seen a ton of advisor movement across the industry. Our annual advisor transition report said that in 2025, over 11,000 experienced advisors changed firms, which is a large number. A lot of those numbers are within the independent world. So advisors who are 1099 through a BD or through an RIA transitioning to another platform or organization or starting an RIA. So why do you think we’re seeing so many advisors reconsider their current firm or their platform or their broker-dealer today than in years past? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a jarring number. 11,000 is definitely a significant amount of advisor movements. To me, it comes down to a few things, but I will say that it’s almost always a conglomeration of pushes and pulls. Pushes being inherent frustrations with your status quo, pulls being the new sexy, shiny things that you see in the marketplace that could be really impactful for your business. To me, it typically comes down to one of three things, at least on the push front, that drives advisors to movement. Service being number one, technology being number two, and economics being number three. And if we were just going to unpack those, I think service being, “Can you call somebody that knows your business, that knows your name? Are you getting the correct answers? Are you being pushed through a phone tree? And even if you’re not doing it, is it taking up a meaningful amount of time of your staff’s free time?” On the technology front, there’s very significant tech spends happening in the industry right now. I think Raymond James and LPL reported, for example, they spent 500 million in 2025 on a tech spend. So advisors are going to the places that are making their life easier. People are looking for a mechanism to really scale their business without having to add staff and a lot of expenses to the bottom line. And technology is just the fastest, most efficient way to do that most times. And then economics, certainly a lot of advisors and teams have built phenomenal businesses and they’ve made a great living without really stressing out about the economics. And they eventually get to a point in their business where what they were giving up as a million dollar producer is far different than what they’re giving up as a $4 million producer. And back to the congruent value, it perhaps stops to make as much sense. Louis Diamond: Well said. I always say when the cost-to-value ratio is out of whack, that’s when advisors sit up and take notice. And not to name names of firms, but there definitely are firms that are more expensive. And even if you look at how much a wirehouse or a Ed Jones advisor paid their firm, it’s like, “What got me here is not necessarily what’s going to get me there.” And while the name on the business card, the resources were incredibly impactful, and I’m so grateful for what my firm, my broker-dealer did for me when I was just starting or when I was smaller. Now the business is bigger, I rely upon different resources or I don’t need the firm as much. So I’d rather plow the cost savings either into income for myself or invest it in areas that are most germane to my business. And it’s usually when that kind of light bulb moment goes off, that’s one of the major pushes that cause advisors to evaluate other options. So I agree with you, those are the major push factors, but then what are the pull factors? What are the major advancements or changes across the independent space that’s causing advisors to say, “Hey, okay, I might have some frustrations, but at the same time, I also need to find something that’s more than marginally better than the firm I’m at. Otherwise, why am I going to go through the hassle, take the risk, et cetera? So what are some of the pull factors that advisors are latching onto today? Joshua Tomolak: Sure. And I might say with one final push factor, there’s a straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back when you’ve been told for however many years that this change or that change is coming down the pipeline and it never happens. And it translates well into the pull factors is do they do what they say they’re going to do? The talking points really for the pull factors are exactly the same. So the counterpoint to service is perhaps having a direct relationship with the chief compliance officer at a firm or having a dedicated service representative that knows their stuff inside and out and can get you the answer even if they don’t know it off the top of their head. Having the technology to rebalance a household in two clicks instead of two hours. In economics, I think it’s really a transparency of economics. We’ve both worked with some really significant firms that have looked at their P&Ls and said, “where the heck is the money going?” And we’ve looked at the same P&Ls and said, “I have no idea,” because it’s so convoluted. People are happy to pay for good service, good technology, good products, but they just want to know where the money’s coming from. So I think it’s a yin and yang. The same things that they’re the push are often the pull. Louis Diamond: Definitely. I’ll give you a couple other from my perspective. I’ll say first specific to the independent BD world, and then we’ll dive into the RIA, I think it’s a little bit different. But I think some other will say innovations or changes that are causing advisors to really perk up and listen and really make the case to themselves that life will be better at this new organization than the status quo or staying put. We’ve seen major advancements in transition support, whether it’s being able to do a transition without a shred of paper, being able to… I mean, we’ve seen some independent advisors move their entire book within two weeks, which never would’ve happened before. So the firms that I’d say are playing offense, the larger firms that are winning, they have insane headcount around transitions and are always investing in technology, whether now on the AI front or in general. And we’ve seen transitions, they’re never easy. So that’s not a comment to say it’s easy, but a lot of the friction, a lot of the manual work has been taken away, which is massive. You definitely mentioned the significant technology spend. I mean, just the innovations going on across the industry. There’s definitely some firms that are laggards on technology and others that are light years ahead, whether because their tech is more integrated or they’ve built out their platform to be more, we’ll say modular, to plug in different third-party softwares where an advisor can really customize and create their own tech stack. I think there’s been some changes on compliance. It used to be if you’re at an independent BD, you had to be the OSJ by yourself or you had to roll up under an OSJ. But now most BDs offer home office supervision, so a big friction or pain point is taken away. And then I’ll give you a bridge to talk about what we’re seeing on the RIA side. But we’ve also seen, I would say, a real blurring of the lines between what you would traditionally think of as an independent broker dealer versus what was an RIA. So whether it’s an internal pathway where it’s like, “Start off on our independent BD platform, get the big deal, get the support, but then you can ditch that and just use this as a custodian or you can sell the business to us when you want to retire and convert to W2.” So in that vein, transitioning internally to an RIA, give me the same points like, “What are the major advancements or changes you’re seeing on the RIA side today?” Joshua Tomolak: I love that you said that because it’s been one of the most interesting changes to watch. Independent broker dealers becoming more like RIAs, and to your point, being more flexible, having more optionality, a more curated experience in some cases. And in many cases becoming closer to independent broker dealers with some of these massive shops that we’ve seen be created over the last five years that now have hundreds, if not thousands of advisors. To your question on the internal RIA slide as we sometimes call it, this really didn’t exist many places a few years ago. And I think it’s been created as both originally a retention tool in many places for the advisors that were with a major independent broker dealer and they ultimately wanted to have their own ADV and their own RIA. And the firm didn’t want to lose all the assets to an independent custodian so they gave them the green light to… And it’s ultimately became a sales tool in many cases. Just to use a couple of examples across the industry, I mean, Raymond James has Raymond James Custody Services, which has attracted a lot of really sophisticated teams. I know Wells Fargo Finance done something similar and even the counterparts over at Cetera and Osaic are trying to do the same thing. So it’s a recognition in my view that we want to keep the best talent possible. And if these folks are ultimately going to go RIA anyway, it’s less about the money and more about the flexibility and control that it offers them. So what can we do to keep those folks on board? And rightfully so, a lot of senior management of these firms have said, “Let’s not lose these teams. It’s going to be a lower margin business for us, but at the rate that they’re growing, it’s going to pay off in the long run.” Louis Diamond: Well said. RIAs are now more mainstream. And some of these RIAs, they’re either resembling independent BDs or I would even go so far to say the valuations that are even publicly available on some RIAs is definitely having people take notice. I mean, Cerity Partners recently raised capital at an over $8 billion reported valuation. Crescent was well over a billion. Firms like Mariner, Creative Planning, Mercer, Wealth Enhancement Group, and there’s many that I’m missing, are all worth a couple billion dollars or more and growing. Do you think that’s had an impact on the legitimacy or the staying power of the RIA model? Joshua Tomolak: Oh, absolutely. There’s no doubt about it. I mean, those groups that you mentioned and many more are winning some of the biggest teams on the street. I mean, if you pull up a run-of-the-mill advisor hub article, for example, you’ll see as many of those RIAs win significant businesses as you will their broker-dealer counterparts, partially in my opinion, due to the massive valuations these firms are fetching. And it’s much more of a partnership in the sense that joining a Crescent or a Wealth Enhancement Group, as you mentioned, you’re a part of a boutique group of maybe a couple of hundred very sophisticated high-producing advisors all playing under the same banner, all rowing in the same direction, and that creates substantial growth. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. I think two other things to me that’s driving the legitimacy or the growth of the RIA segment, there’s so many different outsourcing solutions that have popped up, whether it’s more of a… We’ll say a bundled or a package outsourcing solution through firms like Dynasty and Sanctuary. LPL has done a ton with having a shared services outsourcing model. So you have those. But you also have, I mean, probably 10 different firms I could think of that can be an outsourced chief compliance officer. You have tons of marketing agencies that specialize in helping RIAs. You have all these FinTechs popping up to support the RIA space. Really, it’s like anything and everything can be outsourced now. And even the big Wall Street banks like UBS, Merrill, et cetera, they’re attempting to sell and distribute product into the RIA space. Venture funds, private equity funds, anyone you talk to is trying to get a piece of the RIA space, which means there’s more product and platform availability than ever before. And I think it’s massive because one, it’s a catalyst for teams who say, “I love everything about the RIA world. I just don’t want to do it on my own,” or, “I don’t know where to start.” But also it means that they can look their clients in the eye and say, “Hey, not only do I have the same stuff that I had for you at XYZ firm, I can actually do more for you.” And even if you look at what the custodians are doing on the lending side now, Schwab owning a bank is massive and being able to facilitate mortgages, securities-backed loans, things that didn’t really exist in the past. I think it’s a very exciting time for advisors either that are independent or are considering the independent space because you have all these choices and it’s really like, “Choose your own adventure. Give me your top five things you want.” I’m sure it exists and we can find it and make it happen. And I don’t think we’d have the same confidence in that statement 5, 7, 10 years ago. Joshua Tomolak: I couldn’t agree more. That’s such a huge development is the marketplace of third party vendors in any kind of capitalism environment. There’s problems that people encounter and there’s really smart people that are trying to make a lot of money that go to market to solve them. And we’ve seen a ton of that over the last few years. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. Yeah, it’s like also… If an advisor looks around and says, “Hey, this is what I want,” and it doesn’t exist, oftentimes that’s a light bulb moment to be like, “Okay, I’ll go build it. I’ll do it on my own.” Whether it was Stewart Partners when they launched a number of years ago or Hightower, Dynasty, et cetera. They were all started by people that said, “Hey, I see a big gap in the ecosystem. Let’s create a business and raise capital to go solve it and then deliver this service to other like-minded advisors or business owners.” Honestly, it’s a treat to be able to watch all this happen in real time. We probably should have laid the groundwork with this next question, but I think it’s an important one. What’s the difference between a independent broker-dealer and an RIA? Really basic foundational. It sounds like the lines are blurred. There’s probably a lot of similarities. Advisors are successful in both. It’s not like one’s better than the other. How would you explain the differences, if a client of ours asked, “What’s the difference between an independent broker-dealer and IBD versus an RIA”? Joshua Tomolak: Get into the core of it. Again, the lines are blurred, and I’ll stay very high level on the strategic differences, but I like to use this example. I drive a Toyota Tundra. Really like the truck, gets me from A to B. Now, if I were getting to a point where I wanted a new vehicle, if I were to go get another Toyota Tundra because I really like a lot of aspects of it, but I want the one with the bigger screen and the bigger tires and the power seats, and I have rolled down windows because I have a fear of drowning. But if I want a lot of the bells and whistles, but I want to keep the foundation, that’s what I align to a independent broker-dealer to independent broker-dealer. You like the foundation of everything all under one roof. You like a lot of the resources, but you have some meaningful frustrations and you want to see if another provider in the market can solve for those or you can upgrade. If I instead, Louis, decided that I wanted a sports car or a Jeep Wrangler or something, I would be looking at a different category altogether. That’s how I articulate the platform space. They provide the same services and support in many cases that an independent broker-dealer does, think of marketing and a tech stack and regulatory oversight and a fellowship in a community, but they’re built on an RIA TC registered chassis. They’re typically far more customized so you can shop the street to get a lot more of the things that you like, though you are walking away from maybe some of the things that you’ve liked in the independent broker-dealer model. So I guess that’s the highest level I might explain it, just a little bit more minutia in any broker-dealer is going to be a FINRA registered, FINRA member broker-dealer. So they’re subject to the FINRA rules, which basically means it’s the compliance interpretation of those rules that they have to follow. So LPL’s rules may be slightly different than Cetera’s than Ameriprise’s because it’s based on their interpretations of the rules. In the RIA space, everybody really operates on the fiduciary standard. So it’s just a different lens that from a compliance standpoint, business is looked at. And a lot of people would make the argument that it’s just easier to get things done when you’re looking at something from that lens. I might’ve gone too compliance nerd on you there, but I’d be curious what you think some of the major differences are. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, it sounds like if you’re in the RIA world in some capacity that you as the advisor or business owner are going to have a little bit more control and autonomy and flexibility. One, do you think that’s true? And what are the reasons why that is? Is it platform? Is it strictly just compliance is easier? What are the different ways that an RIA would have more or less flexibility than someone who’s with an independent BD? Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I think it’s overwhelmingly true, but it certainly depends on your business. Within most RIA platforms, you’re going to be one of a couple dozen, maybe a couple hundred, where you’re going to have people within that firm that really know your business. So the experience in getting things done is much less about, “Can I do this,” or, “Can I not do this?” And it’s, “Louis, I understand you asked for this. We’re going to run into these issues, but let’s figure out how to get to yes.” So it’s far more curated by people that are not operating on black and white rules and can actually figure out how to get to yes for your business. The other thing I would say is that most significant RIA platforms have multiple custodial options. So many times you’ll see as few as two or as many as five. So if an advisor or a team is trying to bring on a new piece of business or do something creative, that might be something they can use a different custodial relationship to accomplish. It might be something that Goldman Sachs does really well but is in its infancy at Fidelity, or it might be international business that’s approved on Pershing’s platform but not Schwab’s platform. So the RIA partner that you’re with can really look at those custodians agnostically and say, “What’s the best home for this business? What’s the best way to get this done for Louis?” There’s a couple examples of where I see the flexibility in practice. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think one more too would be the concept of being able to shop the street. I’ve heard it described as becoming a buy-side advocate for your clients versus being a professional seller. So meaning, if I’m affiliated with an RIA or I’m operating my own RIA, there’s no selling away like there is at a wirehouse or at certain BDs. So if I have a client who’s trying to get a $10 million loan for a new building that they’re breaking ground on, if I’m at UBS, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, captive to a BD, I can go to my firm and say, “Hey, this $10 million loan, here it is. What are the terms? What are the rates? Will you take on this business?” And the firm will say, “Yes. No. Yes, here are the terms. Here’s the caveats, et cetera.” But it’s a very closed market process and an advisor has to live and die by what their firm says. Versus in the RIA world, it’s, “Okay, I have relationships with nine different banks and I can go to these different banks and private credit funds and whoever and really create either an option process for my client or really just help them in a fully agnostic open way.” And we see the same thing when it comes to alternative investments. No one at a wirehouse, let’s say, is complaining that they don’t have enough alts that they can offer clients. Those firms have done an amazing job with really boiling the ocean and having tons and tons of options for private investments, hedge funds, et cetera. But if you’re in the RIA world, you can take it to the next level and say, “Hey, this $3 million startup company that my friend is starting, I’m going to help them raise capital,” or, “My client wants to get a syndicate of investors together to have a direct investment into a qualified opportunity zone fund that they’re starting. Let’s do it when we can advise on it.” So it really expands what an advisor is able to do on behalf of clients. Like to me, that’s the most interesting or exciting part of the RIA model. You can get some of that within the BD world, but to me, when an advisor’s business becomes more sophisticated as far as what their end client’s needs are, it tends to translate better to the RIA world than the BD world. Not to say there aren’t ultra-high net worth focused advisors at BDs, but because of that additional flexibility, autonomy, customization, et cetera, that speaks more RIA. So again, absolutely not down at all on the independent BDs because I think there’s a massive home for them. Josh, let me turn it back to you. I’m rambling now. Give me the pitch for an independent BD. What are the things that are misperceptions that people have? What are the advantages that an independent broker dealer like an LPL or a RayJ or a Cetera have over RIAs or over other models in general? Joshua Tomolak: Absolutely. And I’d say I’ve learned more over the last six years from some of your ramblings than most people learn in an MBA course, so keep doing what you’re doing. But it’s funny being in this position now, having spent so much time sort of selling against the IBD model within TD Ameritrade, but what I’ve learned is it’s a good home for everybody. And a lot of times the advisors that they’re entrepreneurial enough where they like having their name on the door, but they’re not so entrepreneurial where they want to build everything out themselves, that’s where the independent broker dealers absolutely kill it. Their economics have gotten to a point where they’re really competitive. They offer transition capital that isn’t even going to be comparable in the RIA space unless you’re selling a minority share of your business. And you mentioned LPL, or we could really list all of the major ones, there’s not a department that they don’t have. It could be as nuance as finding 403(b) payroll slots or it could be as mainstream as fixed income or setting up events. There are all kinds of really neat departments that these all under one roof independent broker dealers have invested in. And a lot of times they make an effort to make you very much aware of all of the support because most people don’t use it. So I would say for the advisors that are looking to get their improved Toyota Tundra, then you can get probably 70 or 80% of what you want within the independent broker-dealer world. And you can also keep 20 or 30% of the stuff, maybe more that you really liked at your previous firm. So I think that’s where it really shines. I sometimes call it an incremental change rather than a transformational change. But for many advisors, incremental is really good enough if you get to keep the familiarity of how you’ve been doing business for the last 20-some years, but you’re able to get net improvement on the things that were really bothering you. Louis Diamond: Well said. Something that I’ve seen that’s been… I guess this could be either pro or con depending upon the advisor, but with some broker dealers, letting an advisor co-brand with them or really having a real consumer-facing brand, whether it’s, “I’m a franchise owner with Ameriprise,” or, “I’m independent through Raymond James,” or, “Running my own practice through Wells Fargo FiNet,” or, “I’m independent with Northwestern Mutual.” There’s definitely some brand cache or brand familiarity with some of those firms that may or may not be the same if you’re in the RIA world. So I would agree there’s a lot to like about the independent BD world and there’s a fit for people that is absolutely better with independent BDs than on the RIA side. Even if some people would say RIA is better, we’re cleaner, I wouldn’t say that. To me, it’s all about what an advisor’s goals are and then matching that up with what these firms do. And there’s never a perfect option. I jokingly say, “If there was a perfect firm, we wouldn’t be in business.” Every firm has their advantages or disadvantages. And depending upon where an advisor’s coming from, their style of business, their pain points, that’ll match up really well with on firm or one type of firm or one model than the other. Let’s pivot a little bit to the RIA world. A lot of your comments have been more about advisors affiliating or joining RIAs, this whole supportive version of independence concept. But what about advisors who want to go and start their own RIA? Either they’re leaving a captive firm and taking the entrepreneurial route and starting their own firm, or they’re leaving an independent BD to go start their own RIA. What do you see as some of the biggest misconceptions that advisors have about that move? Joshua Tomolak: That’s probably my favorite topic because there are the most misconceptions I think in this space. Louis Diamond: I’d agree. Joshua Tomolak: And I would say there’s 9 out of 10 conversations that I have with advisors and teams, they start off with the launching an RIA in mind or at least RIA curious and they want to understand what’s out there. And probably less than half the time do these folks end up actually launching their own RIA, which is okay because the ones that do are massively successful and they know they’re dang sure that’s exactly what they want to do. I think it gets a little bit romanticized sometimes that they’ll say, “Oh, I’ll just give Schwab a call,” or, “I’ll just give the custodian a call,” as if they were shopping independent broker dealers. That’s fine. You can do that and they will help you, but there’s quite a bit more to think about. And it’s not, in my opinion, the same as evaluating independent broker dealers. If it’s all right, I was taught the four pillars of the RIA model. I can go through that with you really quickly. So the way to think about the RIA space is in four pieces. And shout out to a friend, Eli Suarez, that taught me this years ago. The first pillar… Thinking of four pillars on a bar stool, if you will. The first one being administration. And this is your compliance, this is setting up your ADV, your LLC, all of your business formation documents. The second piece being technology, what do you actually want to use? Because the benefits of the broker-dealer world and the supported independent world is they’ve already built it for you. They’ve already paid for it and scraped their knees building it. In this case, you have to. And for some people, that’s really exciting to source financial planning software and portfolio management software and your CRM and tax software, et cetera. For some people, it just sounds like a huge headache. The third pillar being custodians. I have them third because you want to make sure that the right custodian can integrate properly with the technology that you’ve sourced that you’re passionate about. And then ultimately transition. What does a transition really look like? What are my legal and regulatory requirements? How does this work? What are the timelines? Things of that nature. So I guess I would say in closing that if those four things are things that you really want to own, then you’re in a really good position to consider an RIA launch. What do you think, Louis? Louis Diamond: I think that’s a great framework to break it down. Not just be like, “Okay, I can tolerate that,” or, “My team can do it,” but I think you have to be pretty excited about rolling up your sleeves and customizing and doing it yourself because in our experience, there’s a nominal differential between the economics of running your own RIA versus affiliating with an RIA or going to an independent BD. All the extra work and responsibility, you’re not really going to make it up, at least on the front end, on a higher net payout. So it has to be more about what the model means to you and having a vision that you don’t think anyone else can accomplish other than yourself. And looking at that crazy ever-expanding Michael Kitces’ FinTech map and there’s 500 different logos on it and being like, “Yes, that’s what I want. I want to go through this. I want to pick the seven pieces of my tech stack that work for me,” rather than getting, “Here’s the tech stack, take a demo, you like it, you don’t like it, take it or leave it.” To me, the two biggest misconceptions people have about the RIA world is one, “I’m going to have to be a full-time chief compliance officer,” and just that compliance is this boogeyman, this terrible, scary thing. In some ways it is. But the reality is most, especially startup RIAs will fully outsource compliance to a firm or they’ll hire a compliance consultant or firms that are big enough even will hire a CCO or repurpose someone on their team to be CCO. But compliance is much more streamlined and simpler than BD compliance. And ultimately, it’s compliance that’s being built for your business rather than compliance that’s being built for a publicly traded multinational company that supports 20,000 financial advisors. So I think compliance is always a big misconception. It’s definitely what a lot of firms will pry upon when they’re saying like, “Oh, you’re going to own all the legal and regulatory requirements. You could, but it’s definitely not a requirement.” And then I think another one is folks sometimes underestimate and overestimate the operational burden and how much work it is to start an RIA. Sometimes people just… They’re perfect for the RIA world, that’s their goal, but they get stopped in their tracks. They don’t really know what to do. But what we’ve seen, we said it earlier with so many different outsourcing solutions and different service providers that have popped up, if you have the fire in your belly to go build something, it doesn’t mean you’re doing it by yourself. I mean, that’s what firms like ours do. The custodians are very helpful. On the flip side though, I have seen advisors chasing payouts say, “Hey, I’m just going to go start an RIA because I want to make another 1 to 3%,” or whatever it comes to and they drastically underestimate what it really takes to build a successful firm. Joshua Tomolak: Exactly right. I think that’s my favorite one, Louis, overestimating and estimating the operational burden there is you could have the same conversation with two teams and it can go the completely different direction. Louis Diamond: Josh, let’s wrap here. I got one more question for you that I think is an exciting one, but give me three key trends or storylines that most people don’t know about or aren’t talking about that you’re passionate about or that you’re sharing with advisors or counseling today. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. This is the free advice portion. And I’ll tell you what, Louis, if it’s all right with you, I’ll give you two and I would love to hear one from you as well. The first one I’ve seen in both the independent broker-dealer and RIA space is the minority investor concept. A lot of folks will talk about the idea of taking chips off a table and starting to partially monetize your business. I think that’s all important, but what I’ve found is that a lot of advisors really want their partner, whether it’s an RIA broker dealer to help them grow. And that could be with M&A opportunities, that could be with traditional recruitment of advisors, that could be building a business plan. But the minority investment part really helps accelerate that for a lot of businesses because all of a sudden, not only are you cashing out a small part of your business, but you’ve just created an ally with the parent entity, it is now much more likely to help you grow in that capacity because they’re insulated from it and they profit when you profit. So I think it’s easy to be shortsighted and say, “Well, my equity’s going to keep growing. Why would I sell you a piece of this?” But I counsel folks often to really think about what that long-term strategic partnership is and making somebody a real equity partner rather than just a vendor that provides you with technology and regulatory coverage. The other one I’d say is that… And this one’s really important to me, that business formation is far more important than your assets under management. Said a different way, the way you build your business is going to make your business far more valuable than the number of dollars underneath your name. And what I mean by that is, just to use an example, a sophisticated, well-built, centralized, scalable and repeatable business, whether it’s an RIA with a broker-dealer that is going to fetch a far higher M&A multiple than a OSJ that’s five times the size that just has a bunch of 1099 independent advisors underneath the umbrella. What we’ve seen in the M&A space is that if you’re going to shell out 50, 60, $80 million for somebody’s business, you want to know that you have this business for the long term. So I would certainly counsel people that have been around maybe far longer than me to take a look at how you’re building this and put together a business plan on what those next 10 years should look like and not necessarily fall into the trap where your only revenue source is the override that you receive from a firm and then you in turn pay to the advisors on your team. Louis Diamond: Well said. I really like that line. We’d probably do a whole episode on what are the tips and tricks for building a business with the end in mind? Like the Covey quote, “Begin with the end in mind.” Transitions are like… They’re a bear. I mean, there’s no way to sugarcoat it. Advisors, when they hear transition, if you ask them, “Don’t think about it, give me your reaction.” “Terrible, risky, a lot of work. I’ll never do it again. My friend did it and it was terrible. What if my clients don’t come?” It’s all these negative emotions. And in many cases, I don’t blame an advisor because it is a big act. But to me, if someone is weighing making a transition, whether a wholesale business model change going from being an employee to being independent, going from being an advisor at an independent BD to starting an RIA, or even going independent BD to independent BD, it’s an opportunity if you rise to the occasion to build with this next act with intentionality. So whether it’s restructuring compensation for your team, converting people from 1099 to W2, putting in place new workflows, changing how investments, instead of it being each individual advisor doing investments to more of a centralized model, cleaning up workflows, really investing in data, investing in AI. It’s something that I think, again, we can have a whole episode on it, but I think it’s a great one. Build the business the right way. And obviously, businesses that are larger, theoretically, sell for more, but we’ve certainly seen businesses that are half the size of a larger one sell for a similar amount or more because they did all the right things and the larger one did the things that really turn off a buyer or detract from a valuation. Let me give you one more and tell me if you agree, but I think we’re in this moment when Altruist, the upstart, a new kid on the block custodian, they launched a basically tokenization of cash in a way to automatically agentically source or sort cash to the highest yielding money market. And you’re like, “This is fricking wonky. Louis, why are you telling us this?” I think this is an important one just to keep a watchful eye on. I have no idea how this is going to shake out, but really the biggest way that independent BDs or even custodians like Schwab and Fidelity really make money, it’s not on their overrides from practices or the admin fee or the custody fee. It’s really on net interest margin. So how much the broker-dealer or the firm is making on client cash and brokerage accounts relative to what they’re paying out the client. It’s essentially like free margin to these firms. And this concept, I think, has massive potential for disruption for the business model. Again, I don’t know what it’s going to look like, whether it means platform fees that are instituted at all these firms, whether it means certain models would be more beneficial than others, whether it means nothing’s going to change, which is probably the right answer given this industry. But it’s something to keep a watchful eye on just if your firm institutes a new platform fee or there’s a fundamental way in which your firm can no longer make money. How are they going to make it up? Are they now going to be uncompetitive? They’re not going to have as much scale or profits to invest in the platform. Is it going to cause even more consolidation in the industry? So to me, that’s the one pretty under the radar, pretty wonky storyline that I don’t think enough people are talking about, but has the biggest possibility for disruption across their space than anything I’ve seen in a while. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. That’s the whole iceberg. Not a lot of people are talking about it. It’s not poking out of the ocean, but it’s going to be continuously brought up. I think it’s a question that a lot of advisors are going to have to ask these firms. And at the end of the day, the firms aren’t the bad guys. They have to make money too to provide a quality product. So where the money comes from matters. Louis Diamond: Exactly. Josh, this has been awesome. I learned a lot talking with you and just having your objective consulting hat on what I think are really the differences between IBD and RIA and some of the key trends and storylines to watch has been instrumental. I’ll also give a plug that on our website and we’ll link to it in the show notes, we have a really helpful one-page reference guide going through the differences between independent BDs or IBDs and RIAs. So feel free to click on it. We’ll make sure it gets in your inbox. Josh, thanks again for joining us today. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, thanks for having me, Louis. It was a pleasure. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibilities seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I stay or Should I Go? is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and go

Thu, 30 Jul 2026 18:37:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/3254-zertifikate-party-osterreich-die-indexzertifikate-der-imaps-capital-von-andreas-wolfl 2178ba57ceb82d6db441872a9c98593f Mein Ex-Kollege Andreas Wölfl ist mit Imaps Capital ein Big Player bei Partizipationszertifikaten in Deutschland geworden und macht gerade ein Imaps Börsenspiel sowie Youtube-Content. https://game.imaps-capital.com/ https://equitystory.ai Andreas im Fanboy-Buch zur Wiener Börse: http://www.christian-drastil.com Sondernummer 20 Jahre ZFA (76 Seiten) unter http://www.audio-cd.at/zertifikate Intro-Song: http://www.audio-cd.at/music https://zertifikateforum.at About: Structures are my best Friends. In Kooperation mit dem Zertifikate Forum Austria (ZFA) und presented by Raiffeisen Zertifikate, Erste Group, BNP Paribas, Societe Generale, UBS, Vontobel, dad.at, gettex, wikifolio und Börse Frankfurt Zertifikate gibt es Podcasts zum Zertifikate-Markt in Österreich. Und freilich zum Award wieder eine grosse Print-Sondernummer. Heuer besonders gross. Ganz besonders gross. Du möchtest deine Werbung in diesem und vielen anderen Podcasts schalten? Kein Problem!Für deinen Zugang zu zielgerichteter Podcast-Werbung, klicke hier.Audiomarktplatz.de - Geschichten, die bleiben - überall und jederzeit! 3254 full no Christian Drastil Comm. (Agentur für Investor Relations und Podcasts) 898

Couples often treat prenuptial agreements as something to worry about only if a marriage ends, but many of the most useful decisions happen long before that possibility ever arises. The process can bring financial expectations, family responsibilities and future planning into the open while both people are still working toward the same goals. In this episode of Celebrity Estates, Senior Editor David Lenok speaks with Paul Karger, co-founder and managing partner at TwinFocus, about the role prenuptial agreements can play in marriage, estate planning and family wealth decisions. Using the recent marriage of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce as a starting point, Paul explains why prenups can help couples clarify ownership, protect individual assets and reduce the chance of costly disputes if circumstances change. David and Paul also examine why both parties need full financial disclosure and separate legal representation, how prenups should coordinate with trusts and estate plans, and why couples need to follow the agreement after the wedding when buying property or combining assets. Their conversation also looks at postnuptial agreements, tax considerations, family governance and the value of beginning these discussions well before the wedding date. Key takeaways: Why prenuptial agreements can provide clarity for both spouses before marriage How full financial disclosure and separate legal counsel support a fair process Why prenups need to align with trusts, estate plans, and family wealth structures How future purchases and shared assets should remain consistent with the agreement Why starting the process early gives couples time for thoughtful discussion and negotiation Resources: Listen to Celebrity Estates on Wealth Management Subscribe and listen to Celebrity Estates on Apple Podcasts Subscribe and listen to Celebrity Estates on Spotify Trust and Estates Magazine Connect With David Lenok: david.lenok@informa.com  Wealth Management LinkedIn: David Lenok LinkedIn: Informa LinkedIn: Wealth Management Connect With Paul Karger: LinkedIn: Paul Karger LinkedIn: TwinFocus Website: TwinFocus About Our Guest: Known for his discretion, global perspective, extensive worldwide network, and ability to solve complex challenges, Paul serves as a trusted confidant to a select group of families navigating the multifaceted demands of wealth, legacy, and cross-border complexity. He is often the first call for clients confronting high-stakes financial and personal decisions where judgment, nuance, and confidentiality are essential. Paul earned a B.S. in Engineering from Boston University, which recognized him with its Outstanding Alumni Award in 2012. Earlier in his career, he founded The Karger Group at UBS and began in investment banking at Leerink. Beyond TwinFocus, Paul co-founded and serves as Foundation Board President of Bridge Boston Charter School. Paul also serves on the boards of Level Ground and Commonwealth Shakespeare Company. Appointed by Governor Charlie Baker, he chaired the Massachusetts State Athletic Commission from 2016 to 2022. A lifelong martial artist, he actively trains and competes in Muay Thai, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and Jeet Kune Do.

Der deutsche Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz wechselt weitere Personen in der Regierung und im Kanzleramt aus. Die Stimmung in der CDU ist derweil schlecht: auch wegen der holprigen Neubesetzung des Verkehrsministeriums und der Entlassung eines angesehenen Staatsekretärs. Wie stark schadet das Merz? Alle Themen: (00:00) Intro und Schlagzeilen (01:15) Kanzler Merz: Ist das Führungsstil oder Führungsschwäche? (05:47) Nachrichtenübersicht (10:02) Ambitionierte Klimaziele? Ja. Flugverhalten anpassen? Nein! (15:25) US-Besuch Netanjahus: Die Beziehung ist angespannt (21:07) Tessin: Der leise Rücktritt des lauten Claudio Zali (25:07) Wie die UBS endlich den US-Markt erobern will (30:12) Geld und Loyalität: Warum die Fifa die WM teilprivatisieren will

US CENTCOM said IRGC forces launched multiple ballistic missiles from Iran towards US forces based in Jordan.Saudi Arabia's Defence Ministry said air defences intercepted and destroyed several drones, which had attempted to target petroleum facilities in the Eastern Region.US CENTCOM later announced that US and Saudi forces conducted strikes on Iran-backed terrorist sites in Iraq.Crude futures climbed as geopolitical tensions escalated (Brent Oct +2.8%); APAC was choppy, and sentiment deteriorated; Europe looks ahead to a subdued open.US equity futures, DXY, T-Note futures, and spot gold trade sideways ahead of FOMC.Looking ahead, highlights include Swedish GDP Flash (Q2), ECB Wage Tracker, US Atlanta Fed GDP, Fed Policy Announcement (Jul), BoC Minutes (Jul), Speakers including Fed Chair Warsh & RBA's Hunter, Supply from Germany, Earnings from SoFi, Microsoft, Meta, Arm, Qualcomm, L'Oreal, Hermes, Airbus, Porsche AG, BASF, UBS & Standard Chartered.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

Bloomberg reported on July 29, 2026 that UBS and Deutsche Bank delivered strong earnings. UBS under CEO Sergio Ermotti has focused on integrating Credit Suisse and expanding wealth management, supporting cross-border services and selective credit. Deutsche Bank led by CEO Christian Sewing continues its restructuring with emphasis on fixed income, currencies, and corporate transaction services. Stronger bank profits can influence lending standards, underwriting capacity, and capital markets activity across Europe and for U.S. clients. Founders should benchmark credit terms across multiple banks, evaluate fixed versus floating-rate exposure, and maintain documented hedging policies for euro and Swiss franc flows. Tighter compliance after 2023 requires up-to-date corporate records and time for onboarding and amendments.Learn more on this news by visiting us at: https://greyjournal.net/news/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We conclude our special edition exploring the blue economy and ways to support ocean resources that are currently overexploited and underpriced. Featuring The Ocean Foundation’s president, Mark Spalding, and Catherina Campedelli of UBS.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sat, 25 Jul 2026 05:28:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/3245-zertifikate-party-osterreich-zeitzeugin-alexandra-baldessarini-ex-ovag-liest-die-zertifikate-geschichte-von-2007-bis-2009 160985c56825fd33502ceab08852ee3f Heute habe ich eine Lesung eines Spezial-Kapitels aus meinem Fanboy-Buch zur Wiener Börse: Es geht um Zertifikate, danke an Zeitzeugin Alexandra Baldessarini (Ex-ÖVAG) bzw. Bernhard Grabmayr (ZFA) für Einlesen und Inhalt. Fanboy-Buch mit Zertifikate-Content: http://www.christian-drastil.com Sondernummer 20 Jahre ZFA (76 Seiten) unter http://www.audio-cd.at/zertifikate Intro-Song: http://www.audio-cd.at/music https://zertifikateforum.at About: Structures are my best Friends. In Kooperation mit dem Zertifikate Forum Austria (ZFA) und presented by Raiffeisen Zertifikate, Erste Group, BNP Paribas, Societe Generale, UBS, Vontobel, dad.at, gettex, wikifolio und Börse Frankfurt Zertifikate gibt es Podcasts zum Zertifikate-Markt in Österreich. Und freilich zum Award wieder eine grosse Print-Sondernummer. Heuer besonders gross. Ganz besonders gross. Du möchtest deine Werbung in diesem und vielen anderen Podcasts schalten? Kein Problem!Für deinen Zugang zu zielgerichteter Podcast-Werbung, klicke hier.Audiomarktplatz.de - Geschichten, die bleiben - überall und jederzeit! 3245 full no Christian Drastil Comm. (Agentur für Investor Relations und Podcasts)

Werbung | Handelsblatt mit 30 % Rabatt – exklusiv für unsere Hörer: Sichert euch jetzt das Handelsblatt – gedruckt oder digital – für 12 Monate mit 30 % Rabatt. Alle Infos zum Angebot findet ihr unter: www.handelsblatt.com/wallstreet30 Die Wall Street sieht eine zögerliche Erholung, mit einem unentschlossenen Start des Nasdaq. Unterstützung kommt von den besser als erwarteten Quartalszahlen und dem optimistischen Ausblick von Intel, das von einer anhaltend starken Nachfrage nach KI-Rechenleistung profitiert und seine Investitionen in die Chipfertigung weiter erhöht. Auch SAP liefert trotz Margendruck ein solides Quartal und sorgt gemeinsam mit den zuletzt starken Zahlen von ServiceNow und Roper Technologies für neue Zuversicht im Softwaresektor. Gleichzeitig geben die Ölpreise einen Teil ihres jüngsten Anstiegs wieder ab, nachdem Berichte über einen neuen Vorschlag für eine Waffenruhe zwischen den USA und Iran Hoffnungen auf eine Entspannung im Nahen Osten wecken. Belastend wirken dagegen die neuen US-Zölle von 10 bis 12,5 Prozent auf Importe aus rund 60 Handelspartnern, während die Märkte gespannt auf die heute anstehenden Einkaufsmanagerindizes und die Zahlen von American Express und Verizon. Beide Aktie tendieren schwächer, allen voran American Express. Analystenseitig sorgt vor allem AMD für positive Schlagzeilen: Bank of America und UBS haben ihre Kursziele nach dem KI-Investorentag deutlich angehoben und sehen den Konzern auf dem Weg zu einem führenden Anbieter kompletter KI-Systeme. Auch Dell und Hewlett Packard Enterprise profitieren von steigenden Investitionen in Unternehmens-Rechenzentren, während Truist PayPal angesichts der anhaltenden Übernahmefantasie um Stripe auf „Halten“ hochstuft. Ein Podcast - featured by Handelsblatt. ► Erhalte einen exklusiven 15% Rabatt auf Saily eSIM Datentarife! Lade die Saily-App herunter und benutze den Code wallstreet beim Bezahlen: https://saily.com/wallstreet * ► Entdecke den exklusiven NordVPN Deal! Jetzt risikofrei testen mit einer 30-Tage-Geld-zurück-Garantie: https://nordvpn.com/wallstreet * ► Direkt an der Börse handeln mit tradegate.direct: https://bit.ly/WallStreet_Juni * +++ Alle Rabattcodes und Infos zu unseren Werbepartnern findet ihr hier: https://linktr.ee/wallstreet_podcast +++ Impressum: https://www.360wallstreet.de/impressum *Werbung

If your porch light seems to attract every moth and flying insect in the neighborhood, you're not imagining it. Scientists have finally figured out why artificial lights are so irresistible to many insects—and knowing what they've discovered can help you keep more bugs away this summer. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-44785-3 Some people seem to light up a room the moment they walk in. Others naturally draw people in, inspire confidence, and make lasting impressions. We call it charisma, and many assume you're either born with it or you're not. Olivia Fox Cabane says that's simply not true. In this conversation, she explains what charisma really is, why it's often misunderstood, and the surprisingly practical skills anyone can learn to become more influential and engaging. Olivia has advised leaders at Google, Deloitte, UBS, MGM, and TikTok, and is author of The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism (https://amzn.to/44kpuyI). For decades, we've talked about "the midlife crisis" as though it's inevitable. But what if we've gotten midlife completely wrong? Research suggests that your middle years can be one of the most productive, satisfying, and influential periods of your life. So why does this stage have such a negative reputation? And what are people in midlife uniquely positioned to do that younger and older adults often can't? Margie Lachman, Professor of Psychology at Brandeis University and director of the Lifespan Lab, shares a fresh, evidence-based perspective on why midlife deserves a lot more celebration than sympathy. She is author of Primetime: A New Vision for Midlife (https://amzn.to/4bpLbRJ). Have you ever searched everywhere for your keys or your glasses, only to discover they were sitting in plain sight the whole time? It's a surprisingly common experience, and it reveals something fascinating about how your brain decides what you do—and don't—see. https://dictionary.apa.org/inattentional-blindness PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS WAYFAIR: Ready to upgrade your home for way less? Head to ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Wayfair.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ right now to shop all things home and get your space ready for less.  QUINCE: Elevate your summer wardrobe. Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Quince.com/sysk⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada, too! SHOPIFY: It's time to turn those "what ifs" into CHA CHING with Shopify Today! Sign up for your $1 per month trail and start selling today at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Shopify.com/sysk⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ INDEED: Get a $75 Sponsored Job credit to help get your job the premium status it deserves at ⁠⁠⁠https://Indeed.com/PODCAST⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As part of The Lo Life's Level Up Series, Lo explores the skills that can help you thrive personally and professionally—and few are more misunderstood than charisma. This week, Lo sits down with internationally renowned charisma expert and New York Times bestselling author Olivia Fox Cabane, whose groundbreaking research has helped reshape the way leaders, entrepreneurs, and everyday people think about influence, connection, and presence. Drawing on decades of work at institutions including Stanford and MIT, and coaching leaders at Google, Apple, Airbnb, TikTok, Deloitte, and UBS, Olivia has become one of the world's leading voices on the science of charisma. Her own journey—from describing herself as introverted, socially awkward and autistic to becoming a globally recognized expert on human connection—makes her perspective all the more compelling.In this conversation, Lo and Olivia unpack why charisma isn't an innate gift but a learnable skill rooted in psychology and behavioral science. They explore how charisma influences leadership, careers, relationships, interviews, and everyday interactions, while examining how the rules have evolved in an era where our digital presence can be just as important as the person we are face-to-face. They also discuss why introverts can be deeply charismatic, the historical misconceptions surrounding charisma, and how these skills can be used to build trust, inspire others, and shape the next generation. Whether you're looking to become a stronger communicator, a more confident leader, or simply a more authentic version of yourself, this episode offers practical insights into a skill that can transform every area of life.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Matt Kilgroe — President & CEO, Cyndeo Wealth Partners Matt Kilgroe shares how Cyndeo Wealth Partners grew from a newly launched $1.2B RIA to a $3.5B enterprise, and why the next challenge isn't independence, but building a firm capable of reaching $25B.  In Summary Five years after launching Cyndeo Wealth Partners from UBS, Matt Kilgroe returns to the podcast to discuss what happens after independence. Rather than focusing on the transition itself, Louis and Matt explore the next phase of growth: scaling an advisory business, attracting talent, developing niche expertise, taking on outside capital, and building an enterprise designed to last. Along the way, Matt shares how Cyndeo expanded from $1.2B to $3.5B, why serving professional athletes required a different business model, and what led the firm to partner with Rise Growth Partners as it looks toward a $25B future.  The Storyline For many advisors, independence is viewed as the finish line. For Matt Kilgroe, it became the starting point. When Cyndeo Wealth Partners launched in 2020, the goal wasn't simply to leave the wirehouse behind. It was to build a business with the flexibility to grow in ways that simply weren't possible before. Five years later, that vision has evolved into something much larger. Cyndeo has nearly tripled in size, expanded its niche serving professional athletes and entertainers, recruited advisors, added specialized operational talent, and recently welcomed Rise Growth Partners as a minority investor to help accelerate its next phase of growth. The conversation explores what changes when firm leaders stop thinking like advisors managing successful practices and begin thinking like CEOs building enduring enterprises. The discussion spans succession planning, capital strategy, recruiting, organizational design, and the mindset required to scale from billions to tens of billions—all while remaining focused on clients and culture.  Topics Covered Building an enterprise beyond independence Scaling from $1.2B to $3.5B in assets Organic growth versus recruiting Serving professional athletes and entertainers Why fiduciary independence matters for niche client segments Building operational infrastructure for growth Partnering with Dynasty Financial Partners Minority capital and Rise Growth Partners Succession planning and employee ownership Thinking from $3.5B to $25B > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors What did Matt learn after transitioning nearly 98% of his clients? (06:20) Why client relationships—not firm logos—proved to be the firm's greatest asset during one of the most challenging transitions imaginable. How did Cyndeo nearly triple in size in five years? (16:10) Matt discusses the combination of niche specialization, disciplined organic growth, recruiting, and operational investment that fueled the firm's expansion. Why has Cyndeo become a destination for professional athletes? (17:15) The conversation explores how deep industry expertise, fiduciary flexibility, and specialized service created a business that would have been difficult to build inside a wirehouse. Why bring on a minority capital partner when the business was already thriving? (24:15) Matt explains why succession planning, future recruiting, and long-term enterprise growth made outside capital the right decision. How should advisors think about ownership versus compensation? (35:40) A candid discussion about enterprise value, equity, and why many advisors underestimate the long-term economics of ownership. What does it actually take to scale toward $25B? (42:20) From hiring executive talent to expanding geographically, Matt shares how he's thinking about the next chapter of Cyndeo's evolution. Key Takeaways Independence creates opportunities that extend well beyond higher payouts, including enterprise value, recruiting flexibility, and ownership. Scaling a business requires investing in operational leadership, not just adding advisors. Specialized client niches demand expertise that goes well beyond investment management. Outside capital can accelerate growth when it's aligned with long-term strategy rather than an exit. Building an enduring enterprise requires thinking differently about succession, talent, governance, and equity. https://youtu.be/WRYJd9Lkt7o Quotable Moments “Don't rent your practice. Own it.” “You can't work in those niches and not be a fiduciary.” “We're not done.” “The road from $3B to $25B is going to really compound on your equity.”  FAQs Why did Cyndeo decide to take on a minority capital partner? To support its next phase of growth, strengthen succession planning, recruit additional talent, and benefit from the experience of leaders who have successfully scaled wealth management businesses before. How did Cyndeo grow from $1.2B to $3.5B? Through a combination of consistent organic growth, specialized client niches, advisor recruiting, and investments in operational infrastructure. Why is serving professional athletes or other niche client segments different from serving traditional wealth clients? Niche client segments often face unique financial decisions involving private investments, business opportunities, and career transitions that require specialized knowledge and a fiduciary framework. What advantages did independence create that weren't available inside a wirehouse? Matt points to greater flexibility around private investments, the ability to build specialized client experiences, reward employees with equity, and create an enterprise with lasting value. How should advisors think about building versus joining an independent firm? The discussion highlights the tradeoffs between creating your own firm and joining an established independent enterprise, emphasizing that ownership and long-term equity often matter more than headline payouts. What does Matt believe is required to build a $25B firm? A willingness to invest beyond advisors alone, adding executive leadership, expanding geographically, recruiting strategically, and maintaining a long-term enterprise mindset. To support its next phase of growth, strengthen succession planning, recruit additional talent, and benefit from the experience of leaders who have successfully scaled wealth management businesses before. Through a combination of consistent organic growth, specialized client niches, advisor recruiting, and investments in operational infrastructure. Niche client segments often face unique financial decisions involving private investments, business opportunities, and career transitions that require specialized knowledge and a fiduciary framework. Matt points to greater flexibility around private investments, the ability to build specialized client experiences, reward employees with equity, and create an enterprise with lasting value. The discussion highlights the tradeoffs between creating your own firm and joining an established independent enterprise, emphasizing that ownership and long-term equity often matter more than headline payouts. A willingness to invest beyond advisors alone, adding executive leadership, expanding geographically, recruiting strategically, and maintaining a long-term enterprise mindset. Related Resources Article: Your Practice Isn't Worth What You ThinkMost advisors misjudge their business's value, not because of the number, but because of the framework. Learn what really drives enterprise value. Rise and Reinvent: Joe Duran on Building and Rebuilding World-Class FirmsHe's built and rebuilt some of the industry's most successful firms and now he's helping others do the same. In this episode, Joe Duran, the founder of Rise Growth Partners, shares lessons from building, selling, and starting again, and how staying curious and adaptable fuels lasting success. Matt KilgroePresident/CEO Prior to launching Cyndeo Wealth Partners in 2020, Matt ran advisory teams at Merrill Lynch and UBS Financial for 29 years. Providing guidance, counsel, and strategy for families the firm serves is Matt's passion. In addition to his role as an advisor, Matt works in a leadership capacity for Cyndeo while also helping with business development. Matt has been recognized by Barron's as a Top 1000 or Top 1200 Advisor consistently since 2009. In 2020 Forbes named him to their “Best-In-State Wealth Advisor” list. A graduate of Eckerd College, Matt has served on the Board of Trustees at his alma mater since 2012. His three children are his pride and joy. Daughter Carrington owns Sunstate Yoga studio in St. Petersburg, son Kent is a financial advisor with Cyndeo, and daughter Jillian recently graduated Florida State University. An athlete in college, Matt continues to enjoy staying in shape, playing basketball, and bike riding. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… True Alignment: Advising Business Owners on Wealth, Significance, and Value A conversation with Jason Diamond, Nick Hubert and Taylor Gentry – Founding Partners at Panoramic Capital Partners. Jason Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is True Alignment: Advising Business Owners on Wealth, Significance, and Value. It’s a conversation with Nick Hubert and Taylor Gentry, Founding Partners, Panoramic Capital Partners. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education-driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: Advisory firms that work with business owner clients typically operate through a fairly traditional wealth management lens. The business may be the source of the wealth, but the advice itself often centers around investments, planning, and asset allocation, yet Panoramic Capital Partners approaches that equation differently. Nick Hubert and Taylor Gentry are the founding partners of the roughly $450 million RIA, serving about 150 families with a seven-person team. And while they come from very different professional backgrounds, Nick with more of a relationship and storytelling orientation, Taylor from the analytical and private equity side, they’ve built the firm around a shared philosophy tied to what they call personal significance, personal wealth, and personal value. A big part of that philosophy, or the north star as they put it, is applying some of the same accountability and long-term thinking frameworks commonly seen in private equity to the advisory relationship itself, not in a transactional sense, but in helping clients think more intentionally about decision-making, alignment, and outcomes over long periods of time. As a result, our conversation delves deeply into the private equity world, reframing how clients and advisors should consider this important tool as both a growth mechanism and a strategic part of their client’s plans. We talk about how that perspective also shapes not only how they think about serving business owners specifically, but also the role private equity should play in wealth management. Then we take a view of their long runway and how they and other younger advisors might see things differently about building firms today and why clarity of vision may matter more than sheer scale in the years ahead, and much, much more. It’s a narrative that is refreshing and informative, so let’s get to it. Taylor, Nick, thank you so much for joining. Walk us through your background. What brought you to the world of wealth management? Nick, let’s start with you. Nick Hubert: Sure. I think I got my first taste of the industry actually in a sophomore year of college internship, or I interned at Morgan Stanley here in Oregon. I studied finance and accounting at University of Oregon, and so I had this affinity for finance and markets and had that privilege of having that internship. So I had it early on in my career. Ultimately ended up setting my sights on doing investment banking and going that route and did that for a short period of time. Ended up not going very long due to a medical reason, so you don’t have to be that sorry for me. And ultimately started my career in business consulting before pretty quickly realizing that I want to get back to finance, back to investing these things that just felt like core competencies and that thing that you keep coming back to when you’re alone in the middle of the night thinking about stuff, it was always that. Just had this desire to work with smaller units than large corporations, which is great for wealth where you get to work with families and small businesses. And so it was just a natural alignment that took me back full-time to the space in 2016. Jason Diamond: I like the framing it through the size of the unit you’re working with and having more of an impact on the family. Taylor, what about you? Taylor Gentry: I’m a little more circuitous, if you will. Spent a couple of years in investment banking, so you can be sorry for me. Nick and I met in undergrad at the University of Oregon, had the opportunity to work in this investment group together where we were investing a portion of the university’s endowment. And like Nick, interned in wealth management and kind of walked away from it going, “Boy, that’s boring. I don’t really like that.” And so moved to New York, cut my teeth in banking for a couple years and we were working… So an investment bank for context, helping companies raise debt, raise equity, and with mergers and acquisitions, we’re working with huge companies. So the Mattels of the world, the largest toy company in the world. Like Nick, realized, “Hey, I’m going to work with smaller companies that we can get our arms around a little bit better and be more helpful with and have a bigger impact on.” So spent about 10 years with a private equity firm in the western half of the US and we invested in companies in what’s referred to as the lower middle market. So companies doing 50 to 300 million of revenue. And we would invest in those companies, grow those businesses and then look to sell them. Awesome experience, learned a ton, got a bunch of experience around how to invest in companies, how to grow businesses. Then had the opportunity to step into the CFO seat of a couple of different operating companies during that time. It was just a great learning ground, but also to see a whole bunch of different situations. Nick and I have always invested in things together. We’ve worked on things together and we’ve always wanted to work together full time. And a few years ago, the stars really just aligned to say, “Hey, what would it look like to create a differentiated offering in the wealth space where we can blend my background on companies, transactions, how to draw on scale and all those pieces and really marry that with the wealth management piece?” And Nick will get into that further, but it’s just a really unique way to partner with families and companies that are smaller which can have a really high impact experience with those families and really move them through their life journey, if you will. Jason Diamond: Yeah, there’s a lot to unpack there and we’ll get to some of the elements of how you run the business today. First of all, you can’t fool me by using a toy company as your example to make investment banking more interesting. I’m just kidding. Actually, my real takeaway there is you have a skillset that is incredibly relevant in the current wealth management ecosystem, especially in the model you’re currently in. So let’s talk about that a little. Tell us about your current chapter, which is Panoramic Capital Partners. Who do you serve? What types of clients? Give me some perspective on size as well. Nick Hubert: I'm going to take this first. Taylor can do the PE background side and give you a bunch of numbers. I’ll give you the story and see if we can piece it together that way. Jason Diamond: I get the impression you guys use that line a lot. Nick Hubert: Oh, no, that’s the first time. How’d it land? Jason, I spent eight years at our prior firm with our third founding partner, Andrew, and he was at that firm for 30 years. And so we’ve got this core DNA that we’ve always carried of serving high net worth families in a very holistic and deep planning-based capacity, which I think a lot of modern firms say that. And so that’s not necessarily that different, but it is a DNA that carries through. When we got struck with this vision of launching Panoramic and what inspired us to build the firm, it was as, Taylor outlined, around this idea of how do we partner with entrepreneurs and business owners more holistically across their entire entrepreneurial journey, not just around the exit as is so often where the gravity of the conversation sits. And so our firm vision and inspiration was all around that. And since launching in May of 2024, it has been about how do we bring that vision to life with a different business model. And to your point, there’s a bunch to unpack there, but that is ultimately the founding vision of what we are trying to build here overall and what inspires us every day to say, how do we, as Taylor mentioned, bring the combination of skillsets to bear in a way that allows us to be a better partner along the entirety of the journey as opposed to just towards the end when assets traditionally show up, so to speak? So that’s a story from a vision perspective. Taylor, I don’t know what you want to add to that. Taylor Gentry: As Nick outlined, it’s the ability to work with folks throughout the lifecycle. So in private equity, you invest in a company, you work with that management team for three to seven years and then you sell the business and move on to the next project or deal. And really, it’s the deal mechanic that is the value creation. Whereas, with what we are building here, we have the opportunity to really step along the journey with folks when they are in the early phases building what we talk about as the middle phase of allocating, and we’ll talk about this further, and then really the third phase of stewarding capital along the way. And it’s a life cycle or entrepreneurial journey that we’re able to be hand in hand with folks over decades opposed to measured in three to five year spans. Jason Diamond: So it sounds, and you’ve both kind of touched on this now, your different backgrounds, you view as very much a positive because it gives you, Taylor, the more in the weeds analytical perspective. Nick, you’re probably more the storyteller. Do you find that to be a benefit when you’re running your firm every day? And are there instances when it’s a negative? Is there ever a time when you say, Taylor, just maybe more for you, not coming from this world, you don’t speak the same language? Nick Hubert: Do you want me to drop off the call so Taylor can be honest and he can give you the scoop and then he can jump off and I’ll give you the scoop? Taylor Gentry: Jason, we talk about that a lot, honestly. I think it is atypical for someone with my background to step into the wealth space maybe more so. And we leverage that because we have the ability to work with folks on how do you drive value in the company, how do you set the business up for a potential sale exit or transition internally? But this business, historically, we’ve talked about it as almost like two tracks. You have Taylor on the quote unquote business consulting or the business work track and you have Nick on a wealth management track. It’s really not the case. And really, the power is the ability for these two pieces to come together and there isn’t a conversation we have with clients where those two perspectives and backgrounds or contexts aren’t married into one to create really truly holistic advice. And so Nick will probably tell you otherwise, but I haven’t seen an area yet where our two backgrounds has been a negative. It’s actually been immensely positive. And then on top of it, in terms of kind of building out the firm, Nick is more of a traction visionary and I’m more of the traction implementer. What’s amazing about it from our perspective is the partnership we have allows us to, A, recognize that, B, name it, and then C, leverage it in terms of being able to dole out duties and maximize our success together. Jason Diamond: Nick, anything you’d add? Nick Hubert: I think that’s all right. I mean, Jason, your question was from an operational perspective. I think a lot of Taylor’s view is from a client perspective, which is spot on that the overlap of that is really helpful for clients and I think what allows it to be a different experience for them. Internally, operationally, I think that where you could see friction there amongst partners with differences, and I think you do see that, and at the same time, Google was the one who did team research 15 years ago where they put out what you really want, is similarity and vision and differences in skillset when building a team. And so I think we’ve been intentional about that and it’s been really helpful for… Taylor and I functionally met in a quasi-professional setting back in 2011 and developed a friendship quickly, so we’ve got that deep level of friendship that underpins all of it. And same with Andrew and our time working together. So part of it is there’s just such a strength of relationship amongst us that we give space for each other’s differences and look for those as assets as opposed to negatives, but in some sense, beauty in the eye of the beholder as is the case with anything. Jason Diamond: Yep. I appreciate you adding that context. I’ll be honest that when I first encountered your firm, my reaction was your core value prop of serving business owners is not all that differentiated. And then I learned more about the way in which you serve business owners. Can you talk about that? Because a lot of advisors in general, but then I think more specifically, a lot of RIAs would say, “We service primarily business owners.” Tell me how do you do it in a way that’s different and meaningful? Nick Hubert: I’ll take a first stab at that and then Taylor can maybe add on with specific stories. The wealth space is an awesome business and it’s a place where it’s very difficult to differentiate. And so we think a lot about that through the lens of how do we grow this business well for the long period of time to create opportunities for clients and employees. And so we spent a lot of time thinking about that, not only for the sake of differentiation, but also how do we actually just continue to add value to clients? Because if we add value in a different way, growth will take care of itself. I’d say one way of cutting that is we revisit the mission is through this idea of, okay, if I want to be a partner along the journey, it’s about more than a single transaction, more than a single exit, whatever that might be, or a series of transactions as wealth is often created over a series of transactions. It’s this idea of how do we focus on wealth creation and driving business value as the engine of wealth creation for entrepreneurs and what we call personal significance, which is the life of the entrepreneur. And so there’s a next click down framing of our framework that we work through that lens. I think the most important piece for us has been how do we build a business model that actually brings that to life and that’s the trick because we can say that, and if we basically still just operate out of an AUM-based or an asset advisory fee-based business, the reality is my incentive is still towards getting assets out of the entrepreneurial environment, so to speak, into a place that I can manage them, which may or may not be the best thing for the entrepreneur based on where they are at. And so our current work continues to be around how do we build that business model. So layering in different ways of engaging, whether it’s a retainer fee or some other way of engaging so we can start earlier when assets aren’t there and actually encourage the entrepreneur, “No, keep reinvesting in your business. It’s your highest rate of return right now and it’s where the investment needs to go.” I don’t want to have a conflict in giving that advice. And so I think step two here has been building that business model from an actual engagement perspective to enable us to enact the vision. And then I think the third piece is how do we then build tools that are different than just evaluating pre-exit planning, and as is so often, the toolkit, but actually saying, okay, what are the value drivers of a business? And this is probably where Taylor has a lot more to add because it’s 101 of the PE model, but how do we take the mission and vision of an entrepreneur, what we call north stars, translate those into value drivers, ensure those tie to strategic initiatives in the business, ensure it ties to reporting, and ultimately, how capital is allocated between the business and other investments? So then that’s our toolkit that we continue to build out to deploy the mission through our business model with tools that back it up. So that’s how we frame it right now. Taylor, we can share stories about how that’s come to fruition to create different outcomes. Jason Diamond: Taylor, I’d love to hear that. Let me just add maybe my understanding, because this is what helped me, I think, to really understand how you defer, and Nick and Taylor, correct me if I’m wrong, it sounds like the typical advisor thinks about an entrepreneur, a business owner relationship as the next liquidity event in most cases. And you take the viewpoint that it’s a journey, in some instances, 30 years in the making. It’s not even about liquidity event might come that’s beside the point. Is that a fair summary? Taylor Gentry: Yeah. We talk about it as a growing business is a healthy business, a business that is creating incremental value and adding to the multiple in terms of how the business is valued in the marketplace is a healthy business. And so whether you are going to sell that business or retain that business into perpetuity, let’s make a really valuable business and grow a very healthy business. And that’s what we do with clients. Nick laid out the north star framework. And so how do we actually go about engaging with folks on a practical level? It does start with the north star framework. It’s got five steps to it as Nick outlined in terms of defining the north star, where we’re going, what we’re trying to do and that’s across those three pillars, personal significance, personal wealth and business value. And that personal significance has to be held at that same level. Otherwise, we find folks that are mid 50s, their business is crazy valuable, they’ve got a lot of dollars, but their family life isn’t where they want it to be because they didn’t take care of that along the way. So we lay out a place map that says, “Hey, these are the north stars that we are aligning on and coming back to every month when we work with these owners.” We then push that into, okay, what are we trying to do on the business side of the equation? Let’s lay out what is going to drive the value of the business from a multiple and enterprise value perspective. We push that into a set of strategic initiatives that is tactical, who owns what, when’s it getting done, and are we red, yellow or green on it? We then build out the performance reporting package with folks. And so that is a monthly reporting package that says what happened last month and what operational data are we looking at to be able to improve the business month over month and get a good feedback loop going into the company. And then the last piece is around capital allocation that Nick mentioned where if the business generates a million dollars, where’s that capital going? I think there’s a lot in there and it’s really deep, but if you zoom all the way back out, it’s take a private equity style playbook where private equity firms come and invest in a company. And what do they do after close? They put in place good financial reporting, good operational reporting, and then hold the team accountable to that reporting and those results on a monthly, quarterly, and annual basis. And so this is not rocket science or something that’s never been seen before. It’s just most business owners that have never experienced this private equity world don’t have access to it and don’t know how to go about doing it. It’s a relatively long process to get that installed with companies and with teams to really dig in and understand it, but it’s building out those packages to be able to say, “Okay, what happened last month? What changes do we need to make and what are we doing from a initiative perspective to drive the business forward?” So to Nick’s point, it was previously, this was all about liquidity planning or from a wealth management perspective, it’s about the exit. This is about how do we make a more valuable business along the way, and that’s going to be good for the entrepreneur as they move through the journey. Nick Hubert: When we were around the dinner table, the proverbial dinner table creating the vision of this firm, it was around this idea of the silver tsunami and everything that everybody reads in the headlines of this massive wave of transition, this generational transition of business ownership that we could help facilitate. So we launched with that thesis in some sense. In addition to this broader journey perspective, we have gotten to this place by following the market and listening to what entrepreneurs actually want through the big unlock was honestly in a deal process with one of our clients where we realized, “This is a great deal. This person’s going to put a ton of money in their pockets, secure their future,” and it’s completely the wrong outcome for the entrepreneur because it’s thinking all about the deal, not thinking about what this person didn’t want was an exit. They wanted a different relationship with their business, and that required, what do you actually want out of life, that personal significance piece? And it required, “Hey, if we can actually create a layer of team members and reporting that allows you to manage this like a board chair would do as opposed to a highly engaged CEO. That’s actually what you want. You don’t want out of this business. You want to still have this be a huge rock in your life.” And so we’ve ran through that door, said no to the deal with them and have been building the infrastructure around this, and that was the unlock and aha moment for us. There’s something bigger here and that’s what then inspired, in some sense, the broader build out of the toolkit, but I think puts more meat on the bone of actually saying no to a deal, which is not the classic wealth manager outcome to get to a way better outcome for the client and is ultimately still an awesome client for us as a firm and somebody that we can go build with for the next 20 years. I think just telling it through the lens of a story that’s different than what’s normal, so to speak, is a way to frame that up. Jason Diamond: It’s such a hyper focus on a fairly long-term and honestly nebulous potential outcome. You don’t have certainty. That, I think, is why most advisors would prefer the near-term liquidity. I mean, it’s not a secret, right? You can bill on assets, firms are incentivizing it and it’s a pretty direct recipe to net new asset growth, but it’s certainly a refreshing point of view. It resonates with me. I’m wondering if it’s resonated with clients and prospects. I guess what I’m asking is, do they feel that this is something different than the typical wealth management experience for this type of client? Nick Hubert: Yeah, Taylor, tell that story of the guy who said, “I’ve had this, but I felt alone.” I think that story of partnership, you tell pretty well. Taylor Gentry: Yeah. Jason, it was actually that same client, he had a investment banker, a wealth manager, attorney, and a CPA. CPA said, “The deal’s terrible, you shouldn’t do the deal.” Investment bankers obviously incentivized to do the deal. And so he’s saying, “You should do the deal.” That’s how he gets paid. He had a wealth manager who was silent and he had an attorney who just pushing paperwork. Jason Diamond: It’s like the start of a bad joke. Taylor Gentry: Yeah. No, seriously, it’s pretty remarkable. It’s like this guy did what he was supposed to do. He put the team of resources around himself. He got professionals in the seat. It’s that no one could connect the dots of all four of those people because they have the seat of those four people. And so it’s really resonated because there’s an ability to see a bigger picture and connect these dots and say, “Okay, this investment banker is saying X because of A, B and C.” And the CPA is saying it’s a bad deal and that it’s not a market deal. It’s 100% a market deal. This deal is right down the fairway in terms of what the market should value your company at and they just don’t understand how the transaction mechanics should work. And so it’s worked really well from that perspective of being able to be the quarterback or centralized point or personal CFO for folks in understanding where interests lie and also being able to think about what they are pursuing in a bit of a different lens. I think the second piece on that is where does it resonate for folks? I think that there is a gap in the marketplace that we are still working to close, and that gap is that business owners do not know what this monthly reporting package looks like. They do not know what really good reporting on their business looks like in terms of they have always run their… You’ve got a business owner. They’ve run their business for 10 or 20 years. They have a pulse on the business from their gut feel. That does not mean that the business has been optimized, is ready to go to the next level or is ready for a transaction and go through a transaction because they have not done the work on the backend to understand the moving pieces of the business at a granular level. This recording package, we oftentimes get this confusion around, well, I’ve got a temporary CFO or a controller or X, Y, Z. That is very different than what we’re talking about. Well, that is all accounting, close the books, have clean numbers. What we’re talking about is how do I marry operational data in the business, number of units ships, number of jobs completed, time on job, operational data to the financials in the business so I can then go make adjustments operationally on how to improve the business and continue taking steps forward. Jason Diamond: It’s very clear. Nick, anything you’d want to add to that? Nick Hubert: I’d say it’s easy to still cut that from a deal lens and say, look, when an investment partner comes to evaluate a business to sit in their seat for a moment, they’re going to look at the replicability of what that leader has done without that leader still in the seat. And if so many businesses are still reliant on that person and this gets talked about as processes, reporting systems, that ultimately results in a discount to the value of the business because although it can be viewed… For the leader, it’s like, it’s that control thing that entrepreneurs deal with. It’s what made them good. It’s what got you there. And so that transition is really hard. And that’s important from a deal lens because that does a direct impact to value. And to widen out the scope beyond the deal and to think about the entrepreneur’s life, this goes back to the dynamic that a lot of times entrepreneurs look for the exits because they’ve built something that it’s now owning them and what they’ve built is not resulting in the life that they want. And so how can we use this system to actually change that relationship, as I mentioned earlier, with the business so that they can run it more like an executive might and get out of the knife fight, so to speak, that often is how this can feel for a lot of folks, even for pretty large businesses. It can just feel like you’re a firefighter, you’re in a knife fight, whatever you want to use for that terminology. I think it’s as much about creating a different life outcome and different relationship and owning and leading a business as it is in driving deal value. Jason Diamond: Taylor, maybe I’ll ask this of you. Forgive the question, but private equity, I think in our space, has a little bit of a negative stigma at the moment. I don’t think that’s true across the board. I think people appreciate generally the need for capital and there are certainly benefits of private equity. But I’ll say as a whole, advisors are, let’s say, suspicious of private equity. You ever get that pushback? Does anybody ever view your experience or the way you position the story as a negative? Taylor Gentry: I think most people that we talk to don’t know what private equity is. They may have seen it in the headlines. They may have some sort of connotation around it. They won’t come out and say that they don’t like it. They don’t know why they don’t like it. The average American business owner, they don’t know what it is or what it means. So yes, you do have to fight that because of the headline piece around private equity, bad actor ABC, and that’s what gets the headlines. I think what private equity is really good at is taking a business that is not optimized or not running on systems and processes that it can run on. Again, it's not rocket science is not crazy hard. It’s just the private equity world has created ways to install systems and process that improve the value of the business by way of providing visibility to financials and operations in a way that the owner previously didn’t have. And so for us, we view it not by any means as the end all be all or the answer. There are clients we’ve worked with that have taken private equity capital and grown successfully, executed on some acquisitions and then exited again. There are clients that have evaluated those transactions and said, “Hey, not for me.” We are actually fairly agnostic to it. What we really spend a lot of our time on is what are we solving for? What’s the end game? How do we use this private equity transaction to get to where we’re trying to go and is it what we want at the end of the day? Because the reality is, if you’re going to stay on and run that business with private equity investment in, there’s a higher expectation on what you need to do Monday morning than when you owned it yourself and it was a little bit of your personal piggy bank too. Jason Diamond: I love it because you bring it back to the north star concept. Taylor Gentry: Yes, that’s exactly right. It’s what are we solving for and what game are we playing to be able to get to where we ultimately want to go? And for, as Nick mentioned that client that turned down the deal, it was a private equity investment. We got very clear with that, “Hey, here are going to be the expectations. You will have a monthly financial reporting call. You’re going to have quarterly board meetings.” These are things that need to happen in this business to be able to upgrade the management and cadence in this company. You don’t have to do it all tomorrow, but that is how you make a more valuable company, is installing some of these systems, process and cadence. And so we’re working with him now on doing that, just in a private context instead of in the private equity backed environment. Nick Hubert: I think there are three things embedded in this. I’d say number one, to Taylor’s point, this is a massive black box, in some ways by design. Wall Street’s had not a great reputation for a very long time of putting things behind the paywall, so to speak. And so we think a lot about our job as empowerment and education. Jason Diamond: Education, yep. Nick Hubert: Yeah. And so part of it is just, number one, how do we just demystify this thing and name things and take away the go to or bad? Because it can be that, but it should not be that from a core basis. That’s number one. Number two, a lot of entrepreneurs feel like they cannot get access to this ability to professionalize or level up or whatever these things are without bringing on that investment partner. And so part of our motivation is how do we actually bring this skillset in without needing to bring on an investment partner because oftentimes, that investment partner comes when you’re done, and so you don’t actually get to experience it. That’s number two. Number three is, Jason, part of your point earlier was like there’s still a trap here of potentially being able to get motivated primarily by the exit. And so again, that gets back to our business model, making sure our price Racing is right, all that good stuff. And it’s also the reality that a lot of businesses, if you just look at a very broad scope of American businesses, a lot of them don’t have value in the marketplace in a massively material way and/or won’t exit in a traditional way. And so the wealth creation journey then becomes much more of a conversation of, how do we manage the balance between investing in the company and distributing out of the company to invest elsewhere because we should actually be creating investment assets along the way because when you get to the exit, there’s no better power position at the moment of exit than already having financial security to some degree and giving you choice in the right deal, not the highest and best deal because you need to fill the piggy bank for retirement. Jason Diamond: I just want to be sure to ask because you did mention a couple times your pricing structure. How have you set it up so that you can be more agnostic about this as opposed to the typical… You want to talk about it for a minute? Nick Hubert: As it’s structured now, it starts with a retainer earlier on where we are working… As Taylor mentioned, we are going deep in the operational build of the business. We will do that on a monthly retainer. We’re engaging consistently. As assets get built up and if assets get built up, we start to chew that retainer down as assets go up. I think what we are ideally trying to figure out, and still honestly have not figured out yet, is how do we get to parity so that we don’t create an… I want to be able to work agnostically with a client to say- Jason Diamond: Yeah, I love it. Nick Hubert: … regardless of how I’m engaging with you, that’s the goal. So I’d say we haven’t cracked the code on exactly what that is yet, but mechanically, we’ve got the levers to pull to say how we price and move that retainer down is basically allowing to keep it at par, so to speak, for the client and allowing us to say, “I’m here to engage in making the best wealth creation outcome for you along the way, whether that’s investing in the business or investing outside the business.” Jason Diamond: I think that’s the right recipe. I agree. The levers can be fine-tuned, but to me, that’s the model you want to create where you can credibly look your prospects and clients in the eyes and tell them, “Our job is to serve you in the best way… We’re sitting on the same side of the table as you.” I want to turn this inward for a second. The home cooking concept. M&A, within the RIA independent space, is obviously a hot topic. Have you thought about it? Do you think it’s a critical part of a potential growth trajectory of a healthy, independent firm? I’m curious your perspective. I feel you, Taylor in particular, probably have a unique lens on this coming from the world you came from. Taylor Gentry: Yeah, Jason, I think if Nick and I wanted to put as much money as we possibly could in our pockets as fast as humanly possible. It’s a pretty easy recipe. It’s go get some private equity capital backer, roll up a few RIAs, get to a few billion of AUM and then sell it to the next private equity firm or roll it to the next private equity firm, do that a few times. We’d all make plenty of money and go on our way. We’ve been really intentional on this front, and again, I talk about this is what we want to do for the next 30 plus years. And really being intentional around building a business that has that enduring nature to it, decided to take private equity capital on, you are on a shot clock to some degree. Yes, you’re trying to build a best business, all of those pieces. You get cadence. You get capital. There’s a ton of value there, but you are on a shot clock that is not a shot clock we’re trying to get on at this stage. I’d say we opportunistically are looking at acquisitions. So we think about it, and Nick and I talk about it all the time, how much of our time should we be spending on acquisitions? And we think of it as 80/20 or even 90/10, 80% or 90% organic growth-focused, 10 to 20% acquisitions-focused. And so we’re actively evaluating those consistently and see deals on a monthly basis that we look at and evaluate, but it’s less of the focus today than it could be down the road. Jason Diamond: And Nick, do you think of that when you guys talk? Do you guys call that your true north? Do you think the same way you coach your clients and prospects to say, “For right now, it wouldn’t be the right move for us to take private equity capital and to do this acquisition rollup strategy because A, B and C are more important for us”? Nick Hubert: Yes. I think if we take our life north star for Taylor. I’m speaking for Taylor, but we’re close and so we share this of… To Taylor’s point, the life outcome of scaling that quickly with that type of capital backing is likely to create a life that I don’t actually want that’s not good for me, not good for my family, and honestly, not good for our clients at this point. And so that overrides in this case, even though the wealth, north star might say, “Hey, absolutely do that.” At some point something has to win. And so that is true. At the business side, as the north star is motivated by this mission of the entire entrepreneur journey, the worst thing I could do is shortcut my ability to be on that journey for a long period of time. One of our friends in this space says, “The best thing I can do for my clients is still be in the seat 30 years from now because I’ve lived a good life that enables that.” And I think that’s spot on for us, is everything, it’s so easy in today’s world to be consumed by short-termism and we are intentional in ensuring that we don’t succumb to that. While still recognizing to your point, I mean, you’re in this all day, Jason, right? There’s a massive opportunity in front of us to be thoughtful about how acquisitions fit into this. And I think we want to be open to that in a way that ensures we just don’t lose the core of the goodness of what we’re trying to build. Jason Diamond: I think that’s the right answer. The only wrong answer in my mind is we’re not open to this or we’re closed to it. To not at least be opportunistically aware of the dynamics in the market, I think is naive. But also, I’ll be honest, Nick, when I think about the concept of the north star, I have a hard time imagining, because we use a similar concept when we counsel advisors. What is your true north or your north star and your best business life, whatever you want to call it? To me, it does include absolutely the personal piece. I think it’s hard to define it only on the economic verticals because, I mean, I think about this for a transitioning advisor. Almost never is the conversation about crunch the spreadsheet and get us the biggest check possible. It’s, yeah, sure, transition capital is important, but it’s let’s also, we want a better work life and we want freedom to market and blah, blah, blah. To me, I think it’s a completely fair way. You two are looking at it at least for now and I assume you reserve the right to revise that opinion down the line. Nick Hubert: I think acquiring for size and scale is as often the headline is, yeah, we’re not into that at this point because I think… And yet, hey, if the right acquisition with the right people came along in that, we’d be extremely excited and would move very quickly to execute on that. So it’s a little bit of a both hand. Taylor Gentry: Yeah. Jason, I think it goes without saying, but my background on having done a bunch of transactions of businesses like this, it’s a natural fit for us to have this as a lever. And so we are looking at deals. We just haven’t prioritized it as the top priority. Jason Diamond: I think also where you are, 2024 was the launch of the business. It’s pretty common to see, all right, let’s nail this, let’s get our feet under us, client service model and then we’ll start to think about that down the line. A couple other things I want to ask you about running an independent firm. This is a pretty glowingly positive review, I think, of your ability to service clients, your ability to grow and to build and run the business that you want. Has there been anything negative that you haven’t enjoyed about running and operating this business, other than working with each other, of course? Nick Hubert: No, I was going to say, I’m like, can we get Taylor off the call again? Taylor Gentry: Jason, maybe I’ll take a first cut at it. I think for both Nick and I, it’s just the administrative components of running an independent business that we don’t enjoy candidly. I don’t think many people would. That said, you come full circle and it is a pretty glowingly positive review of running an independent business because we get to run it in the way that we see fit. And oh, by the way, we use the same things that we use with our clients. So the value drivers we’ve talked about, we have a value drivers worksheet. We refresh it every six months. Nick, Andrew, and I get together every six months and we’re 18 months into this thing and we’ve already got this cadence and system to it, if you will. So I personally really enjoy the running the business piece of it from a macro perspective. Yeah, I’m responsible for running our fee billing and running the math on all that and getting that done, for example. Jason Diamond: I think that’s actually a very thoughtful answer. And I appreciate you saying I enjoy running… I feel the same way, by the way. There’s some elements of running a business that I think are immensely fun. I think it gets painted with this brush of, “Ugh, running the business is the hassle and I want to work in the business.” Agreed, nobody likes invoicing and accounts receivable for the most part, but Nick, what are your thoughts on this? Nick Hubert: Yeah, I think mine is different a little bit coming from a different background where it’s easier for me to sit with the rose-colored glasses of the joy of the freedom that we have in this model. At the same time, when I’m counseling folks who are talking with folks or mentoring folks, younger people who are thinking about, “Okay, I want to go start my own thing,” I’m like, “Hey, it’s like I’m the same way. I want to look in the mirror and think I’m the boss or I’m one of the bosses and we get to go build this.” Then the reality is, at the end of the day, if there was something that you didn’t want to do that had to get done and you didn’t do it, you got to look in the mirror and be like, “Well, you’re the boss, you didn’t do it.” It’s the both sides of the coin that I think a positive, negative cut is one way to look at that because it can feel that way sometimes. And the reality is every job has 20 to 30% of it that you just don’t enjoy doing, and that’s totally true. Jason Diamond: It’s why they call it work. That’s why they pay you. Nick Hubert: They’d be pretty quick to point out that I’m the one of the partnership group that they’re going to have to chase for a smaller administrative item because, yeah, I honestly, just similarly speaking, don’t enjoy that. I want to go talk to clients. I want to go focus on building what we’re building. In finance speaks, it is a higher beta to just the all encompassing realities of running a business that is really hard to underscore without being in the seat. And yeah, there’s definitely 20 to 30% of that I would love to wave a magic wand and say, I don’t have to do anymore. Jason Diamond: Yeah, I appreciate that. Nick Hubert: You can’t have one without the other. It’s both sides. Jason Diamond: I think it’s getting easier and I think it’s getting more offloadable and some of it probably gets more… In some ways, more offloadable as you scale, but then you get a new set of problems, probably two, because you’re dealing with bigger… It’s a never ending. I think most business owners would agree with that. And you said it well, you take the good with the bad and overwhelmingly, most people we speak with in the independent space feel as you do, which is, are there things I would prefer to offload or that I would prefer not to do? Of course, but that’s almost just the price you pay for the freedom and for doing all the things you want to do. Two more questions that I want to be sure to ask about where this has been a great episode. One is AI. Need to know your thoughts. Is this coming for our jobs? Do you think your firm is positioned to capture either asset flows or also just to leverage this technology and use it to serve clients better? Just give me your thoughts. Nick Hubert: I think, in some sense, it would be irresponsible as people this early in our entrepreneurial journey and thinking about how do we optimize what we do for clients to not be engaging with AI in some way, shape or form, at least in an evaluative posture. So we are actively, in a bunch of different ways, whether it’s buy it off the shelf or build it, continuing to find ways to think about, not only how do we drive efficiency, because there’s an obvious surface level dynamic of if I can save time and spend more time with clients, that is a go to thing objectively. And there’s this deeper dynamic of if it can amplify what… Actually, back to your prior question, if it can amplify what I’m best at and enjoy and reduce what I don’t enjoy, that’s a massive win. And I think we’re on the surface of seeing that. That’s the opportunity we are motivated by that and pursuing that. And at the same time, I would say an operational principle that really is important to us, and you can almost call it a north star within the business is client security can never be put at risk for the sake of our own growth, our own efficiency, or anything else. There’s, I think, still a question mark as to how we think about trusting this. And so we are very cautious as we think about we will never try to move so quickly on any technology, whether it’s AI or otherwise that we risk our clients in some way, shape or form, because the reality is we are also in a context where AI is, when pulled, one of the least popular things happening in the world today for the average American. And so there’s no kudos here for being a leader. Jason Diamond: I totally agree. The first mover advantage here is slim to none. Nick Hubert: Yeah, you don’t want to be the one sticking your neck out on this in our industry. And yet there still objectively has a potential to be better for the clients. Navigating that I think is messy. Taylor Gentry: I think the only thing I’d add, which is pretty short, is the use of these tools has the ability to create a better deliverable for clients on a more consistent basis. And marrying that with exactly what Nick just outlined around the risk is really the magic piece here. And so I think, to the extent we can get it implemented effectively with the security, but also with, this is going to result in a lot better outcome for clients across the board, that’s a pretty attractive objective to go after and it’s pretty exciting to be in the industry with that now on the forefront in terms of ability to improve that experience over time. Jason Diamond: Yeah. No, that’s a good color to add. I want to end here with a potential HR violation, but you’ll forgive me. I’m not going to ask about age, but you are clearly both relatively young advisors. And this is a hot button issue in our industry, the idea that there are not a lot of talented, young next gen advisors at a time when a lot of gen one or older advisors are retiring out of the business. So what would you say… I think one of you made the comment earlier, it’s not necessarily the coolest industry to go into at 23 years old right out of school. I think more commonly people go into sales and trading, investment banking or some of the other finance verticals. What would you say to younger folks interested in wealth? And maybe I’d ask also, do you have any thoughts on how we solve this next gen talent crisis? And if you’re both secretly 90 years old, you can just do it. Taylor Gentry: You talking my internal age or my actual age? Jason Diamond: Why don’t you go first? Nick Hubert: Yeah, go ahead, Taylor. Taylor Gentry: I think there’s two threads here. The first is it’s not a sexy industry to go into and not as sexy as an investment banking, private equity shtick, if you will. I think from my perspective, it’s really important what you’re working on. The ability to be in a firm like what we are building with the diversity of work that is available is a little bit like the world’s your oyster and we’re designing it with that in mind. For Nick and I, the ability to work on many different situations throughout the day and throughout the week is actually why this business is so attractive and interesting and why we want to do it for 30 years. And so we’re building with that context. And so, in some ways, it’s almost like a plug for younger advisors, the ability to work in a firm like what we’re building where you’ve got this diversity of work that is not just trading stocks and bonds or just spreadsheeting or just financial planning. This is a much broader expression and experience than what I would call “traditional” wealth management. So I think that’s the key on that front. Then, on the talent development side of the equation, if you will, this AI thing is going to be a big question mark. And what I mean by that is there is significant training that will be required in, call it traditional wealth management or the firm we’re building with regard to folks’ ability to actually learn when you can plug it into AI and get an answer that you don’t have to critically question or think through. And so there’s going to be a significant learning curve for folks that we’re going to have to continue to train and educate on in order to produce talent that can be long-term sustainable and beneficial for clients more writ large. Jason Diamond: Nick. Nick Hubert: Well, first and foremost, we haven’t given our third partner enough here of time. I think we have a tremendous benefit of having a multi-generational team at the partnership level where he’s in his mid to late 50s and can bring that additional experience to bear and as is necessary, and as is important because investing is an experienced business and a lot of clients want that. And so the power of that matters. I think that actually speaks to firms being willing to think of partnership at that level that partnership is not reserved for just once you’ve been there for a long time. So I think it’s getting at like, how do you share ownership earlier, do it in a way that is actually giving people a stake in the outcome and allowing that elevation to happen. I think that’s number one. Number two, honestly, the existence of people like you and your team and that your family has built over the years, Jason, is awesome. And because of the ability for you to help people navigate and see how easy it is to actually run this business and build this business in some sense… And that’s in the broader spectrum of having seen. We work with so many different types of companies. We sometimes say our business is so much easier to run and it has come so far with technology and with people like you who are providers to us to allow it to be easier for us so to speak. That’s a big deal. I think that should be talked about more that there is a massive… What that allows is more time to, as Taylor mentioned, build what you actually want because you can outsource the compliance piece in a major way that allows you to not spend as much time on that as you used to. So I don’t think that gets talked about enough. And I think if you just zoom out and view this in the perspective of post-2020, there was this massive movement of entrepreneurship through acquisitions and people looking at this idea of how do I get the life I want by way of not having to be on a two-year clock to go to the next job to the next job. Have something that I can have a long-term impact on where I get to build something and have employees. This is the perfect space for that because it’s such an awesome business where you get to work so intimately with people and clients and their life outcomes. They’re, again, relatively speaking, easier businesses to run relative to what’s out there. I’m just baffled by the fact that it is not seen a larger wave of younger people coming out of these more “traditional” paths and seeing this as an awesome place when they’re willing to go buy an HVAC company. This is so much easier than that. So honestly, I think

In this episode, we sit down with Eric Wagner '96 Lib and Eric Vishnevetsky '15 Bus to explore their career journeys in wealth management, leadership, and the power of building meaningful relationships.Eric Wagner, a Managing Director at UBS Private Wealth Management and co-founder of PWJ, has helped build one of New York City's premier wealth management teams while bringing together his background in finance and law to serve clients and lead with a people-first approach. Eric Vishnevetsky has spent his career at UBS, growing from the firm's Graduate Talent Program into a senior role with The Wagner Abrams Group, where he focuses on next-generation client initiatives, financial planning, and team strategy.Together, they share insights from their professional paths, discuss the importance of mentorship and lifelong learning, and reflect on how their Penn State experiences continue to shape their careers and connections.For more alumni stories, visit pennstatermag.com

In this episode, Joseph speaks with Mark Haefele, Chief Investment Officer at UBS, about what truly separates lasting wealth from wealth that gets eroded, across investing, family dynamics, and generational planning. They explore why inheritance planning can be the hardest financial puzzle wealthy families face, how billionaires think about keeping families aligned, and what happens when emotions, identity, and "behavioral noise" run the portfolio instead of a clear plan. Chapters: 0:00 The biggest mistake wealthy investors make 1:37 What are the world's wealthiest people most worried about right now? 2:44 Personal habits of billionaire families 4:24 What asset class are wealthy families increasing exposure to? 5:03 The 'Godfather' approach to inheritance 7:21 Succession TV show in real life 9:08 Why do some families retain wealth, and others lose it all? 10:28 The billionaire asset allocation template 12:06 What long term risk are markets underpricing? 13:11 An unstable decade for investors 14:08 UHNWI's view of private markets 16:40 Investing sophistication of UHNWI's 18:10 UHNWI appetite for private credit 19:15 Preferred asset classes of the wealthiest people in the world 20:12 The importance of credit ratings 21:09 Has working with billionaires changed Mark? 22:15 Mark's #1 tip for young people to build wealth today

For thirty years, healthcare has met every new technology with the same four words, we've seen this before. Most of the time the doubt loses. The internet was called a fad, and by 2009 a majority of US adults were looking up health information online, up from a quarter in 2000. So the reflex is earned. This episode asks the harder question, whether being right about the internet tells you anything at all about AI. Chris Boyer and Reed Smith open with why the reflex is so strong. The 1999 objections to the web read almost word for word like the 2024 objections to AI. Patients won't trust it. It makes mistakes. It can't replace the clinician. Pew found 60% of US adults uncomfortable with a provider relying on AI for their own care, which rhymes with the discomfort that greeted the web. There is even a formal model for the pattern, the Gartner Hype Cycle, though its own critics point out the curve has no data behind it. In the second segment they find where the analogy breaks. The web reached a majority of adults over roughly a decade. ChatGPT reached 100 million users in about two months, the fastest ramp UBS had seen in twenty years. The web moved information you could still judge by its source. A large language model makes the answer in the moment, with no source to check, in the same confident tone whether it's right or wrong. Chris and Reed hand you one question to run in a meeting, does the thing that made the old case turn out fine actually show up here, and one way to sort your AI uses by how much a wrong answer costs. Then the conversation turns to two people who have hosted the room where healthcare argues about this since 1996. Kathy Divis and Mike Schneider of Greystone.Net mark the 30th anniversary of HCIC. They trace digital from a small side function to something so central that a keynote once argued digital marketing was dead, meaning it had stopped needing its own name. Mike makes the point plainly, the technology changes and the questions stay the same, from the internet to CRM to AI. And they share what surfaced across this year's conference proposals, a return to trust and authority as the theme running through the whole organization. In this episode, Chris, Reed and the guests cover: Why we've seen this before is both earned pattern recognition and a way to stop thinking Where the AI story tracks the internet and where it breaks, on speed and on the difference between moving information and making it The one question that separates a real analogy from a comforting one How 30 years of HCIC read the same skepticism across the internet, CRM and AI What it means when a technology stops needing its own name, and why invisible was the goal for the web and the risk for AI Why trust and authority came back as the theme in this year's proposals If someone in your next meeting says we've seen this before, this episode is about the follow-up question that tells you whether they just said something wise or talked the room out of thinking. touchpoint.health Mentions from the Show: Pew Research Center, The Social Life of Health Information, 2009 (25% of adults online for health info in 2000, 61% by 2009): https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2009/06/11/the-social-life-of-health-information/ Pew Research Center, 60% of Americans Would Be Uncomfortable With a Provider Relying on AI in Their Own Health Care, 2023: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/02/22/60-of-americans-would-be-uncomfortable-with-provider-relying-on-ai-in-their-own-health-care/ Gartner, Hype Cycle Research Methodology: https://www.gartner.com/en/research/methodologies/gartner-hype-cycle Reuters, ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base, 2023 (100M users in about two months): https://finance.yahoo.com/news/1-chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-051929384.html BMJ Open, 2026 chatbot health-information audit (nearly half of answers problematic). CONFIRM primary link and figures before publish. Medical Hallucination in Foundation Models, medRxiv, 2025 (overconfidence and poor calibration): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.02.28.25323115v1.full HCIC (Healthcare Interactive Conference), 30th anniversary, produced by Greystone: https://www.hcic.net/ Live  Kathy Divis, president, Greystone. https://www.linkedin.com/in/kathyldivis/   Mike Schneider, Greystone. https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelschneider-greystone/  Reed Smith on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/reedtsmith/ Chris Boyer on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisboyer/ Chris Boyer website: http://www.christopherboyer.com/ Chris Boyer on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/chrisboyer.bsky.social Reed Smith on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/reedsmith.bsky.social Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us Fan MailWhat happens when a corporation decides to sacrifice an individual to save its own skin? This episode of Employee Survival Guide® dives deep into the gripping legal saga of Tom Hayes, the former UBS trader who found himself at the center of a scandal that rocked the financial world. After serving five years in prison for allegedly manipulating LIBOR rates, Hayes is now fighting back, suing UBS for malicious prosecution. He argues that the banking giant scapegoated him to deflect blame and protect its executives, raising critical questions about corporate accountability and the ethics of self-preservation. Join Mark Carey and his co-host as they unravel the complexities of Hayes' case, including the controversial corporate investigation known as 'Project Chocolate' that seemingly targeted him. This episode is not just about one man's fight against a powerful institution; it's a broader exploration of employee rights, corporate governance, and the lengths to which companies will go to maintain their reputations. How do corporate interests intertwine with individual rights in the workplace? What does this mean for employees navigating the tumultuous waters of employment law? Throughout the discussion, the duo examines the legal strategies employed by both Tom Hayes and UBS, scrutinizing the evidence, affidavits, and the broader implications of outsourcing criminal investigations to corporations. This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in workplace culture, employee advocacy, and understanding the rights of employees in a system that often favors corporate power. As we dissect the ramifications of this case, we invite you to reflect on your own experiences in the workforce. Are you equipped with the knowledge to negotiate severance, understand employment contracts, or advocate for yourself in a hostile work environment? With insights into workplace discrimination, retaliation claims, and the importance of employee empowerment, this episode serves as a vital resource for navigating employment disputes and ensuring fair treatment in the workplace. Don't miss this eye-opening discussion that not only sheds light on Tom Hayes' battle but also equips you with essential tools for survival in today's complex work landscape. Tune in to the Employee Survival Guide® and become an informed advocate for your rights!  If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, X and LinkedIn.  We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Leaving a review will help other employees find the Employee Survival Guide.  For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer:  For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice. 

While diversification remains a priority, economic fundamentals are once again taking precedence in investment decisions as central banks navigate a more fragmented global landscape. Max Castelli, head of strategy for sovereign institutions, and Philipp Salman, director of strategy for sovereign institutions at UBS Asset Management, join Yara Aziz, senior economist at OMFIF, to unpack the main takeaways from UBS' 32nd Reserve Management Seminar. They discuss why economic fundamentals are returning to the centre of reserve management, what geopolitics means for investors, and how central banks are thinking about diversification, the dollar and gold.

Olivia Fox Cabane reveals the behaviors and practices that help develop your personal charisma.— YOU'LL LEARN — 1) The number one myth surrounding charisma 2) How to amplify your presence in just a few seconds3) The master key to looking and feeling more powerfulSubscribe or visit AwesomeAtYourJob.com/ep1167 for clickable versions of the links below. — ABOUT IAN — Olivia Fox Cabane is a leading authority on the science of charisma and the bestselling author of The Charisma Myth and The Net And The Butterfly, translated into 36 languages. Formerly Director of Innovative Leadership for Stanford StartX, she has lectured on charisma, leadership, and innovation at Harvard, Yale, MIT, the Marine War College, and the United Nations. As cofounder of the KindEarth.Tech Foundation, she supports foodtech companies advancing environmental sustainability. Her clients include the leadership of Apple, Google, TikTok, Deloitte, UBS, and JP Morgan as well as founders of Airbnb, Brex, Paradigm, and Presight. She has been featured in The New York Times, The Economist, and The Wall Street Journal. • Book: The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism• Meditation: The Charisma Myth Exercises: Metta• Website: AskOlivia.com— RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THE SHOW — • Study: “Case Report: Women, Be Aware that Your Vocal Charisma can Dwindle in Remote Meetings” by Ingo Siegert and Oliver Niebuhr• Study: “Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes” by Jane M. Howell and Peter J. Frost• Study: “Predictors of leadership: The usual suspects and the suspect traits” by John Antonakis• Researcher: Dr. Oliver Niebuhr• Microphone: Maono HD300T• YouTube: Podcastage• Book: Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini• Book: Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life With the Heart of a Buddha by Tara Brach— THANK YOU SPONSORS! — • Shopify. Sign up for your free trial at Shopify.com/awesomepod• Monarch. Get 50% off your first year with code AWESOME at Monarch.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Investors weigh results from Netflix, Alcoa and Intuitive Surgical. Andrew Goldberg, Chief Global Strategist at Nomura Asset Management, explains how investors should position as earnings season gathers momentum. Evercore's Mark Mahaney analyzes Netflix's results and what they signal for growth, advertising and the broader media landscape. Our Annika Kim Constantino reports on Eli Lilly's move into psychedelics while Michael Yee of UBS discusses the latest wave of biotech M&A and where deal activity could accelerate next. Plus, a look at South Korea's move to ban new single-stock leveraged ETFs and growing short interest in SpaceX as investors debate whether early holders are hedging ahead of future share sales. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Information's TITV is on the ground at UBS' Private AI, Software and Internet Conference in Menlo Park. TITV Host Akash Pasricha has exclusive access to UBS leaders asking about the future of AI and SaaS.Kicking it off, UBS' Chief AI Officer Daniele Magazzeni talks with TITV Host Akash Pasricha about the enterprise AI playbook. He also talks with UBS Research Analyst, AI and Software, Karl Keirstead about the SaaS stock reckoning and Locus Robotics CFO Dustin Pederson about bottlenecks in frontier robotics. Lastly, we get into the $60B SpaceX-Cursor acquisition with our reporters Rocket Drew and Grace Kay.Articles discussed on this episode: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/cursor-reinventing-spacex-deal-loomshttps://www.theinformation.com/articles/startups-try-new-cloud-companies-aws-faces-heavy-demandSubscribe: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theinformation The Information: https://www.theinformation.com/subscribe_hSign up for the AI Agenda newsletter: https://www.theinformation.com/features/ai-agendaTITV airs weekdays on YouTube, X and LinkedIn at 10AM PT / 1PM ET. Or check us out wherever you get your podcasts.Follow us:X: https://x.com/theinformationIG: https://www.instagram.com/theinformation/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@titv.theinformationLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/theinformation/Chapters:00:00 - Introduction01:45 - DeepSeek's IPO Plans & Stripe's $53B PayPal Bid02:15 - Inside SpaceX's $60B Cursor Acquisition08:23 - Startups Bypass AWS for Nvidia GPUs15:02 - UBS Chief AI Officer on Enterprise AI Playbook24:34 - SaaS Stock Reckoning: The App Layer vs. Infra42:39 - Locus Robotics CFO on Physical AI & Warehouse Bots52:02 - Closing & Show Wrap-up

In this episode of the fAQ Podcast, Tai-Danae Bradley sits down with Luca Ferrara, the General Manager for the AQNav team at SandboxAQ, to discuss his inspiring career trajectory, which began with a childhood in Orlando, Florida, and an early interest for the sciences. After experiencing some academic burnout in high school, he pivoted to speech and debate, eventually studying international relations and economics at Boston College. We discuss his journey from the trading floor at UBS to earning his MBA at the University of Chicago, and how a 20% project at Google led him to the cutting edge of quantum technology.We also discuss the world of magnetic navigation, where Luca explains how GPS systems are increasingly vulnerable to jamming and spoofing, and how his team is building resilient infrastructure by using highly sensitive quantum sensors to navigate using the Earth's magnetic field. Tune in to hear Luca's insights on filtering out extreme electromagnetic noise on an aircraft, his advice on seizing high-leverage career opportunities, and why he dreams of touring the world's remote islands on a mega yacht.LinksLearn more about SandboxAQ's AQNav team here: https://www.sandboxaq.com/solutions/aqnav Connect with Luca on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luca-andrea-ferrara-83a03b38/ About this podcastThis podcast is hosted by Tai-Danae Bradley and features the stories of amazing people working in science and technology at SandboxAQ and beyond. All curious humans are invited to join!Want to get in touch? Write us at faq-podcast@sandboxaq.comFor previous episodes, check out https://www.youtube.com/@sandboxaq

Swift, het wereldwijde betaalnetwerk voor banken, zet een nieuwe stap. Het bedrijf gaat met zeventien grootbanken op zes continenten testen met een op blockchain gebaseerd grootboek, dat 24/7 grensoverschrijdende betalingen mogelijk moet maken. Banken als HSBC, Citi, UBS, BNP Paribas en Wells Fargo bereiden zich voor op live transacties met getokeniseerde deposito's, digitale versies van bankgeld die op de eigen grootboeken van de banken worden uitgegeven. Het systeem is negen maanden geleden aangekondigd en moet klanten in staat stellen geld te verplaatsen buiten kantooruren om, ook in het weekend, voordat de definitieve afwikkeling via de bestaande betalingssystemen plaatsvindt. Het nieuwe grootboek van Swift maakt daarbij geen gebruik van een publieke blockchain of een cryptomunt, en werkt dus met eigen bankgeld in plaats van stablecoins. Dat roept vragen op over de toekomst van partijen als Ripple, dat met XRP al jaren claimt sneller en goedkoper grensoverschrijdende betalingen te kunnen afhandelen. Verschillende deelnemende banken hebben ook banden met Ripple's netwerk, dus een rol voor XRP is niet meteen uitgesloten. De stap van Swift laat vooral zien dat grootbanken liever zelf de regie houden over hun digitale infrastructuur dan afhankelijk te zijn van externe partijen. Decentralisatie, vaak het uitgangspunt van crypto, is bij dit initiatief ver te zoeken. Terwijl banken zich buigen over hun eigen betaalinfrastructuur, blijft de koers van bitcoin voorlopig zijn eigen weg volgen. Analist Bert Slagter van kennisplatform Bitcoin Alpha bespreekt hoe de koers de afgelopen week, op twee schokken na, redelijk stabiel bleef, terwijl de zoektocht naar de bodem voortduurt. Het oplaaiende conflict tussen de Verenigde Staten en Iran zorgt voor meer onzekerheid op de markten en een stijgende olieprijs, met gevolgen voor bitcoin. En er is nieuws over de Amerikaanse Clarity Act. Door het zomerreces van het Amerikaanse congres begint de tijd te dringen voor het aannemen van de wet in 2026. Bovendien komen de tussentijdse verkiezingen dichterbij. Komt de Clarity Act er überhaupt nog wel? Co-host is Mauro Halve, voorzitter van branchevereniging VBNL. Over de podcast Cryptocurrency are here to stay. In deze wekelijkse podcast gidst Daniël Mol je door het belangrijkste cryptonieuws, langs hypes en trends, voor- en tegenstanders en winst en verlies. In het A-deel bespreken we het laatste nieuws en in het B-deel gaan we in gesprek met een gast. Van cypherpunkpioneers tot grootbanken die aan de haal gaan met stablecoins, van Bitcoin tot Ethereum tot CBDC's. Alles passeert de revue.Reageren? Stuur dan een mail naar cryptocast@bnr.nl Gasten Mauro Halve is voorzitter bij de branchevereniging voor cryptodienstverleners VBNL. Bert Slagter is analist bij kennisplatform Bitcoin Alpha. Links Persbericht van Swift over de lancering van het nieuwe blockchainsysteem met 17 banken Coindesk over hoe Swift met 17 banken 24/7 bankieren mogelijk wil maken CCN over de mogelijke gevolgen van Swifts nieuwe grootboek voor Ripple Host Daniël Mol is presentator en redacteur van de Cryptocast. Hij is sinds 2017 met Bitcoin bezig en kwam in 2021 bij het team van de Cryptocast. Redactie Daniël Mol Matthijs Damsteeg See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

UBS marked the US semiquincentennial with a series of reports exploring 250 years of uniquely American innovation. This week, we ask: can the system that has supported US progress continue to hold?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Story of the Week (DR):Social Media's 'Big Tobacco Moment': Meta Faces $1.4 Trillion Fine for Allegedly Fueling Teen Suicide and AddictionMeta is being sued by 33 US states, led by California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey.12 blue/12 red/9 purpleThe states allege that Meta deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to be addictive to children and teens, fueling a youth mental health crisis (including anxiety, depression, self-harm, and suicide).They also accuse Meta of violating child privacy laws by collecting data from children under 13 without parental consent.Meta warned a federal court that it could face up to $1.4T in penalties if the states prevail at the upcoming trial (set for August 18, 2026). Meta extrapolated this massive figure—which is roughly equivalent to the company's entire stock market value—based on the methodology proposed by the lead states for calculating damages.Meta calls the penalty "outlandish" and "unsubstantiated," arguing it has no precedent in consumer protection history: 'A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement.' The company accuses the states of improperly multiplying penalties (e.g., stacking fines based on daily usage time). Meta denies the allegations, asserting its platforms have extensive safety tools and that the claims are unmoored from actual unfair practices.‘I Don't Think I'm Ever Going to Stop,' Says Mark Zuckerberg. Even With 'Infinite Money,' He Has No Plans to Retreat to His Massive Hawaii EstateMeta found to breach EU laws with 'addictive' Instagram, Facebook designsInstagram and Facebook's “addictive” designs have put Meta in breach of the European Union's digital laws, the EU concluded Friday in a preliminary report.The tech giant violated the EU's Digital Services Act by failing to adequately consider the risks associated with design features that affected the physical well-being of its users, including minors and vulnerable adults, the European Commission said.These features include infinite scroll, which constantly shows fresh content, autoplay, push notifications and highly personalized recommendation systems — feeding users' compulsion to continue using platforms and putting them into “autopilot mode.”The EU Commission also accused Meta of ignoring available information about how much time young people are spending on Instagram or Facebook at night, and how different types of content formats, from reels to stories, could lead to excessive use of its services.Meta said, “We disagree with these preliminary findings.”New Zealand Moves To Ban Climate Change Litigation. Will The U.S. Follow?New Zealand has proposed a bill to limit the ability of individuals to sue high greenhouse gas emitters over the impacts of climate change, relying instead on the enforcement measures taken by the government. The bill appears poised to pass.The women who wouldn't let climate data disappear MMAfter losing their jobs at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Rebecca Lindsey, her sister Mary and colleague Anna Eshelman teamed up to rebuild a pivotal resource the Trump administration took offlineRebecca Lindsey, a technical writer for NASA–one of 280,000 federal workers fired by Musk/Trump, joined forces with former NOAA employees Anna Eshelman, and Mary Lindsey, her older sister, to become the core team behind the deactivated site's successor, Climate.us, preserving over 15 years of key climate data and resources.Elon Musk says he always wanted his SpaceX employees to get rich — and now thousands of them are millionairesElon Musk's 'Chainsaw for Bureaucracy' Just Left an $11 Billion Budget Hole as Trump Rehires StaffThe trove features key maps, educational materials and climate indicator reports, including the now-deleted Fifth National Climate Assessment, the government's most comprehensive analysis of climate change that was at risk of being lost to the publicJersey Mike's $12 billion IPO filing reveals a $50 million payday for the founder's stepson and a $41 million jetFamily members of founder Peter Cancro were employed Jersey Mike's in various roles and received compensation in excess of $120,000 from the Company as follows for the years ended December 28, 2025 and December 31, 2024 and 2023:John Cancro, Mr. Cancro's brother, received total compensation of approximately $20,019,231, $519,231 and $500,000, respectively;Paul J. Cancro, Mr. Cancro's son, received total compensation of approximately $8,001, $216,022 and $208,023, respectively;Robert Cancro, Mr. Cancro's son, received total compensation of approximately $38,462, $1,038,462 and $1,000,000, respectively;Tatiana Cancro, Mr. Cancro's wife, received total compensation of approximately $11,538, $311,539 and $300,000, respectively;Caroline Jones, Mr. Cancro's daughter, received total compensation of approximately $38,462, $1,038,462 and $1,000,000, respectively;Alexandra Powers, Mr. Cancro's sister-in-law, received total compensation of approximately $0, $1,165,437 and $0;Daniel Powers, Mr. Cancro's brother-in-law, received total compensation of approximately $30,213,462, $1,793,952 and $0;John Tesauro Jr., Mr. Cancro's brother-in-law, received total compensation of approximately $0, $0 and $2,429,628, respectively;Phillip Sivolobov, Mr. Cancro's stepson, received total compensation of approximately $50,011,538, $311,539 and $276,923, respectively.GRAND TOTAL: $112MStepson Phillip got $51M, brother John got $21MOther Peter Cancro schwag in 2025:Got a $41 million jet and an additional fixed amount of $166,666.66 per month in light of the business expenses incurred by Mr. Cancro related to air transportation to travel from time to time for business purposes.Lease agreements valued at $1M in rent (leases go to 2030) Controlled company: Blackstone (will control more than 50% of voting power)Board: 8 directorsBlackstone:Chair Nigel Travis (also chair of Abercrombie & Fitch)David N. KestnbaumDevon L. RinkerMichael J. StaubFounder/former CEO/chair: Peter CancroCEO Charles R. MorrisonCheryl S. Miller, director on two controlled companies:Tyson FoodsOld Dominion Freight Line (Congdon brothers)Fran Horowitz, CEO of Abercrombie & Fitch (where chair serves as chair)Goodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: Amazon, Walmart and Other Large Employers Could Face New Costs As New Jersey Targets Companies With Medicaid Workers— Will Other States Follow?DR: UBS says rich people will be younger, female and openly queer thanks to the Great Wealth TransferMM: Meta Buried Research Linking Instagram To Teen Harm While Facing $1.4 Trillion Penalty That Could Erase Its Entire WorthMM: ESG!Madison Square Garden Kept a List of Gay CelebritiesAn internal Madison Square Garden database of VIPs labels Joe a “medium risk,” one of roughly 400 celebrities given a risk score.If you're a celebrity and you're marked with a risk score—even as a low risk—it means “you've done something in the publicity world, the social media world, that has caught the attention of the wrong people,” the source continues.The talent database also tracks some celebrities' race, gender identity, and sexual orientation; 93 entries are marked as “LGBTQIA.”MM: California vs. Elon Musk: Tesla Snubbed as New EV Incentives Boost Rivian, Lucid MM DRAssholiest of the Week (MM):Billionaire amplificationKen Griffin says everyone is misinterpreting the AI revolution — and wishes Zohran and Bernie would ‘read a damn history book for once'“[Capitalism is] the greatest success story in the history of humanity,” Griffin said, urging the self-identified socialist politicians, “whether it's Bernie Sanders, whether it's Mamdani,” to “read a damn history book for once and then tell us how to run our country.”Jeff Bezos 'Made All of Our Lives So Much Better,' Says Billionaire Investor Tim Draper"Amazon has made all of our lives so much better," Draper said.Draper said he has benefited from what Bezos has done, and that's a part of the world economy that isn't spoken about enough."Those geniuses who create this incredible world for us are benefiting all of us."40 Epstein-Tied Billionaires Have Injected $1.6B Into US Elections, Report FindsThese are the millionaires and billionaires pledging to fund Trump accountsZuckMeta AI Data Centre Contractor Triggers Biohazard Scare After Flushing Rare Bacterium Into Public SewersMeta Platforms To Build $9 Billion A.I. Data Centre In CanadaThe $145 Billion Lie? Zuckerberg's Leaked Town Hall Audio Exposes Massive AI Failures After Mass LayoffsMeta jumps into AI coding market in effort to chase Anthropic and OpenAIWhat person in their right mind would trust Zuckerberg with their coding?Hollywood Vs Zuckerberg: CAA Warns Meta's AI Image Tool Needs A Major Privacy Overhaul‘I Don't Think I'm Ever Going to Stop,' Says Mark Zuckerberg. Even With 'Infinite Money,' He Has No Plans to Retreat to His Massive Hawaii EstateJeff Sonnenfeld - DRIn defense of Musk, SpaceX, and dual class shares“the rigid formulas of proxy advisors create a perverse, socially destructive incentive: hoard your wealth like an oligarch to maintain your good governance rating, or give it away and risk losing your company”“The proxy advisors want a world governed by rigid mathematical formulas because auditing a checklist is easy. Evaluating human character, industry dynamics, track records of success and failure, and the capacity for visionary leadership is hard. But it is exactly that hard work of judgment which is vital. When it comes to dual-class shares, it is time for the critics to step out of the theoretical vacuum and look at the real-world scoreboards”Headliniest of the WeekDR: OpenAI Wants a $1 Trillion Valuation. But College Students Are Testing At The Level Of 10-Year-Olds AND Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered an in-person final; scores fell 50%MM: ‘Waymo Takes Revenge, Dropping Drunk Teens Directly Into Squad of CopsMM: West Virginia spent $3M to create university program to fight ‘woke ideology.' One student is enrolledWho Won the Week?DR: Free Float's new platformAnd blowhard Jeffrey Sonnenfeld for arguing that dualclass owners are necessary because the dualclass mechanism allows them to sell shares and maintain voting power so they can “cure diseases, endow universities, and combat poverty” MM: Free Float data: Elon Musk and the age of the corporate leviathanAbove a certain size the ordinary rules of governance apparently cease to apply.Of the 16 listed firms worth more than $1trn, seven are shareholder fundamentalists.None has an elaborate statement of corporate purpose, since they are mostly content making heaps of moneyFree Float says Nvidia, Amazon, Broadcom, Micron are all TOTALITARIANNext are the corporate paternalists, who believe that the problem with shareholder democracy is that its voters do not know what is best for them.Free Float says Berkshire, Google, Meta are all TOTALITARIANThe final clan presents the strongest argument against the end of corporate history: individual shareholders consent to hand over all of their rights to the world's richest man, who then governs as he sees fit.Free Float says SpaceX, Tesla are TOTALITARIANBasically, it's nice of the economist to recognize everything Free Float says every weekPredictionsDR: Jeff Sonnenfeld writes something on Fortune that triggers meMM: Jeff Sonnenfeld writes something on Fortune that triggers Damion

With James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist, Raise Your EI As AI makes expertise more accessible, what becomes an advisor's true advantage? EI expert James Woodfall explains why authentic human connection may be the one thing technology can't replicate. In Summary As artificial intelligence reshapes how information is delivered, financial advisors are being challenged to rethink what truly differentiates their value. Mindy Diamond sits down with James Woodfall, a former wealth management business owner turned emotional intelligence expert and founder of Raise Your EI, to explore why emotional intelligence may become one of the profession's greatest competitive advantages. Together, they discuss how rapport, curiosity, and authentic human connection influence trust, referrals, leadership, and client loyalty and why those skills can be developed just like technical expertise. The conversation also examines the difference between AI's “synthetic empathy” and the authentic relationships clients continue to value—and why that distinction matters to financial advisors now more than ever.   The Storyline For decades, advisors have built successful businesses by combining technical expertise with thoughtful financial guidance. But as AI makes information more accessible and planning tools more sophisticated, expertise alone is becoming less of a differentiator. James Woodfall believes the future belongs to advisors who master something technology cannot authentically replicate: human connection. Drawing on his experience as both a former wealth management firm owner and a specialist in communication and behavioral science, James explains why emotional intelligence isn't simply a “soft skill.” It's a business skill that affects nearly every aspect of an advisory practice—from building trust and earning referrals to leading teams and helping clients make difficult decisions. Mindy and James explore why asking better questions matters more than having better answers, how curiosity creates stronger relationships than scripts ever can, and why advisors who create memorable client experiences may find themselves even more valuable in an increasingly automated world. The conversation ultimately reframes AI not as a replacement for advisors, but as a catalyst forcing the profession to rediscover the uniquely human qualities clients have valued all along.   Topics Covered Emotional intelligence as a business skill Building trust through rapport and curiosity Authentic empathy vs. synthetic AI empathy The psychology behind client decision-making Why referrals are rooted in emotional outcomes Coaching advisors to improve communication Leadership and emotional intelligence AI's impact on advisor differentiation Creating premium client experiences Future-proofing advisory businesses > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why do better questions lead to better financial advice? (6:10) James explains why financial planning is only as good as the conversations that precede it—and why understanding a client's fears and aspirations leads to better outcomes than simply gathering financial facts. How does emotional intelligence translate into business growth? (15:30) Rapport isn't simply about making clients feel comfortable. James discusses why advisors who build trust quickly tend to earn more referrals and become significantly more referable. Can emotional intelligence actually be learned? (37:05) Contrary to popular belief, emotional intelligence isn't an innate personality trait. James explains why it is a trainable skill and how advisors can intentionally improve it throughout their careers. What makes authentic empathy different from AI? (39:10) One of the episode's most compelling discussions explores the difference between AI's ability to simulate empathy and the authentic emotional connection that develops between two people. Why should advisors think more about experience than efficiency? (45:10) Clients don't always pay more for information. Often, they pay more for confidence, judgment, reassurance, and the experience of working with someone they trust. Will AI replace advisors or elevate the best ones? (46:55) James shares why he believes AI is more likely to automate routine work while making relationship-centered advisors even more valuable. Key Takeaways Emotional intelligence is a measurable business capability—not simply a personality trait. Stronger client relationships begin with curiosity rather than advice. Advisors who solve emotional concerns make it easier for clients to recommend than advisors who simply deliver technical expertise. AI may replicate information, but authentic trust remains distinctly human. Premium advisory relationships will increasingly be defined by the experience clients receive—not just the answers they're given. Emotional intelligence improves leadership, client retention, referrals, and advisor well-being. The firms that embrace both technology and human connection will likely be best positioned for the future. https://youtu.be/xlQMQm6mqtc Quotable Moments “Rapport building is one of the foundational things for trust building.” “It's not real empathy. It's synthetic empathy.” “If all of our decisions were made on price, Ferrari wouldn't have a business.” “The advisors who create authentic human connection may be the ones who remain untouchable.” FAQs What is emotional intelligence, and why does it matter for financial advisors? James defines emotional intelligence as the ability to recognize, understand, and influence emotions in ourselves and others. For advisors, those skills strengthen communication, trust, leadership, and client relationships. Can emotional intelligence actually be developed? Yes. Unlike IQ, emotional intelligence can be improved through intentional practice, feedback, coaching, and greater self-awareness. Why do referrals have so much to do with emotional intelligence? Clients often remember and recommend how an advisor made them feel more than the technical work performed. Solving emotional concerns creates stories clients naturally share with others. What does James mean by “synthetic empathy”? AI can recognize language patterns and respond empathetically, but it doesn't genuinely experience human emotion. James argues that authentic empathy remains one of an advisor's greatest competitive advantages. How should advisors think about AI? Rather than viewing AI solely as a competitor, advisors should use it to improve efficiency while investing more time in conversations, judgment, and relationships that technology cannot fully replace. What is the biggest mindset shift advisors should make? Stop viewing emotional intelligence as a soft skill. Treat it as a business skill that directly influences growth, leadership, client loyalty, and long-term differentiation. James defines emotional intelligence as the ability to recognize, understand, and influence emotions in ourselves and others. For advisors, those skills strengthen communication, trust, leadership, and client relationships. Yes. Unlike IQ, emotional intelligence can be improved through intentional practice, feedback, coaching, and greater self-awareness. Clients often remember and recommend how an advisor made them feel more than the technical work performed. Solving emotional concerns creates stories clients naturally share with others. AI can recognize language patterns and respond empathetically, but it doesn't genuinely experience human emotion. James argues that authentic empathy remains one of an advisor's greatest competitive advantages. Rather than viewing AI solely as a competitor, advisors should use it to improve efficiency while investing more time in conversations, judgment, and relationships that technology cannot fully replace. Stop viewing emotional intelligence as a soft skill. Treat it as a business skill that directly influences growth, leadership, client loyalty, and long-term differentiation. Related Resources Why AI Matters Now: Filling the Estate Planning Gap with Wealth.com The Paradox of Choice Traps Successful Advisors Freedom vs. Familiarity: Is It Worth Disrupting Comfort for Something That Might Be Better? Guest Bio James Woodfall, founder of Raise Your EI, is a former financial planner who now advises financial services and firms on how they can leverage emotional intelligence (EI) to improve individual and organizational performance. He is the co-author, with Cliff Lansley, of “The Heart of Finance,” which teaches finance professionals to develop the emotional intelligence needed to build effective and profitable client relationships. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World A conversation with Mindy Diamond and James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist at Raise Your EI.      Mindy Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World. It’s a conversation with James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist from Raise Your EI. I’m Mindy Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. For years, advisors have competed on expertise, the ability to solve problems, deliver answers, and provide guidance clients couldn’t easily find on their own. But today, those answers are becoming easier to access via artificial intelligence and tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity. AI can generate planning ideas, summarize complex topics, and answer questions in seconds. As the technology continues to improve, it raises an important question. If information becomes increasingly commoditized, what will clients continue to value most? My guest today, James Woodfall, is the Founder of the training firm, Raise Your EI, and a former wealth management business owner. James now helps advisors, leaders, and organizations strengthen the communication and behavioral skills that drive trust, influence, and performance. Skills rooted in emotional intelligence or EI, something that AI cannot authentically replicate. What’s interesting about James’s perspective is that he doesn’t view emotional intelligence as a soft skill. He views it as a business skill, one that impacts how advisors build rapport, earn referrals, lead teams, deepen client relationships, and ultimately differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive marketplace that includes human and machine-driven advice. Our conversation explores why rapport is the foundation of trust, how emotional intelligence can be developed like any other professional skill, and why advisors who learn to create authentic human connection may be best positioned to thrive alongside AI, not compete against it. Or as James puts it, remain untouchable in the face of a changing world. Because while technology may continue to reshape how advice is delivered, the experience of being understood, trusted, and guided by another human being remains remarkably difficult to replicate. So, let’s get to it. James, thank you for joining me today, especially coming all the way from the UK. I’m grateful. James Woodfall: Thanks for having me on. Mindy Diamond: So, let’s start at the beginning. You’re a different kind of guest for us, and a topic that is near and dear to my heart because I’m always all about emotional intelligence and EQ, but it’s a topic that sometimes can feel a little squishy to some folks. So, tell us a little bit about your background and really how you got into the world of wealth management. James Woodfall: I got into wealth management probably was by accident while I was, I think about 19 years old. I got a job at a bank because I was living with different jobs and it was the first company that would take me. So I ended up working in a bank as a cashier in a branch. And then after a series of different career moves, I ended up running my own wealth management firm for about nine years, which I sold about three and a half years ago. Around the time that I was selling it, I did my first master’s degree in communication and behavior analysis, and that’s when I started taking a bit of a deep dive into understanding emotional intelligence and behavior and communication. But really, I started that journey before I sold my wealth management company, and really the goal was, how can I become a better financial advisor to my clients by having a better understanding of their psychology behavior around money so that I could communicate with them more effectively, help them build their plans? So I had a bit of a… like a lot of people I speak to in wealth management, they fell into it. Mindy Diamond: So, a lot to unpack there and I’m fascinated by your story. Tell us a little bit about how you began to use or leverage emotional intelligence. You say you got into it or were fascinated by it because it was a way of helping your clients. So, talk to us a little bit about that. How did you begin to see the impact long before you started this business? James Woodfall: So going back a couple of steps to that. When I started the business, it was very transactional. You’d sit down with the client, you find out about what sort of assets they have, what type of plans they have already, and you look for gaps where you can optimize things, or there was a product which they need which you didn’t have. But I moved away from that type of service to a financial planning led service. So, where actually before we get talking about, well, how do we structure your world? We spend a lot of time building a plan in cashflow modeling software. So the one that I used was over at a company called Voyant, and effectively I build a cashflow plan for the clients, which would map out based on assumptions of what age they would reach financial independence. And then that then would then move on to, how to we optimize your holdings? Now what occurred to me pretty quickly in offering that service is that the outputs from that type of exercise are only as good as the inputs. So you’re really relying on the client to be able to come up with the answers to the questions that you ask them to make the financial plan work. And in my experience, quite a lot of the time you sit down with these people and you ask them, “Imagine you’re retired, what does an ideal week look like for you?” So, what I realized is actually I was asking clients a lot of questions which no one had ever asked them before, such as, “If you go retire, imagine you’re retired tomorrow, what does your idea week look like?” Very rarely do we get asked that day-to-day, especially not from friends, family members, certainly. So I went off and actually did a diploma in coaching because I thought initially I want to become better at actually getting people to think about the future and think about plans. And in doing that, I ended up wanting to take a bit of a deeper dive into understanding behavior at a higher level. So that led me on to getting my masters. Impacts on clients though is that I became, and me as well, is that I became a far better listener first. So I listened first, I stopped making so many assumptions as I found I had about people. And really, I think that changed the dynamic in terms of me constant, I suppose, dictating to people about what they should be doing. So of course that’s what a good advisor does, isn’t it, is advice. You switch around into actually making sure you’ve got a deep understanding of people’s hopes, fears, goals, dreams, and then ultimately, you can help them better in terms of optimizing their financial plans and wealth. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. 100% of what you just said speaks to me in a big way, because that is 100% our philosophy. Most recruiters, I don’t mean it disparagingly, but most recruiters in general are pretty transactional. They see a hammer, they see a nail. So, a recruiter sees a financial advisor and he’s a means to an end to making a deal to a transaction. And our whole approach from day one was never about seeing you, financial advisor, as a transaction, but rather first and foremost, wanting to understand what’s important to you. And we get told all the time that we were asking questions that nobody ever asked them before. And I want to unpack it more, because I love what you’re saying. The goal as far as I see it is not just to ask a bunch of questions nobody asked before, but it’s to ask questions as a means to an end, to start out by asking questions that make somebody comfortable that tell them that you care about them. Then it’s about asking questions that they’ve never been asked before because the answers to a question like, “How do you see yourself behaving in retirement,” has everything to do with how much money they’ll need to retire. So, one informs the other. In our world asking somebody, “What are the things that spark you and what are the things that really don’t? And what will you do with this information?” And all those sorts of questions are questions many people had never been asked before, especially if somebody was looking at them as a transaction. And yet, it’s what deepens relationships, it’s what creates trust, and it’s what allows you to identify me as a recruiter, identify the best solution or the best opportunity for someone. So, do you agree with that? Is there anything that I’m off about? James Woodfall: No, that’s exactly the point. I think I’m asking better questions as a wealth manager talking to your client. Because ultimately this is, I suppose, one of the things which comes from understanding emotional intelligence, is that for most of us, we make decisions in motion first and then we justify with logic and reasoning, which is basically back to from. If I was to start with logical reasoning and then expect people to make a buying decision. And so a lot of the time, especially with things like retirement savings, for example, because it’s in the future, it’s over there, especially if it’s 10, 20 years away, people think, “Well, why will I give up so much money a month now for something which is so far in the future that I can’t comprehend it yet?” But if you start reigning the questions in a way which gets to kind of the… Really what you want to uncover is, if you wake up at 3:00 in the morning and you can’t get back to sleep, what’s on your mind? Because if you can uncover that emotion that fits all that kind of pain or problem, then you deal with emotion first and logic second. Mindy Diamond: And it tells you what you need to solve for, right? James Woodfall: Exactly, yeah. Mindy Diamond: If what keeps me up is I’m worried I’m going to outlive my money, and you know that’s your true north in terms of how you begin to tackle that they’re thinking about the future, they want you to focus on the long term. Right? Is that what you get from that? What’s the typical answer you get to that question, that one in particular? James Woodfall: For retirement planning, it’s usually clusters around. “Well, I’m not sure I’m making the right decision. There’s lots of options that are complicated. But really, actually, am I going to have enough money? Am I going to run out?” Because it’s the big question, isn’t it? How long are you going to live and how much are you going to need? Mindy Diamond: Right. As I was preparing for this interview, I think I know the answer because I’m a person that lives in this world that believes fully in, I don’t have a degree in behavioral finance but I’m big on emotional intelligence, connecting, developing trust, and that I don’t have any right to sell anybody anything or suggest anything unless I’ve connected on an interpersonal level. But I don’t know that everybody believes that. So help us, our listeners to understand, why does this matter to financial advisors? So, I’m going to give you two examples. I’m a younger advisor that has, say, five to 10 years in the business, say $100 million or 100 million pounds under management and is looking to really build a business. How and why does the concept of emotional intelligence, of EI, matter to me? And then I’m going to ask you the same question again with respect to someone who manages a billion dollars or a billion pounds. How and why does it matter? James Woodfall: Yeah. I think probably a starting point is, let’s just clear up I suppose in definitions so that we understand what we’re talking about when we say emotional intelligence, it’s an EQ. Because I suppose let’s think about, let’s call EQ the measurement, and emotional intelligence is the concept. So the definition of emotional intelligence is it’s an ability, and it’s this ability to understand and influence emotions in ourselves and others. So within ourselves, can we perceive and understand our own emotions? What turns them on? What triggers them? Can we do something about that? Can we recognize it, manage it in the right context, or either initiate our emotions in the right context? And can we do that when we’re talking to other people? So, are we good at perceiving people’s emotions within different contexts, and are we good at influencing and utilizing that information to help us communicate more effectively? So, these are skills which requires regard within those two roles to make you effective. And so, one of the things that we’ve learned from probably 30 years of people studying emotion intelligence is that if emotion is involved within the job role, emotional intelligence correlates with job performance and has a meaningful impact on the difference between an average and a big performer. So regardless of whether it’s one of the two scenarios that you’ve said, performance improvements are always on the table. But one of the things which tends to happen as you move from, say, up in terms of the money that you’re managing is the stakes get higher. So quite often, you actually need a much far higher degree of self-management, a higher degree of self-awareness, a higher degree of ability to perceive emotions in others, and to be able to communicate with influence. Because quite often as you are dealing with clients who are more affluent, there’s a correlation between actually the skills that your clients have and the skills that they expect you to have as an advisor. So the higher you go up that sort of ladder in terms of value, the more effective you need to be. So that’s where that EQ measurement. If you had to sit down and do an EQ assessment, for example, you need to be scoring way above average the higher up you go. Mindy Diamond: How will somebody begin to notice that developing the emotional intelligence muscle, developing the quantity of EQ, how will that begin to show up and impact their business? James Woodfall: There’s a couple of ways, and I think it really does show up in self-awareness and self-management and awareness and understanding of others. So one of the things which will show up in terms of that awareness and understanding of others is, can you build trusted relationships quickly? So like those skills that we were talking about before about asking better questions and listening, especially the first time you meet a new prospective client, if you can really turn your ears on and get very, very curious about the person that you’re talking to, rapport building is one of the foundational things for trust building. And really, if you get rapport building right, one of the goals should be to find common ground early, because the minute that you can build a connection with people and you start uncovering things that you’ve got in common, it starts signaling to people that actually you’re someone who is like them, on their side, and that they’re someone that you can trust. Now people who get this right, they tend to close more clients and they tend to gain more referrals or recommendations to other clients. And when I used to run my business, referrals was the largest source of new clients. Every single year, all the other different marketing streams, they didn’t produce anything near referrals. And I think back to that, if you look back to the kind of retirement example, if you can really get an answer to that question of, you wake up at 3:00 AM, what’s on your mind, what’s up when you’re getting back to sleep? If you can uncover that and solve that, for a client, it’s far easier to articulate that to a friend than it is for them to explain the technicalities of what you did with their retirement savings. But it’s easier to articulate, “You should absolutely go and see James. We were worried about whether we’re saving enough, he solved that, it’s brilliant, you need to go and see him.” That’s what I mean, is that they’re able to articulate the emotional outcome. Mindy Diamond: Even though what we’re talking about here is someone making the case that strengthening one’s emotional intelligence will make you a better advisor, easier to say that, sounds logical. But you’re connecting it to, you’re saying that someone who actually gets this right, gets it better, is going to create more of an instant rapport rooted in trust, and likely grow their business because it makes them more referable. And those are things that certainly every young advisor wants, but every advisor wants. So, let me switch the tables a second. I get why a young advisor with 100 million wants to get to a billion, why this is really important. They want to do everything they can to really make themselves the most referable. But let’s take the advisor that’s on the back nine that has been doing this 30 years, manages a billion and a half of pounds, dollars in assets under management, is growing by referrals and it’s an organic referral stream. It’s a business that feeds itself. So, while everybody always needs to be in business development mode, they feel like they’ve cracked the code, they’ve got it covered. How and why does this concept impact a senior advisor, someone with a much bigger, more robust book of business? James Woodfall: Yeah, it’s interesting. So if we take a bit of a step back and look at a bit about what some of the research says about the impacts of emotional intelligence, there have been some studies done within financial services about the impact of your training on business outcomes. So there was a study done probably around about between 2000 and 2004 with Ameriprise, and they brought their agents through a year-long emotional intelligence development program. And it was interesting, they measured at the beginning of the program EQ, what someone’s EQ score was, but they measured things like health, anger, trade anger. So, how often were people experiencing anger, stress, and burnout. So they’re measuring all sorts of things other than EQ just to see what the impact of EQ training was. Now EQ scores went up, sales went up, I think on average of about 24% across four cohorts. But things like stress, burnout, health outcomes, perceived health outcomes, people are asked to rate, how would you rate your health, that went up. Experience of anger went down because people become better at managing it. So as you look at the kind of example that you described, I would say that as someone who’s in that stage of the career where they may not have the capacity to take on more clients. So just think, well, actually, I don’t want an uplift of 20%, 24% in sales because I might not process that. But one of the things which I suppose the EI research shows actually is that it impacts your quality of life. And there is finding which is quite common in research, is that actually EI scores correlate with age. So as we go through life and we have sort of ups, downs, highs, lows, and we learn from those. We learn from our emotional experience, and that’s hypothesis, is it feeds into our EQ score. So you’ve probably got people at that later stage of their career who actually probably have had experience which has developed their emotional intelligence. They’ve got mature standing, which means that they might not necessarily need to go out and find new clients. They’ve got experience, which has helped them develop client relationships, but they might want to take a step back at quality of life. If they’re experiencing stress, burnout, pressure, EQ can help absolutely with all of those. The other thing which is quite common as well is that if they’re playing any sort of leadership part within that business now, let’s say if they’re a business owner, EQ absolutely is key for leadership performance. So making sure that you’re building a team of people around you, you can help you develop the business. And actually, EI and leadership’s one of the biggest areas where research has been focused. But I think one of the other things I’ve got to say is that we’ve all got blind spots. It doesn’t matter where we are in life, we’ve all got things that I suppose that we could be better at. And actually shining a lens on those and improving our self-awareness is something that you can develop at all stages. Mindy Diamond: A lot of people in our industry, whether it be a recruiter or an advisor themselves, believe that efficiency or being most effective and efficient is the true north. And that to ask what may fee like unnecessary or ancillary questions that don’t directly get to help me to figure out what your asset allocation is so that I can grow your portfolio, may feel ancillary. And so, is that one of the most common objections you get when somebody, say, comes to you and they’re thinking about retaining you and they’re wondering what the benefit is? James Woodfall: Well, I think the people in firms I tend to talk to, there’s a couple of common things that are coming to mind now. One is pressure around fees. So, how can I make sure I’m articulating my value in a time where clients are more informed, they can go on AI and they come to meetings prepared with answers, and they’re challenging back around the value that advisors can provide. So getting back, I suppose, and the answer is funnily enough, is actually if you’ve designed your service around a proposition which makes yourself easy to replace by someone else who can do it for the same or cheaper price with a promise of better performance, or even in the years coming, a robo-advisor, it’s going to be challenging to retain and grow clients. But I’m not particularly worried about AI. The other types of firms that come to me is to say, “Look, we’ve identified actually that we need to think differently about our business model, what we do and who we serve, because it’s going to be easier than it’s ever been for clients to come up to do some of these things themselves.” But absolutely what is untouchable, I think, is this ability to create a human connection, to sit down and discuss a range of different options. “Do I do X, do I do Y? What are the trade-offs if I choose that over that?” And to uncover those things which, as I said, really keep people up at night and solve for them. I think it’s going to be quite hard to replicate that digitally. Mindy Diamond: So I want to get to a end that you hit the nail on the head, and I want to delve deeper into it. Whatever the advisor is looking for, they may not worry about pressure around fees, they may not be kept up at night. They have a practice or a business that’s worked well all these years and is growing organically and it’s more than good enough. But anybody who isn’t concerned about the potential impact of AI on their business and whether they’re a financial advisor or recruiter or anybody else, is living under a rock. So, the goal for everyone should be to make yourself untouchable. And you hit it on the head, it’s the ability to create human connection. So, I want to ask you something. It occurs to me, you talk a lot about learning to ask the right questions. In some cases, the questions that a client never been asked before makes sense to me. But I think the real skill, I mean, I imagine anybody can teach you a list of questions to ask. The real skill comes in is knowing what to do with that information. So, let’s assume that someone says an advisor says you ask that smart question, “What keeps you up at night? What do you think about at 3:00 AM?” Pressure around fees. I find people, clients asking me, prospects asking me all the time what sort of value I can add, whether it be in the land of AI or competitively, whatever it is, pressure around fees. What do you do? So you’ve asked the smart question, but what do you teach? What do you do with that information? James Woodfall: It’s a mindset, I think, because having just say a list of questions I don’t think is really helpful to any advisor when you’re training them. And yet I find I do get people who, okay, say, “Well, look, what questions should we ask? Have you got a list of questions that you would ask?” I hold back giving those out because I think that, well, that’s what I would say. It’s not necessarily going to land the same way if you say it. The mindset I’m trying to teach advisor is to adopt a curious mindset. So not asking questions for question’s sake, but if I’m talking to someone, what I want to do is I want to understand, how are you thinking? How do you see the problem? What assumptions are you making? What things do you believe which maybe don’t line up with how things are in reality, or goals, objectives, or whatever it is. So I’m trying to understand how you think, and that requires not asking questions off a list of great questions to ask, comes off of understanding the format for that, is utilizing the open questions to gather information, to check assumptions that might sit behind them, because actually understanding those assumptions is really, really useful. And to then summarize and play back to someone that you’re talking to so that you can demonstrate that you’re listening and you deeply understand them, and being able to summarize and be able to succinctly put their words into a, “Well, what do we do next about this?” Mindy Diamond: Yeah, and, why does it matter? I love that because what I always say is it’s art, not science. AI could give you a list of, if I put in the topic of emotional intelligence and give me a list of 10 smart questions to ask relative to X. One of the questions I would ask someone from an emotional perspective that demonstrates I have strong emotional perspective relative to pressure around fees, AI could spit out the questions. But I think you’re 100% right. The real key is being a good listener and meeting someone where they are. And it’s not about a prescribed or canned list of questions that demonstrate you have strong emotional intelligence. It’s much more about asking the right next question, saying the right thing, the validating statement afterwards. And not as a means to an end, not as a means to a transaction, not as just a way of checking the box, I have emotional intelligence, but really because demonstrating that you deeply care. And I like what you said, the notion of a changed mindset. Do people get that right away? I guess what I’m asking is, financial advisors, while smart ones who are looking to make themselves untouchable by AI will get that concept. They’re looking to differentiate themselves and they’re looking to hone the skills that AI can’t bring to the table. But at the same time, financial advisors are number oriented and goal oriented. And so, how long does it typically take to begin to see, or how do you paint the picture about getting from here to there, connecting the dots between strengthening changing your mindset, strengthening your emotional intelligence, and seeing more results? James Woodfall: Well, look, it’s about behavior change, isn’t it? Like any kind of behavior change, there has to be a few things at play. One is that you have to have a good understanding of where you are right now, what things that you are good at, but what things you need to work on. And then effectively the things you need to work on, you need a plan of how you’re going to work on them. So I think commonly how you develop these kind of relational skills is that you need to be able to get close to, what does the goal look like? Where am I headed? If I get this right, what’s it going to look like? And then you need to have a plan to get from A to B. And actually part of that plan has to be built around good feedback. And I was quite lucky where during my career, I worked for two large banks before I started my firm. And I had really, really good training from managers that I worked with, almost on a monthly basis would come and sit in my client meetings and then feedback to me about what I could have done better. And so actually, if you’re going to really commit to developing, I suppose relational skills and becoming more emotionally intelligent, you need help from someone within your firm or externally to come in and actually observe you by trying out new things and giving you feedback. Now of course, you could do some of that yourself if you’re doing a virtual meeting, you could hit record, play it back, be your own analyst. But quite often we can’t see that ourselves, but if you’ve got say a third party, they can watch you in action. Quite quickly they can hone in and say, “Well, actually, you could have asked a different question here, or actually if you’d phrased that like this, you might’ve got a bit more information, or the client closed down when you ask that question.” So actually then, you start to create that behavior change. So feedback I think is one thing, but actually aligning it with really, values, I think. So, one of the things that I suppose is quite important for behavior change is that we are motivated to do things where we strongly believe it’s the right thing to do. So, I think which is why it can be quite difficult for a firm to bring in with a team of advisors and say, “Well, we’re going to roll out emotional intelligence training,” because you’ll get some of us go, “This is brilliant.” Mindy Diamond: Eye roll. I would imagine eye roll is the… It can be a lot of the response, right? James Woodfall: You get a lot of resistance, because some people see it as a criticism of just saying, “Well, actually I’m good at that. I don’t need training in that, thank you very much.” Mindy Diamond: And because if efficiency in getting to a goal is the true north, I mean, I think the mindset shift you’re talking about is going from believing that getting to the goal by just asking the right numbers and dealing in data, changing that from it’s about building a relationship, which ultimately will impact the amount you manage and how you grow and how you connect and all of that stuff. But for people that are goal-oriented, linear in their thinking, I imagine this can be not just felt as a criticism but hard to embrace. James Woodfall: Oh, yeah, no. I think we view the brain as kind of a black box. I do get people I speak to, they go, “Mental health isn’t real. And all of this is psychobabble,” but from the people that I’ve had feedback from, and this is even for people I haven’t trained. I wrote a book about 18 months ago about the topic which talks about emotion intelligence within the 5X context. I’ve had people contact me on LinkedIn and say, “Look, I read your book. I’ve been following your content for a while. I’ve put some of the ideas to work, and I’m now getting my manager and their manager contact me and saying, ‘What are you doing differently?’” Because all of a sudden they’re opening up conversations with clients that they couldn’t before, doing business with clients where they couldn’t before. And all it is that this kind of focus on the client, the relationship, building that connection, and all of a sudden you start seeing that convert into more sales opportunities. Mindy Diamond: Yes and more yes, because that’s always been our philosophy, my philosophy from starting the business and our philosophy, and I couldn’t agree with you more. You articulated it probably as did, I got to it instinctively. You have research behind it, etc. By the way, for our listeners, we will link your book in the notes for this episode if anybody’s interested in buying it. But you hit the nail on the head, so, or you took the words out of my mouth in terms of next question. Who are your clients? Are they individual advisors? Are they independent RIAs? Are they Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch? And what kind of work do you do for them? James Woodfall: So, I do, there’s probably two parts to my business. One is the consulting training part, which is going into firms, typically firms that were the owner managed typically, where the owner either is still advising or has a big impact on other behaviors of the advice team that’s underneath them. And really, I work on a consultancy basis. So rather than going and just provide EI training, what I do is effectively start with understanding the business. So exactly as I’ve been talking to you about, the process I used to follow as an advisor, it’s the same process I follow when I’m working with practices, is I want to find out what’s going well in the business. Where are the blockers, what’s not going so well? And I’m a social science researcher. So I’d want to spend some time in the business actually doing a bit of a deep dive and maybe speaking to the team while the owner’s not in the room and finding out a bit about how they’re seeing things. Because ultimately, what that will do is it allows me to look at thematically extracting what types of training interventions might move the needle within the business. And then I put that onto a report for businesses and say, “Look, this is what I think we should be doing.” Some of that might be me working one-to-one, doing that coaching, observing, training with particular people in the business who have been highlighted as requiring development, or it might be group training, might be taking the whole teams through a training program. And then following up, helping build those development plans, and then being there supporting with the one-to-ones as they bed in that behavior change. So, that’s one part of the business. The other part of the business is working for the larger firms. I’ve done a bit of work for Fidelity this year and last year, and they’re looking to hire me as an authority expert on the topic to put together training programs that go out to the advisors that they work with. So, there’s the two aspects, like an external speaker trainer that’s brought in by some of the larger companies. And then the other one is a bit more hands-on, applying not only the science but my experience of having been there and run a business. Mindy Diamond: Right. So are the big firms like… So you mentioned Fidelity, are the wirehouses, Merrill, Morgan, UBS, Wells Fargo, are they embracing this? Are the big banks embracing it, or is this largely in the RIA space right now? James Woodfall: In the UK, there’s been a huge kind of interest in emotional intelligence, behavioral finance, relational skills. And actually, a lot of the kind of people who require influential in the UK are actually based in the US. And so, I think there’s a good bit of crossover. We’ve got good people who are specialists in looking at the retirement piece from a retirement transition about, how do you support people through what is a profound psychological transition? So, I think the RIAs are really interested in it as a topic. Then we’ve got the larger institutions are interested in it either as the RIAs are clients of theirs and they want to be seen to providing thought leadership to the RIAs and helping them develop these skills. But also, we’ve got some quite large companies in the UK now here, like the banks, for example, the banks or the whole exited the advice market in around about 2012, 2013, and then this year they’re starting to come back. So they’ve had 15 years nearly out of the market and they’re coming back because they’re just wanting an opportunity for face-to-face advice. So, I think actually it’s a hot topic now and I think all segments of the market are looking at, how do they develop non-technical skills to help them succeed in the future? Mindy Diamond: Can someone who was not born with strong EQ, can they learn this? James Woodfall: Absolutely. One of the interesting things about EQ is it’s not like IQ, for example. IQ is our a sort of cognitive ability. There was some good research that was done probably about, I think 2016, which looked at, do you remember all this sort of brain training apps like, if you do Sudoku, do you get smarter? You get better at Sudoku, but it doesn’t translate into performance on another. You don’t get better at crosswords from doing Sudoku, for example. So, IQs are pretty much fixed and there’s not a lot we can do about that. But EQ has been shown to be a trainable ability. So regardless of where you are now, if you understand your strengths and weaknesses and put a plan together for improvement, everyone has the ability to improve their EQ. And it’s not like personality, for example, where it’s quite hard to shift the dial. Let’s say if you’re quite strongly introverted and you find social situations difficult, if you just took that approach and said, “Well, look, can we make you extremely extroverted?” The answer would be, well, probably not. But EQ absolutely helps that person because noticing that you feel uncomfortable in, say, a networking situation if you have to do that professionally, having the tools in the bag to manage that feeling and throw yourself into the experience, that’s EQ in action. So, it doesn’t matter your baseline of where you are, EQ can have a big impact on your ability to perform across a range of different contexts, home, work, with friends. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Let’s talk about your comment that EQ or strong emotional intelligence is what can make an advisor untouchable by AI. And I assume the premise being that, I can’t replace a human relationship. It may be able to come up with the questions, but at least for today it lacks the ability to know what to do with that information and to create the human connection. Talk to me more about that. How and why is that? I mean, is that part of why people are coming to you, because they’re worried about AI encroaching on their business? James Woodfall: Where we are at the moment is actually AI… Let’s look at healthcare for a second. Chatbots in healthcare have actually been outperforming humans in some respects. So there’s a type of therapy called cognitive behavior therapy, that’s been run with AI agents and patients. And as researchers to show that actually, disclosure has increased when patients are speaking to a chatbot because cognitive behavior therapy is like it’s guided, is a method, it’s a methodology to it. But disclosure increases and this theory behind that is is that people open up more when they don’t feel like they’re being judged by another person. So that’s interesting, because that saying to us, “Well, actually, people are trusting AI agents with very, very personal information, and people are already getting that feeling of empathy with AI agents.” Because if you tell an AI agent something deeply personal and it says, “That must have been really difficult for you,” for example. Mindy Diamond: Yeah, it does that well. Wonderful feedback about how great you are or what a smart question you just asked. James Woodfall: Yeah, but it’s synthetic, it’s not real empathy, it’s synthetic empathy. Whilst we might feel actually we get that feeling that we’re being understood, it’s not real. And I think the advisor’s edge is, look, I think where we might end up with this is that if you take a step back and you do this kind of exercise of what’s my ideal client, the ideal client is, I think, now is someone who is still time poor. So yes, an AI agent might be able to interview you, build a financial plan, but do you really want to spend the time doing that or do you have any inclination to do that? No. Well, that’s a perfect client who would hire an advisor. They value human relationships. Obviously when we do get AI entering the advisor market, it’s going to be at a lower price point. So actually, we’re now talking about a difference between experience. So the experience of being with an advisor comes at a premium. So that experience is going to be what people are going to pay additional value for. So, it’s the experience of dealing with a human. It’s the experience of dealing with a human who can talk them through complex information and options, help them understand their thinking and apply judgment, connect with those emotional things. But there’s a whole range of information that we get when we’re talking face-to-face, which AI doesn’t have access to. So back to that retirement example, if we say, “Well, man, I’ve modeled your plan. If we do X, Y, and Z, you’re not going to run out of money when you retire. You’re going to be okay.” And then the person, usually what they do is they sigh with relief, which is actually the emotion of joy, relief is actually happiness. So that sigh of relief and the softening of muscle tension in the body that you see when you’re face-to-face with another person, AI can’t, doesn’t get that data. Mindy Diamond: And how powerful is that? So, why does that matter? If I say, “I have X, I need Y. I have X number of years until I retire. Will I have enough money to retire the way I want to?” AI can spit that answer out faster than any financial advisor and come back hopefully saying, “Yes,” they’ll know that I will experience relief and joy because I’ll write back saying, “Great news.” It’ll say, “Yes, that is fabulous news.” It’ll tell me why I’m relieved and all that sort of stuff. So, why does that matter? James Woodfall: I think fundamentally, it comes back to trust. For those people who can get that quick answer, they’ll go, “Yeah, that’s great.” But there’ll be some people who go, “Yeah, fine. I’ll take that answer at face value.” There’ll be other people who go, “Well, what if you made a mistake?” Quite interesting that actually, people will get the same answer from a human advisor and they’ll trust it more. And I think one of those things is because we’re wired for connection, so when empathy develops, it’s quite interesting. Something which you see in young children, for example, is when we develop at the very early stage, probably about three or four years old, before children have learned to self-regulate their emotions, you see emotional contagion in groups of children happen quite rapidly. You get one child who say gets a toy taken away from them and starts crying, and then all the other children at the same age in the nursery start crying. Now, none of those other ones are crying because they’re sad. They’re crying because we have these things called mirror neurons, which means we pick up and mirror the emotional state of people around us. So, you actually get an experience of shared feeling and especially if you’ve got strong rapport, strong relationship, you actually share emotions of the people around you. Now, of course, as we grow out of that developmental stage, we learn this ability to understand that actually what we’re feeling isn’t happening to us, it’s happening to someone else. But have you ever been around… My favorite example for this is, if my wife has had a bad day at work because she comes home and starts slamming the door and banging cupboards, why I start to feel anger, because it’s rubbing off, it’s in the room. So, it’s this shared understanding that I think is where the value is. And so absolutely the answer might be faster and quicker, but for some clients they value that experience of having that answer delivered by someone who understands them. Mindy Diamond: And I think, so the point is that there will be clients or prospects that will value the efficiency of AI, that don’t necessarily need the face-to-face, that don’t necessarily… They just want the answer. They want the answers to the test, they don’t care how you got there. But what you’re talking about is finding the clients that really value the human connection. And if that’s what in fact is going to make advisors untouchable, then they need to make sure that they really strengthen this skill. James Woodfall: It’s not just the answer, but it’s the whole experience that’s wrapped around that. So actually last year, and my wife took me to a restaurant and we had a lovely, lovely meal. And on the menu there was this cup of coffee and the beans were like one of the rarest beans in the world. They’re the ones that get eaten by this little animal with the jungle in it, poops them out, and then the beans get roasted. But it was about 40 pounds for this cup of coffee and I thought, well, I’m going to have that. But that’s the experience, isn’t it? I could get a cup of coffee at McDonald’s, but actually the experience of this, something which is rare, exclusive, delivered in an amazing environment, that’s what you’re paying for. So, you’ve got to remember that actually if experience dictates a lot of what we value as well. So because if all of our decisions were made on price, Ferrari wouldn’t have a business because everyone would just be buying the cheapest car that does the job. You’re going to think advisors that are going to operating in this space, well, they need to think about the whole package, as in the experience that the plan that’s delivered, and the advice. Mindy Diamond: But it speaks to the notion of any advisor that isn’t thinking about AI’s impact on his business and how to reshape or rewire the business, even just rewiring the value proposition, retooling their value proposition, how they explain their value and what they do needs to change because they’re competing not only with the advisor that sits next to them or down the hall, but they’re competing with AI. How about as AI, as you see AI develop? So fast-forward five years, you and I are talking about where AI is today, but AI is, God knows where it’ll be five years from now. So, how do you foresee, do you still foresee the advisor being untouchable if they get this right, five or 10 years from now? James Woodfall: I don’t think it’s financial advice that’s unique with this, because I think it’s any profession where at the moment human judgment and understanding are valued. Healthcare, for example, same thing, doctors follow consultancy process. You’ve got this like tax, legal, a whole range of professions which are all grappling on the same problem. So I think in five years time, I think the answer is, is that we just don’t know what AI will look like. But certainly in the moment, if you track what Claude are doing with code work, and what Perplexity is doing with its skills and add-ons, a lot of it is actually at the moment geared up to freeing up the advisor’s time so that they can spend more time with clients. So, I think at the moment this sort of trend is looking like AI companies want to support advisors to be way more efficient so that they can deal with more clients. But in five years time, who knows? I think probably one of the biggest leaps that will happen is when AI is no longer working from, say, just a transcript. If it gets out to that kind of chat where you can actually interact with an AI agent like you and I are talking, I think that’s going to provide a different experience, because then you’re moving it from, as I said, that kind of structure where somebody is stuck there tapping away at keyboard, having a conversation with a chatbot, effectively, to actually having a conversation with an embodied agent with a face, gestures, a voice. That I think will start to change things a little bit. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Well, it will be an interesting future, for sure. This has been a fascinating conversation. I really enjoyed it, and thank you so much for sharing so graciously. Is there anything to wrap up that I didn’t ask you, that you would want an advisor to know about this concept or anything you’re thinking about? James Woodfall: I think we’ve taken a broad sweep and then a deep dive into certain areas. I think really probably have to get started. I think probably one of the… I mean, you mentioned obviously I’ve got a book that you share the links to, which is fantastic. Audiobook is available to that as well on Spotify or wherever audiobooks are listed. I think there’s a lot of good advice in that about how to get started. So, I think for people who are looking at covering that next step of, what do we do, it’d be, yeah, pick up a book and have a bit of a deep dive. If you want to skip the book and come straight to having a conversation with me, then I write a weekly email, which goes out once a week, which is just one topic. So very much like we’ve been talking today, I share ideas on that once a week, or on LinkedIn, I’m around on LinkedIn as well. Mindy Diamond: Good. Well, we will link all of it so everyone knows how to find you. Thank you again for being so gracious. Love the topic, love the work that you’re doing, love that there’s a need for it, and can’t wait to see where you go from here. James Woodfall: Brilliant. No, I enjoyed it. Thank you. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously, and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind? It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World A conversation with Mindy Diamond and James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist at Raise Your EI.      Mindy Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World. It’s a conversation with James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist from Raise Your EI. I’m Mindy Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. For years, advisors have competed on expertise, the ability to solve problems, deliver answers, and provide guidance clients couldn’t easily find on their own. But today, those answers are becoming easier to access via artificial intelligence and tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity. AI can generate planning ideas, summarize complex topics, and answer questions in seconds. As the technology continues to improve, it raises an important question. If information becomes increasingly commoditized, what will clients continue to value most? My guest today, James Woodfall, is the Founder of the training firm, Raise Your EI, and a former wealth management business owner. James now helps advisors, leaders, and organizations strengthen the communication and behavioral skills that drive trust, influence, and performance. Skills rooted in emotional intelligence or EI, something that AI cannot authentically replicate. What’s interesting about James’s perspective is that he doesn’t view emotional intelligence as a soft skill. He views it as a business skill, one that impacts how advisors build rapport, earn referrals, lead teams, deepen client relationships, and ultimately differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive marketplace that includes human and machine-driven advice. Our conversation explores why rapport is the foundation of trust, how emotional intelligence can be developed like any other professional skill, and why advis

What if the single biggest threat to your practice isn’t the market, isn’t AI, and isn’t the competition? What if it’s simply being invisible? Join Duncan MacPherson for an in-depth conversation with Mitch Slater, Executive Director of Digital Communications at UBS and self-described Chief Visibility Officer. With a career that began working alongside Larry King in all-night radio and later spanning 37 years as a financial advisor, Mitch brings a rare and battle-tested perspective on what it takes to get known in today’s marketplace. Together, they explore why AI and shifting client expectations are reshaping financial services into its most significant era yet, and what separates the advisors who will thrive from those who will be left behind. The conversation is equal parts strategic and personal, grounded in real stories and hard-won lessons from decades at the intersection of media, markets, and client relationships. Key highlights include: Answer engine optimization and what it means for advisors Why LinkedIn comments are your highest ROI activity Why personal storytelling outperforms credentials every time How AI should free you up for more high-touch work The compounding effect of one dedicated hour a day on your business Two lessons from Larry King that shaped Mitch’s entire career Tune in for a practical, energizing conversation on visibility, authenticity, and what it really means to get known in the modern advisory business. Promotions: Toolkit CRM by Pareto Systems: toolkitcrm.com Pareto Systems: Practice Management Index (PMI) Connect With Duncan MacPherson: Website: ParetoSystems.com Toll Free: 1.866.593.8020 Learn More: Schedule a Call LinkedIn: Duncan MacPherson Connect With Mitch Slater: LinkedIn: Mitch Slater About Our Guest: Mitchell (Mitch) Slater is Executive Director and Chief Visibility Officer, Advisor Marketing at UBS Wealth Management USA. After a 35-year career as a Financial Advisor, Sales Manager, and trainer, Mitch now helps financial advisors and business professionals increase their visibility through LinkedIn, video, podcasts, personal branding, and AI. A former radio producer who worked with both Larry King and Howard Stern early in his career, Mitch combines media experience with decades in wealth management to help professionals build trust, strengthen relationships, and grow their influence. He is the host of several UBS programs, including Front and Center and Leadership Lounge, and is a frequent speaker at conferences and advisor events across the country. Mitch lives in Westfield, New Jersey, with his wife Leslie and is passionate about helping people “stop being invisible” and get known for what they do best.

Elon Musk reporter Grace Kay talks with TITV Host Akash Pasricha about Tesla's Miami Robotaxi launch. We also talk with Nvidia correspondent Phoebe Liu about Nvidia partnering with AI chip rivals and enterprise software reporter Kevin McLaughlin about HubSpot's controversial customer data reversal. Plus, we get into the cooling AI IPO pipeline with Gregor Feige, Co-Head of ECM, Americas and Head of Global TMT ECM, UBS.Articles discussed on this episode: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/teslas-robotaxi-push-tests-new-blueprint-scaling-fasthttps://www.theinformation.com/articles/nvidias-new-hedge-chip-competitors-partnerhttps://www.theinformation.com/newsletters/applied-ai/facing-revolt-hubspot-reverses-decision-use-customer-data-ai-feature Subscribe: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theinformation The Information: https://www.theinformation.com/subscribe_hSign up for the AI Agenda newsletter: https://www.theinformation.com/features/ai-agendaTITV airs weekdays on YouTube, X and LinkedIn at 10AM PT / 1PM ET. Or check us out wherever you get your podcasts.Follow us:X: https://x.com/theinformationIG: https://www.instagram.com/theinformation/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@titv.theinformationLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/theinformation/

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Philipp Vetter und Holger Zschäpitz über die Samsung-Enttäuschung, neue Scharmützel im Nahen Osten und ein Rekordhoch bei Coca Cola. Außerdem geht es um Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, Micron Technology, Intel, Infineon, Süss MicroTec, Siemens Energy, Barclays, Nvidia, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Coca-Cola, Viking Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Fresenius Medical Care, Deutsche Börse, Henkel, UniCredit, Commerzbank, Apple, TKMS, Hanwha Ocean, SpaceX, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, UBS, Citigroup, Nasdaq, Raymond James Financial, Alphabet. Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien *Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt.* Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Gary Sinderbrand is a seasoned financial services professional and founder & CEO of ArcheMatch. With over 35 years of experience, he co‑created the Payne‑Sinderbrand Program at Merrill Lynch — the firm's longest‑running peer‑based training initiative — and has trained more than 10,000 financial advisor. At just 24 he joined Merrill Lynch without prior sales experience and, by focusing on problem solving and client needs, became one of the youngest $1 million‑plus producers in the company's history. Gary has built $100 million training programs at Merrill Lynch and UBS and led the training of 12,000+ advisors, building a network of hundreds of thousands of professionals. Today he leads ArcheMatch (Rainmaker), an AI‑powered prospecting platform that uses Jungian archetypes and AI‑driven research to match advisors with high‑compatibility prospects and improve outreach. In this episode we discuss how to leverage AI to increase your prospecting conversions. Gary explains how psychology‑driven AI can match prospects based on compatibility and create tailored outreach scripts, giving advisors and sales professionals an unfair advantage. We explore how real estate agents and sales professionals can build AI systems that adapt to their workflows, analyze data signals and deliver personalized scripts to boost response rates. Gary shares insights from his decades of training advisors and reveals how AI can help professionals focus on the right prospects, save time and increase conversions.You Can Find Gary @:Website: https://archematch.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gsinderbrand/

Justice Department records reveal that UBS facilitated a series of financial transactions that enabled Ghislaine Maxwell to purchase a secluded New Hampshire property where she later hid before her arrest in 2020. Even after receiving a grand jury subpoena tied to a federal sex trafficking investigation, the bank processed a transfer of nearly $8 million from a trust connected to Maxwell. That money was then routed through multiple accounts before being used to acquire the estate known as “Tucked Away.” The timing of these transactions—occurring while Maxwell was under increasing scrutiny—raises serious concerns about how closely the bank monitored or responded to obvious risk factors.The broader financial trail shows that UBS had managed significant assets for Maxwell over an extended period, continuing to facilitate transactions even after Epstein's arrest and as investigations intensified. The property purchase was later flagged by authorities as potentially involving proceeds linked to trafficking activity, underscoring the scale and complexity of the financial network surrounding Epstein and Maxwell. Altogether, the situation highlights how major institutions continued servicing high-risk clients despite mounting red flags, allowing critical financial movements to proceed unchecked during a pivotal moment in the investigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Exclusive: How UBS helped Epstein accomplice Maxwell buy her hideout, 'Tucked Away' | ReutersBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Daniel Eckert und Holger Zschäpitz über die Rekordjagd beim Dax und magische 26.000 Punkte, Übernahmefantasie bei Easyjet und die Hoffnung auf eine Sonderdividende bei Conti. Außerdem geht es um Foxconn, Nvidia, Lufthansa, Ryanair, Airbus, Brookfield, SK Hynix, Micron Technology, PepsiCo, Delta Air Lines, Levi Strauss, TSMC, Volkswagen, GEA, Repsol, Bank of America, UBS, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Spotify, Walmart, Ford, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Moody's. Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Diese Folge enthält Werbung für Smartbroker+. Depot eröffnen, 30 € ETF als Bonus sichern und aus tausenden ETFs wählen. Smartbroker+ macht Investieren einfach. Alle Informationen gibt es unter: https://get.smartbrokerplus.de/triple-aaa-podcast2/ Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

UBS chief economist Paul Donovan marks the publication of the 2026 UBS Global Wealth Report by talking to 2025 Nobel laureate in economic sciences, Joel Mokyr, about global wealth trends and how technological progress shapes growth.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

UBS economists Paul Donovan and James Mazeau discuss the findings of the 17th edition of the annual report, which has become a crucial reference point on the trends shaping wealth across the world.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

OpenAI has discussed giving a 5 per cent stake to the US government, UBS will start trialling everyday banking services for its American employees within months, and dealmaking hit record levels in the first half of the year. Plus, many Russians are angry that the Ukraine war is now playing out on their territory.Mentioned in this podcast:OpenAI proposes handing Trump administration 5% stakeUBS to trial US banking services in push for wealthy American clientsMega takeovers drive record $2.8tn in dealmakingPutin admits Ukrainian drones are causing ‘problems'Putin ties himself to ruling party as war fatigue bitesListen to the Rachman Review on Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or Spotify.Tell us your thoughts to enter a prize draw for a chance to win a pair of Bose QuietComfort Headphones worth £229. https://www.feedback.ft.com/c/a/6f9bJBvxsxaEBSIB5esBISOver 18s only. Find full T&Cs here Prize Draw winners' surnames and regions may be made available upon request, as required by the Advertising Standards Authority. If you do not want your information to be made available, please email Privacy.Officer@ft.com upon entry. For more information on your rights and how we use your data, please read our Privacy Policy.Want to get in touch? Email us at podcasts@ft.comNote: The FT does not use generative AI to voice its podcasts The FT News Briefing is produced by Victoria Craig, Sonja Hutson, Saffeya Ahmed, Katya Kumkova, and Fiona Symon. Our editor is Marc Filippino. Our show is mixed by Kelly Garry and Alex Higgins. Additional help from Gavin Kallmann, Michael Lello, Peter Barber and David da Silva. Our intern is Cole van Miltenburg. Our executive producer is Topher Forhecz. Flo Phillips is the FT's global head of audio. The show's theme music is by Metaphor Music. Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Denise George tried to attack Jeffrey Epstein's operation through the money trail, not just the sex-abuse allegations, by using the U.S. Virgin Islands' civil enforcement power to subpoena banks and financial institutions that handled Epstein's accounts, entities, trusts, charities, and shell companies. Her office sought records from major institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, and others, looking for account records, transaction details, communications, cash movements, and the financial architecture around Epstein's estate and business entities. George later sued JPMorgan, accusing the bank of helping Epstein finance and conceal his trafficking operation, and her office had already reached a settlement of more than $105 million with Epstein's estate and related defendants. In other words, she was trying to prove that Epstein's crimes were not just enabled by recruiters and household staff, but by banks, lawyers, accountants, and institutions that moved the money and ignored the warning signs.A separate financial trail later raised similar questions around Ghislaine Maxwell. Reuters reported in 2026 that UBS helped move money connected to Maxwell before her arrest, including funds that ultimately helped purchase her secluded New Hampshire hideout, even after UBS had received a grand jury subpoena seeking information about her financial dealings in a child-sex-trafficking investigation. UBS had told Maxwell it would close her accounts, but documents showed millions still moved through the system before the shutdown was complete. That is what makes the institutional side of the Epstein story so damning: while George was trying to force major banks to explain how Epstein's money flowed for years, other institutions were still handling Maxwell-linked money in the aftermath, showing once again how elite clients could remain bankable long after the red flags should have been impossible to miss.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

A Special Industry Update, With Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond Jason and Mindy Diamond revisit how advisor due diligence is evolving—from AI and enterprise value to firm stability, ownership, and optionality—and why those questions matter more than ever. In Summary Due diligence has always been about finding the right fit. But what advisors are evaluating has expanded considerably. In this replay of an Industry Update, Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond revisit The Advisor Transition Playbook to explore how advisor priorities continue to evolve. Beyond the traditional reasons advisors consider change, they discuss newer factors shaping decisions today—from artificial intelligence and enterprise value to ownership structure, firm stability, and long-term optionality. The conversation reinforces that while every advisor's motivations are personal, the evaluation process has become far more strategic. Today's advisors aren't simply comparing recruiting deals or platforms. They're considering how today's decisions may influence the value, flexibility, and future of the businesses they're building. The Storyline For years, advisor movement was largely driven by familiar themes: bureaucracy, management changes, technology frustrations, and the desire for greater independence. Those factors remain important. But the conversations Diamond Consultants has with advisors today increasingly include questions that rarely surfaced just a few years ago. How should AI factor into firm selection? What is the long-term value of building enterprise value instead of simply maximizing a recruiting package? How important is a firm's ownership structure? And how should advisors think about stability in a marketplace where acquisitions, recapitalizations, and private equity investment have become commonplace? Jason and Mindy revisit the transition framework introduced in Part 1, focusing less on the mechanics of making a move and more on the evolving criteria advisors are using to evaluate their options. The result is a broader discussion about due diligence—not simply as a transition exercise, but as an ongoing strategic process for advisors seeking to build their best business life. Topics Covered Advisor due diligence Traditional vs. emerging drivers of advisor movement Artificial intelligence in wealth management Enterprise value and advisor ownership Recruiting deals versus long-term economics Reverse due diligence Firm ownership and stability Private equity in wealth management Advisor optionality Building a long-term advisory business Blubrry Player > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why are the traditional drivers of advisor movement still relevant? (4:00) Jason and Mindy revisit the longstanding push-and-pull factors that continue to influence advisor decisions, from bureaucracy and management frustrations to the desire for greater ownership and control. How has AI become part of the due diligence process? (13:50) The discussion explores why advisors increasingly expect firms to demonstrate a clear AI strategy—and why investment, integration, and vision may become meaningful competitive advantages. Why should advisors care about enterprise value, even if they don't technically own their business? (24:30) Jason and Mindy explain why more advisors are evaluating decisions through the lens of long-term business value rather than solely short-term economics. What does reverse due diligence really involve? (37:15) The conversation highlights why advisors should evaluate prospective firms with the same rigor firms use when evaluating advisors. How does firm ownership affect advisor optionality? (38:00) Private equity, acquisitions, and changing ownership structures have made it increasingly important to understand what happens if a firm's strategy changes after an advisor joins. Why has due diligence become more strategic than ever? (45:30) The episode concludes with a broader discussion about defining one's “best business life” and making decisions that align with long-term goals rather than reacting to short-term frustrations. Key Takeaways The reasons advisors evaluate change have expanded well beyond traditional frustrations such as bureaucracy and compensation. AI has become an increasingly important component of firm evaluation, not because it replaces advisors, but because it can enhance productivity and client service. Enterprise value is becoming a consideration even for advisors who currently work within employee models. Reverse due diligence is just as important as a firm's evaluation of an advisor, particularly when assessing ownership structure, capitalization, and long-term stability. The most effective transition decisions balance immediate economics with long-term flexibility, ownership, and optionality. Every advisor's definition of success is different, making clarity around personal goals the foundation of any due diligence process. https://youtu.be/WZbUZJZK1yc Quotable Moments “Every advisor deserves to live their best business life.” “Just because you're frustrated doesn't mean you should move. You need something worth moving toward.” “The question isn't simply what you're paid today. It's what you're building over time.” “Knowledge is power. Understanding what your business is worth should be part of every advisor's decision-making process.” FAQs Why are more advisors expanding their due diligence beyond compensation? While transition economics remain important, advisors are increasingly evaluating technology, AI capabilities, enterprise value, ownership opportunities, and long-term flexibility as part of the decision-making process. How should advisors evaluate a firm's AI strategy? Rather than looking for finished products, advisors should assess whether a firm has a clear vision, meaningful investment, and an integrated approach to using AI to improve advisor productivity and client experience. What is reverse due diligence? Reverse due diligence is the process of evaluating a prospective firm as thoroughly as the firm evaluates the advisor. It includes understanding ownership structure, financial stability, culture, technology, leadership, and long-term strategy. Why does enterprise value matter for employee advisors? Even advisors who do not currently own their businesses may benefit from understanding how different business models create opportunities for ownership, long-term value creation, and future monetization. How has private equity changed advisor due diligence? Private equity has introduced new opportunities for growth and capital, but it has also made it more important for advisors to understand ownership structures, investment horizons, and what future transactions could mean for their business. What does Diamond Consultants mean by an advisor's “best business life”? It refers to aligning an advisor's business model, goals, client experience, compensation, flexibility, and long-term vision in a way that best supports both the advisor and the clients they serve. While transition economics remain important, advisors are increasingly evaluating technology, AI capabilities, enterprise value, ownership opportunities, and long-term flexibility as part of the decision-making process. Rather than looking for finished products, advisors should assess whether a firm has a clear vision, meaningful investment, and an integrated approach to using AI to improve advisor productivity and client experience. Reverse due diligence is the process of evaluating a prospective firm as thoroughly as the firm evaluates the advisor. It includes understanding ownership structure, financial stability, culture, technology, leadership, and long-term strategy. Even advisors who do not currently own their businesses may benefit from understanding how different business models create opportunities for ownership, long-term value creation, and future monetization. Private equity has introduced new opportunities for growth and capital, but it has also made it more important for advisors to understand ownership structures, investment horizons, and what future transactions could mean for their business. It refers to aligning an advisor's business model, goals, client experience, compensation, flexibility, and long-term vision in a way that best supports both the advisor and the clients they serve. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. Related Resources The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 1 Annual Advisor Transition Report Top 10 Tips for a Strategic Due Diligence Process Should I Stay or Should I Go? View the transcript of this episode… The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 2 A Special Industry Update with Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond. Jason Diamond: Welcome to a replay of one of the most popular episodes from our podcast series for financial advisors, The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between. It's Part 2 of a 2-Part Industry Update with Mindy Diamond. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner, well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: There’s been a noticeable shift in how advisors are approaching decisions about their business, not necessarily in whether they’re exploring change, but in what they’re focused on when they do. Mindy is back with me for a continuation of our earlier conversation on the Advisor Transition Playbook. Last time, we spent time on the mechanics, how due diligence works, what a move actually entails, and how to think through the process. What’s become more apparent since then is that the inputs into that process are evolving. The traditional drivers are still there, but layered on top are a set of considerations that didn’t carry the same weight before. AI is one of them, and not just as a tool, but as a differentiator that advisors are starting to diligence more seriously. Enterprise value is another. Showing up in conversations, even for advisors who don’t technically own their business, but are thinking more critically about what they’re building over time. And then there are questions around stability, ownership, and flexibility. What happens to the firm itself and whether advisors retain the ability to adapt again if circumstances change. None of this is theoretical. It’s showing up in real time conversations. What we want to do here is unpack those new triggers of advisor movement and what they suggest about how decisions are being made today. So let’s get to it. Mindy, the legend, thank you for joining me. So glad to have you on. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. I’m so happy to be here. Jason Diamond: Great. Let’s dive right in. I’ll set the stage really quickly one more time. When we spoke about this topic last, we talked about the drivers of movement, what we’ll call in this conversation as the old or the legacy drivers of movement, and we spoke about the mechanics of the move. Before we get into the new drivers of movement, which I want to be the meat of the conversation, remind us, when we talk about the legacy drivers of movement …. And by the way, by saying legacy, I by no means want to suggest that they’re not valid today, because they’re equally valid, if not more so today than they were then. But when you think of the classic drivers of movement in our industry, what are they? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I would say, first of all, let’s start by saying that for every advisor, they’ve got a unique set of needs. So the first thing to say is that while you and I can talk about the categories of frustrations or things that might bother an advisor, they show up differently in each advisor’s life. So it’s important to note that everyone is unique. But generally speaking, if I had to package them, I’d say it’s number one that shows up most of the time is too much bureaucracy. A feeling that a firm or a model is just too hypervigilant in terms of compliance and it’s too bureaucratic and too hard to get things done. Number two would be some sort of change in or frustration with management. Something is going on that the person or persons that are responsible for managing the business are just not … They’re not the wind at their back. They’re obstreperous. They’re causing difficulty and frustration. And probably the third one would be less about a pain point and more about the desire to be something that they couldn’t where they were. The notion that they want to be more independent, they want to be a business owner and they just can’t do that. That doesn’t exist within the model where they work. Those probably have been the three ones top of mind, but I bet you’ll have some … You’ll add to that. Jason Diamond: I’ll add a couple. But before I do, I’ve heard you talk about this topic, maybe said another way as pushes and pulls. Can you explain what you mean by that? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I think that we think about the pushes, the frustrations, the things pushing somebody out the door, the factors that make it less easy or less fluid to do business. And there’s almost always pushes that exist when somebody comes to us, where they’re frustrated to some degree or another about certain things. But we tell people all the time that just to be frustrated should never be enough, because if all you’re doing is running from one set of problems, you’re very likely to run into maybe a different set, but still problems elsewhere. So a move needs to be driven in equal part, if not more, by pulls. Being pulled toward an opportunity that can be needle moving enough or better enough than where you are now. Pushes and pull. Jason Diamond: I love it. So let me ask you a little bit of a pointed question. Is a recruiting deal a valid pull factor? Mindy Diamond: So look, it’s different for every person. We’ve had advisors come and say, “I just went through a divorce and the most important thing to me is to recapitalize. And so a recruiting deal is really important.” And while I would never be one to say that’s not valid, it can be … And by the way, any advisor should want to and expect to better their financial situation. There should be economic gain. But it shouldn’t be the only or the primary reason for the move. So you want to monetize. The notion of wanting to monetize in the short term should be a factor in what model you pick, but it shouldn’t be the primary driver for a move. Jason Diamond: I agree with that wholeheartedly. I was going to say something I think maybe would’ve surprised you a little, which is like, yeah, I think recruiting deal is a very valid pull factor because what we’re saying is, it shouldn’t be the only pull factor. And sometimes it is and it makes us a little bit sad, I think, when that’s the case. But all of these factors you mentioned, and the ones I would add, I think that maybe technology would be another kind of factor that drives movement, all of these factors are not one specific reason. If you did the exit interview, either actually conducted the exit interview with advisors or thought exercise exit interview, I think they would point to a confluence of all of these factors. Compliance was a headache. I wanted to launch a podcast. I wanted to be able to send a timely communication to my clients. We used to hear that one during COVID a lot, right? By the time compliance approved something to send to clients, it was already stale. So do you agree with that, that it’s generally a confluence or a combination of these? Or in your experience, is it advisors are like, “No, compliance or the tech is so bad, I’m out”? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So most often there’s a straw that breaks the camel’s back incident or thing where they’re willing to put up with a series of minor paper cuts, if you will. And then almost always there’s something that happens. You and I got a call the other day from a team that said that they had split from their partner and the management of the firm was favoring the ex-partner, making it harder for them to stay or making it less fun or feel good for them to stay. So while they gave me a laundry list of things that were imperfect, I don’t know that any one of the things that were imperfect up until then would’ve been enough to drive them out. But when that one thing, that feeling that they were a second class citizen came up, that was the straw that breaks the camel’s back and went from a minorly frustrated to, “I’m out of here.” Jason Diamond: Yeah. And there’s probably a hundred examples you could walk us through. And I wanted to just highlight too, this concept is not limited to the wirehouse or employee or captive firm world, this is equally relevant for independent advisors. Granted, some of the pushes and pull factors, some of the triggers are not necessarily the same, but the idea that advisors outgrow a broker dealer or an RIA or either need or want or desire in some way, shape or form, greater autonomy, flexibility, freedom, control is certainly not limited to the employee space. I just wanted to make that point. Mindy Diamond: And I think that’s absolutely right. I think the notion of that frustrations or limitations or bureaucracy only existed if you were a W2 employee at a bulge bracket firm. That went out the window. As the industry landscape has expanded and there’s more and more valid ways to be a financial advisor, there’s more and more ways for a firm or a model or an infrastructure to frustrate an advisor. And that’s not being overly negative. It’s just to say there is no perfection anywhere. Jason Diamond: Yeah, 100%. And by the way, to play a little bit of devil’s advocate on that, and then we’ll move on, I would just say there are pain points that might come from a firm being small and subscale as well. My firm doesn’t have efficient technology. They don’t invest enough in the business. They don’t provide a lead mechanism. They don’t have a robust banking and lending or investment solutions platform. So this stuff cuts both ways. An advisor can be frustrated or limited and an advisor can be excited. Pushes and pulls I think touch on, we’ve heard from advisors in every single pocket of the market, this is a relevant concept. Mindy Diamond: The theme of this is that every advisor deserves to live their best business life. That’s what people are in search of when they reach out to us or when they engage with us. What they’re looking for more than anything, and this is irrespective of where they work or how long they’ve worked or how much they manage, every advisor is in search of their best business life. And what defines their best business life is having the best quality of work life, but also the best ability to do what they want to do with their business, to serve their clients without limitations, to grow the way they want, to be paid a fair wage, and ultimately set up to maximize the value of the business they’ve built. Those are the definitions of one’s best business life. Jason Diamond: I used an even simpler definition of best business life and I stole it from you, which is the true north concept, which is if your true north is maximizing enterprise value and chasing the dollar and trying to build something that’s scalable and saleable, then great. If your true north is to build a lifestyle practice, there’s plenty of advisors who are successful and happy and content in that regard as well. And I think that’s what we’re talking about, is finding your true north and then it’s possible. I mean, that’s the beauty of the landscape. We’re talking about this, a lot of this is pain points or things that advisors experience. The exciting part of this is there’s never been a better time to be an advisor because of the breadth of choice they have and the ecosystem that’s been born to support advisors, to your point, across the spectrum. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. And it’s also, I think, worth saying that it starts with really good crystal clear clarity around not only what’s frustrating you, but what you want ideal to look like. Because I can’t tell you, or I can tell you because … I can’t tell our listeners, I can’t stress enough how often we get calls from advisors that tell us where they think they want to be or tell us they want to move. They have clarity about what’s frustrating them or what they want to change, but they don’t really have clarity about what they want it to look like. And the less clarity you have, the less likely you are to be successful in finding the exact right solution. So our work, the thing we probably do best is really work with advisors to help them. It doesn’t take long. In an hour conversation, we can help them to really get crystal clear on what they’re looking to solve for. Jason Diamond: Absolutely. All right. Great appetizer. We set the table. Let’s dive into the main course now. I want to talk now about what I’m calling the 2.0 triggers or the new triggers of movement. And to be clear, it’s not that these are more important or better or more significant drivers of movement. In fact, you could argue they’re probably at present less significant than the ones we just listed. But I think what we’re saying is these are triggers that are starting to come up more and more in conversations and we expect them to only proliferate further. And in that regard, they’re noteworthy and important for advisors because advisors should be reconciling not just what are the things I need to be worrying about today, but also what are the things I need to be potentially worrying about five years from now. So with that in mind, let’s dive in. I think the first one we have to start with is AI. And I always chuckle a tiny bit when we mention AI, we used to have to specify what are we talking about. Are we talking about artificial intelligence or alternative investments? And now it’s very clear. Everybody knows we’re talking about artificial intelligence. So the direction of the industry, no over-dramatization to say is at stake here. It’s that important of a topic. Let me ask you just very simply first, is this coming up in conversations with advisors? Mindy Diamond: Oh, all the time, but it’s almost table stakes. So I think the way it comes up is that people assume, advisors assume, and by the way, have the right to assume that AI is part of the tech stack. The notion that if I’m evaluating a firm and part of what frustrates me or part of what’s really important to me is cutting edge, really robust technology, part of what I am expecting is that a new firm is going to have really robust technology. And part of that is really robust access to AI. And has honed the AI in a way that’s user-friendly, that really answers or delivers on making me a better … Not replacing me as an advisor, but making me a better, more efficient advisor. Jason Diamond: 100%. And I would also add, so as I think about this AI topic, I don’t want this to become a conversation around, is AI going to replace advisors, because I think we both agree that’s not going to be the case. Especially at the top end of the market for quality advisors, I think they’re not going anywhere. But in my view, when we think about the trigger of movement, AI has the potential to be transformative because a couple kind of use cases or trigger cases come to mind, and I’d love to hear your thoughts. One is, do you think advisors will potentially consider a move because they’re worried about this? So in other words, play this logic out with me. I’m 55 years old and I’m like, “Oh man, AI might be coming from my job.” And there’s firms offering 400% of revenue to move my book. Maybe I should take that check and kind of de-risk and monetize while I can. What are your thoughts on that? Mindy Diamond: I absolutely think we’re already working with that fall into that category, but to say that is the only reason for the move would be wrong. I’m grateful that people trust us enough to be transparent with us. So they let us know that underneath the notion that they want to better serve clients, they ultimately want better access to A, B, and C, they want to be able to do D, E and F with less restriction, is really the main reason for the move. But underneath it, the notion that my book, I want to protect myself. My book may well be the biggest it’s ever going to be. It is going to be worth more today than it could be in the future if things don’t go my way. And if I know I’m going to move and one of my goals is to monetize, I might want to do that now. Jason Diamond: I agree. And that’s where the top deal story comes in also. Firms paying a top deal is a part of that story. It’s what you just said, plus advisors know firms are willing to pay incredible multiples. I mean, as we speak, UBS is in market with one of the largest deals in history. So those two narratives side by side, I agree. I think this becomes more of a kind of catalyst or driver movement. It’s come up in my conversations on both sides of the spectrum. It’s the tech savvy, AI savvy advisors who are excited about this, who are like, “I want to be the most AI enabled version of myself I can be. It’s going to make me a rockstar and it’s going to widen the gap with my peers,” but it’s also come up with the people who are, I think, rightly scared and fearful about what this might mean for their job. Mindy Diamond: Let me ask you, what are examples of the way you’ve seen some of the best firms who have embraced AI? What is their narrative? What is it that they’re saying to advisors that if you come here from a tech or AI perspective, you’ll be better because we’re able to do … Fill in the blank. Jason Diamond: Yeah. So a couple that come up. First of all, I want to make the important point. Advisors do not expect that firms, either their current firm or firms that they are diligencing prospectively, have this figured out or solved. Everybody understands this is a fairly new area that firms are still very much kind of developing their strategies in. What advisors want to see is a few things. They want to see though leadership, they want to see investment, and they want to see a strategy, right? Effectively, they want to see a step in the right direction, really. So I’ll give you a couple examples. There are a number of tech savvy RIAs, very tech-enabled, AI-focused RIAs, because I think this is easier to be nimble. I think where you’ll see this quicker probably is in the independent space. That what they’re doing is things like this. An advisor logs on to their workstation in the morning and their system queues them proactively, Mr. and Mrs. Smith may be good candidates for a Roth IRA conversion. And then if the advisor decides to contact the client in some way about it, the system will of course help them draft the communication, but then it’ll take it a step further and actually help them to process and transact that conversion. So soup to nuts, ultimately driving efficiency. That’s the name of the game. That’s why firms, I think, are excited about AI, at least the good firms. Because what I think they realize it will do is, the stuff that’s a waste of time that could be automated that advisors, and probably even more so their associates, client associates are spending time on, that should be a massive time saver for advisors. And I think if you play that story out, what does that mean? It should mean bigger books of business and therefore more productive advisors because they have more time to prospect and focus on their clients. Thoughts? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I think you said it perfectly, but it raises the question then. You say that the RIAs can be more nimble. You’re right. I mean, the big story around the biggest firms was like moving a battleship, it takes a long time to turn it. It’s not as nimble. So what and how are the bigger firms competing against the RIAs with respect to AI? And second question, we still always get questions, and rightly so, about Morgan Stanley has more money to invest… Jason Diamond: That was going to be part of my answer. Mindy Diamond: … than fill in the blank RIA. So how does that all work? Jason Diamond: That is absolutely going to be part of my answer, is that I have heard this question posed almost presumptively both ways. “Oh, it’s got to be that the RIAs are going to be the clear winners in this.” And I’ve also heard, “Oh, it’s got to be that the wirehouses are going to be the clear winners in this.” I don’t think it’s going to be channel specific like that. I think it is going to be firm specific. I think there’s going to be firms that are going to do this well and firms that are going to not do this well. But there’s going to be winners in the wirehouse space. There’s going to be winners in the regional firm space, with firms like Raymond James who are clearly trying to be on the cutting edge of this. There’s certainly going to be winners in the broker-dealer space. LPL is investing heavily in this, as are many of their broker-dealer competitors. And then of course the RIA space, where sometimes they may not have the budgets, but they have a couple things. They have private equity backing, sometimes. They have the custodians that they’re built on, right, or the tech vendors that they’re built on. So Schwab and Fidelity or Orion and Addepar. They have other ways to access these innovations. One of the things that comes up with this that your question I think gets at is, a similar question that was raised around technology stacks, which is strength of offering versus integration. And that’s where I think a firm like Morgan Stanley really will shine, is they should … Because they don’t put anything out that’s not well integrated. The big firms have generally done a pretty good job of that. Versus the RIAs. Sometimes we’ve heard feedback where, yes, you have access to you name it, right? You dream it up, you can go and buy it. But the left hand may not speak to the right hand quite as well. Mindy Diamond: Yeah, that’s actually a really good point. And integration is probably one of the biggest … If you ask an advisor when they talk about technology as either being one of their pushes or pulls, probably what they’re referring to more than anything is not only having the capability, but having the integrated capability. So that’s a great point. And I think your point is right, that the final chapter on this has not been written. Nobody thinks that it has. And so whatever answers you and I can talk about today about who’s winning this race, or this tech race or this AI race, will be totally different tomorrow. We all know that. But I think for purposes of this conversation, to say that an advisor having an expectation that their technology be outstanding and that AI be on the table, that a firm is embracing it and heading in the right direction, if you will, has the right thought leadership and the right willingness to invest in it is what advisors are really looking for right now. Jason Diamond: Absolutely. And this is a question too from the firm’s perspective, if you are a firm of any size, you must be able to answer that. This has become question 1A. And again, I don’t mean to suggest that I think AI is the number one most important factor driving advisor movement today. It very well might be at some point down the road. I don’t think we’re there yet. But I do think it’s the topic du jour or the hot topic, where every advisor is asking about this. So that means if you’re a firm, you need to be prepared to tell the story or at least have the vision. And I think what we’re hearing from both advisors and from firms is this, AI is going to … What is right now a gap between the good and the bad, the quality and the non, is going to become an absolute chasm, right? An absolutely mountainous gap between the best firms and the firms who are able to adapt this technology or this AI. And the same thing at the advisor level, between the AI-enabled superpowered advisor versus those who are in the dinosaur ages, for lack of a better term. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. And we’ll move on, but it is worth saying that the day of the standalone independent, the one man or one woman band who hangs out a shingle, and to use your term, running a lifestyle practice, nothing wrong with that, but it would be near impossible to imagine a world where a standalone independent can compete with a private-equity-backed RIA or an RIA that has a big pool of capital behind them or to compete with the major firms. And our point is the ability to compete is probably more important with respect to this topic than just about any other. Jason Diamond: Totally agree. Thank you for tying a bow on that because I think that’s a good place to leave the AI topic, at least for now. I’m certain we’ll have more to say on this one. By the time we release this episode, we’ll probably have more to say on it. So we’ll have to do a follow-up again. But I want to talk now about enterprise value. And this is one where if you’re an RIA or if you’re an advisor at an independent firm, this might sound like a duh, but hear me out on this one. The idea is as follows, if I’m a wirehouse advisor or any sort of captive advisor, I don’t technically own anything. Agree? Mindy Diamond: Agreed. Jason Diamond: Okay. So if that’s true, that I don’t technically own anything, I technically don’t have any sort of enterprise value or ability to monetize. But my premise here and why I would argue that enterprise value has become a driver of movement is even wirehouse advisors know … They see teams like OpenArc, a massive RIA that launched last year. They see their corner office peers breaking away, starting independent firms. They see them selling to asset managers, private-equity-backed RIAs, private equity firms in their own right for these massive multiples. And what I guess I’m getting at, and I’m curious if you agree is, if a wirehouse advisor, let’s say, sees their colleagues sell to a private equity firm for 20X, doesn’t that have to become a little bit of a catalyst for movement in its own right? Mindy Diamond: Without a doubt. Historically … Actually, let me date myself. When I started this business now 32 years ago, there was zero way for an advisor who was a captive employee of a firm, of any firm, to monetize their business. It’s why there was so much movement, because the only way they could monetize was to get paid a big fat transition deal to move from one firm to the other. Jason Diamond: Yep. Mindy Diamond: Obviously, we all know that first it started with the big firms, and then just about every brokerage firm on the street began to offer a retire-in-place program. And that is the big firms or a traditional brokerage firm’s way of allowing advisor to monetize in place from their perspective to stave off attrition. And for an advisor that believes that the status quo serves them well, that finishing their career, that leaving their legacy, that leaving their team at their firm is the best thing to do, then those retire-in-place programs, like Merrill’s CTP or Morgan’s FAP or UBS’s Alpha or a name at every firm has them, is the best gift to advisors there is. But the problem is that the next generation at those firms are buying an asset they don’t own. And so when we talk about enterprise value or the desire to build enterprise value as a real driver of movement, what we’re talking about is not only that advisors want ownership of an asset, because ownership translates into more control and autonomy and agency over building it the way you want to, but it also translates into maximizing the value of the business that you’ve built. So that’s a long-winded way of saying that the OpenArc deal you are referencing, for anybody not familiar, is a Merrill Lynch team, a legacy Merrill Lynch team in Atlanta that was managing more than 120 billion in assets, part retail, ultra high net worth client assets, and part institutional consulting assets. And believe me, I don’t want to make it sound like it was a snap that one day they’re happy and the next day they’re going independent. Over a 10-year period became more and more aware, driven by the pushes and more aware of the pulse. But ultimately, while there was a long list of things they wanted to be able to do that they couldn’t to best serve clients and grow the business, the real driver at the end of the day, or I shouldn’t say the real driver, but a major driver was the notion of building and owning enterprise value. Yes, they could have all gotten very attractive deals and retired with your Merrill CTP, but they wanted to own the business, they wanted cap gains treatment. And so they went through the sweat equity big time of building what they’re calling OpenArc for the ability for probably five, 10, 20 years, because there’s partners with all different ages, so at all different times, to be able to really maximize the value of the business they’ve built. Jason Diamond: Can I push back on that for … It’s a super helpful example, but my one thought is, okay, yeah, of course, 130 billion in assets, they should be concerned with enterprise value at that size. And the delta between caring about enterprise value and not is too great because those guys have, by all accounts, a phenomenal business that is rivaled by very few in the industry. Most of our audience does not fit into that stratosphere. So what about advisors in, let’s call it the million to $10 million space? Should they still care about this concept? Mindy Diamond: Again, it’s an inside job. It’s a personal thing. Some don’t. But the answer is yes. And if I were them, I would. Why? Because whether I am generating a million a year in revenue or $10 million a year in revenue, at the end of the day, I’ve got an asset. I’ve built a valuable asset. And I have the choice at the end of the day or the middle of the day to decide a million things about that asset. How do I want to live my business life? How do I want to serve my clients? Where do I want to work? But one of the biggest factors to determining where and how they want to work is, ultimately, do I want to be able to maximize the value of the business that I’ve built? And while there are few things that are really definitive in this industry, the one thing that is absolutely indisputably definitive is that if you build an independent practice like the ex-Merrill Lynch churned RIA OpenArc team did, you will ultimately build enterprise value exponential multiples greater than any way you could monetize the business as a traditional employee. Jason Diamond: And that math absolutely still holds up even at numbers smaller than we’ve mentioned. I totally agree with that. I’ll give you one other reason why I think you should care. And I’d love your thoughts on this one. I’ll ask it two ways maybe. I’ll tell you my take and then I’ll ask you yours. Morgan Stanley, let’s use as an example. Who are Morgan Stanley’s competitors? In my opinion, the legacy answer to that is, well, of course the wirehouses are Morgan Stanley’s competitors. Merrill, UBS, Wells Fargo, what maybe used to be a longer list, but today those four. I don’t think that’s the answer anymore. I think those are the direct competitors. But because of this enterprise value conversation, I think Morgan Stanley’s competitors are anyone and everyone who recruits financial advisors with books of business. Because if you think about it, an advisor who has a $3 million business at a wirehouse, even if they’re not actually going to do this, they don’t have any entrepreneurial spirit, no desire to go independent, they still know that they could. This is an option and a viable option. And firms are even figuring out ways to cut out the middle step, right? Because this was historically a two-step process. You’re a wirehouse advisor or a W2 advisor. You break away, launch an independent business to establish your enterprise value, begin building it, and then you monetize it. If you could cut out the middle step, or even if you couldn’t, I still think it’s pretty clear that if you’re an advisor, this is important because the firms know … Like when Morgan Stanley’s writing a recruiting deal, they’re kept honest by RIAs and acquirers just the same as their direct peer set. Do you agree with that or do you think I’m reading too far into this? Mindy Diamond: Oh no, I agree a thousand percent. I think that it is naive for anyone recruiting for or on behalf of a traditional firm to think that the only competition is another traditional firm. The days of pomposity for a senior leader at a traditional firm to say, “We’ve got the best technology, the best everything fill in the blank. We have no competitors.” That’s just naive. Because even if it’s true, you’ve got the best platform infrastructure fill in the blank, there is a multitude of advisors that value things different than what you can provide. Beauty is in the eye of beholder is probably a good way to say that. But at the end of the day, what we’re really talking about is when I started the business, because there was no way, no really good way for an advisor to really monetize their life’s work, the only thing they could or were focused on from a personal financial gain perspective was the short-term deal. What are they paying? What’s the transition deal? Now, of course they’re concerned about that. But almost to a person, they’re equally concerned about what I can build and what will this allow me to build in terms of the value of the business I’m building in the long term. So let me ask you, if we’re talking about an advisor that has the ability to monetize in the short term for what could be 4X and in some cases more than that these days, and we’re talking about the ability to maximize enterprise value, and we talk about the concept of moving once and monetizing twice, what kind of numbers are we talking about? Fill in the blanks there. Jason Diamond: It’s such a hard question to answer because I do genuinely believe recruiting deals, when you talk about 300 to 400% revenue deals in the recruiting space, they vary a little bit, but I feel pretty comfortable quoting those types of numbers that most firms are somewhere in the 300 to 400% of T12 realm. There are some outliers, we mentioned UBS. But the multiple or EBITDA based or enterprise value M&A market where we’re doing these legitimate buyout transactions, the valuations do vary quite a bit. But here’s how I think about it. First of all, most firms are not purchased or sold at top line revenue. Most are sold at some sort of adjusted EBITDA number, which factors in local expenses, platform expenses, but also advisor compensation. And then that adjusted number is typically multipled. The multiples are anywhere from 8X for small kind of, let’s say, million dollar revenue businesses up to, we’ve seen deals struck at north of 20X for some of these mega cap RIAs. Typically, just back of the envelope, if I had to quote, I typically estimate around 5X top line at capital gains is a good kind of ballpark valuation. But there is quite a bit of nuance to it, more so than the traditional recruiting space. And I do think, shameless plug, part of the value in working with somebody who’s an expert on the entirety of the industry landscape is just that. It’s the idea that you need to run the horse race across multiple verticals. The good advisors who work with us typically are looking at a wire like a Morgan Stanley or a Merrill. They’re looking at a boutique firm like a Rockefeller, or they’re looking at a regional like an RBC or a Ray J. They’re looking at an independent firm like an LPL or a Sanctuary. They’re looking all across the spectrum. Mindy Diamond: I think that’s exactly right. But the topic of enterprise value, you can see how powerful it is and how wise it is. For an advisor today, when considering their personal economics to consider not just the short term, but to weigh in or add in or factor in, what could I be building and what ultimately will that business be worth at the end of the day? Jason Diamond: Yeah, 100%. Short of going out and selling your business, what can advisors do then? So I’m an advisor, okay, I’m curious about this. Or is it just as simple as, “Yeah, you should know what your business is worth if you’re an advisor”? Mindy Diamond: Definitively yes, because I mean, we always believe that knowledge is power. And just like it’s important for you to understand what your options are within your own firm, how can I ultimately retire out and monetize my business where I am, I think it’s really hard to make a decision in a vacuum without having other perspective. And getting other perspective doesn’t have to be that you have to go out and take 20 meetings. It’s not that hard for you to figure out what your business is worth to make it a data point for whether or not you’re ultimately best to retire in place or go elsewhere. Jason Diamond: Yeah, that I think is the main takeaway. And the education point is so important. I think because these are relatively new concepts for a lot of advisors that haven’t formally shopped a business before, there’s a lot of resources available. And we’ll certainly link some as well on the page for the episode. Let’s shift gears now, our kind of final trigger 2.0, which is stability and ownership structure of the firm. And this has been a little bit of a hot topic. It’s honestly been a hot topic every year because it seems like things pop up every year. And a lot of times advisors don’t reconcile the question of who owns the firm or how stable is the firm until something happens. The firm gets bought, the firm goes bankrupt, like the First Republic scenario. What should a good advisor do proactively about the idea that if you’re a W2 employee or even an employee who’s affiliated with a broker dealer, you saw this with Commonwealth, you just don’t really have control over what the firm decides to do. Give me your thoughts on this. I know it’s a big topic. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. First of all, using Commonwealth an example, it’s a good one. Because for those unfamiliar, Commonwealth is a boutique broker dealer that was privately owned and whose tagline was, “We love our privately owned status and we are never going to sell,” until one day they did. And not only did they sell, but they sold to the biggest independent broker dealer in the country, ala LPL. That’s not good nor bad, it’s just a fact. So if Commonwealth, who had definitively said we’re never up for sale, suddenly sells, any time you’re an employee of a firm, you never know what tomorrow brings in. You’re not in control over whether it’s sold. So that’s one example. But as you’re talking about this, I’m thinking about, I’m probably going back 20 years, so I’m 10 years into my career and I talked to someone who had been a very successful Merrill advisor. So I’m going to say he was probably generating around $5 million in revenue at the time. Going back 20 years, that’s a pretty significant book of business. He was courted for years by what he thought was a top RIA. And in those days, remember 20 years ago, the RIA space wasn’t nearly as mainstream as it is now. But the story the RIA told him was that ultimately, one, he was going to be a partner in the firm, that was very appealing to him. So he was going to have equity in the firm and much more freedom and control. And locally, by the way, the RIA was a really high quality brand. He worked on a lot of the economics, the short term and the long term with them. They did a ton of due diligence on his book of business. But he failed to ask … And I didn’t represent him. I just know this story. He failed to ask or do enough due diligence about the stability of the firm. What we think is really important, we talk about this expanded landscape. If you’re looking at Morgan Stanley, I don’t think you necessarily need to see Morgan Stanley’s balance sheet. If you are talking to a firm that is anything but a bulge bracket or anything but a large firm, it’s really important to do what we call reverse due diligence and to really understand if a firm expects you to open your kimono and show everything about your business to prove your worth, it is equally important that you do the same for them. In this new world order where private equity has come in and there are so many different ways for a firm to be owned and to be capitalized, it’s very important that an advisor understand what’s going on behind the scenes. And one of the questions around stability, if a firm is private equity backed, is it permanent capital? Is it patient capital? Is the private equity firm going to look to sell and monetize in five years? And then who would the likely buyer be and what does that mean for you? So the question is a big question and it’s really important. Jason Diamond: I love everything you just said, except I do think even the wirehouses, wirehouse advisors, honestly, as much as anybody should be asking these questions. And I’ll give you an example right now, UBS. And UBS, it’s not a story of balance sheet stability. I don’t think anybody has concerns that UBS is going to fail. But UBS management has been very publicly, “Oh, we’re cutting costs.” There’s been some rumors, I think for years, probably dating back 30 years to when you started the business about UBS’s commitment to the US wealth management business. I think those questions about stability and ownership structure are still valid. And to me, the implication of it is twofold. One, what you said, reverse due diligence, ask the questions, plan B. But also the concept of the exits or the off-ramps or how many bites of the apple do you get. So if you’re an advisor and you sell your business to somebody and you sign garden leave and non-competes and non-solicits, the question of ownership structure of that firm becomes less relevant because you have no off-ramps and no ability to exit that business anyway. A lot of times that’s how advisors get comfortable with this concept. And that’s what firms will tell them too, frankly, and we’re living through the middle of this, by the way, with Commonwealth and LPL, is vote with your feet, right? To the extent advisors can, the offer … And this is like, you used the example of private-equity-backed firms. This is how Rockefeller addresses the question of their private equity ownership. If we sell to UBS, all of our advisors will leave. They have that built-in put option. So knowing where the off-ramps are or how many bites of the apple an advisor gets, I think is a big concept that ties into that. But we’re absolutely seeing this pop up, probably largely because of those two examples, Commonwealth and UBS this year, more so Commonwealth, to your point. Janney’s another example last year or two years ago now where KKR comes in and buys Janney. So when these examples happen, it seems like it triggers advisors to say, “Is this something that could happen to me and should I be thinking about this?” Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So let me ask you a question. You’re talking, you’ve mentioned UBS offering this outsized deal. So how does the notion of stability and ownership factor in? If an advisor is considering an unprecedented deal from UBS, what are the caveats or concerns with respect to stability and ownership? Jason Diamond: It’s the same list of considerations you should and would ask of any other firm you’re diligencing, except I think amplified even more in the case … If I was counseling an advisor who was looking at UBS, that would be what I would say, is exactly that. You’re seeing all of these departures and defections, and I would want to have conversations with those advisors and understand exactly why and have guarantees or assurances that I’m not going to suffer from those same pain points that force them to leave. Or, and I say this a little bit flippantly, but it’s a little bit true, I understand the devil that I’m getting into bed with, but for 550%, or whatever the deal might be, I can suck it up. And that’s something that some advisors might well say as well. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Jason Diamond: I don’t want to end on the negative note of overly large transition, not there’s anything wrong with large transition deals, but as you look out, is there anything that’s coming up in your conversation with advisors that you view as the next wave of this? I’ll give you one that maybe you could touch on, and if you have another one, feel free to offer it in conclusion, but do you think age or advisors starting to succeed out of the business will become more of a driver of movement, even though to your point, advisors can access sunset deals? Mindy Diamond: I do actually, because I think the more the average advisor age increases, the more likely that those advisors are going to want to move on to do something else to monetize the business. And so much of the wave of movement we see is driven not so much by the senior advisor, because many seed advisors are happy enough with the ability to monetize their business in place. Even though it may not maximize the value of the business, it’s a close enough approximation and it means I don’t have to disrupt the apple cart. So we support that 100%. But where we get the calls is from the next generation that says, “Yeah, but hold on a minute. It’s a good way for me to take on a book of assets that I not otherwise have access to. And it’s great for my senior partner, my father, my mother, my whatever to monetize the business. But I’m buying an asset again that I don’t own and I ultimately don’t have control over all these things we’re talking about, the AI investment, the ability to create enterprise value, the stability, the cost cutting, all of it.” So I think it’s all of the above. You say, “What else is there?” I think that’s it. It’s all of the above. It’s anything and everything that drives movement. One, it’s personal, it’s highly unique, it’s different for every advisor. There are certainly themes, and we’re talking about them, but there’s a million different things. It’s personal. And while there are an awful lot of pushes, things that can frustrate an advisor, it is the most exciting time in our view to be an advisor, particularly a high quality one, because the options abound, the ecosystem is big, because the ability to monetize both in the short term and the long term is big, mammoth, exponentially bigger than it ever was before. And the true ability to really build an enterprise has never been greater. And I think all of those things, the desire for an advisor to be the best that they can be and live their best business life is probably the biggest driver of all. Jason Diamond: It’s really true these days, if you can dream it, you can probably build it. And we’ve said in the past, if you build it, they will buy it. It’s a great place to end. This was a really fun topic. I think that’s a spot on kind of fourth trigger, by the way, too. This sort of next gen is almost like the force multiplier or the amplifier of like they see all this other stuff and they’re asking these questions even more so. Because if I’m 60 years old, none of this matters all that much. It matters, but I’m out of the business in five to 10 years. Versus the next gen advisors are the ones who often bear the brunt of this. So I think a lot of really smart stuff. Thank you for sharing your wisdom and expertise. In the episode page, we’ll be sure we have our Industry Transition Report. And we’ve also created a tool, the top 10 tips for a strategic due diligence process, which is a great kind of practical hand-in-hand companion for this topic for advisors looking for more pointed tips on the due diligence process. So Mindy, thank you again. This has been a blast. Mindy Diamond: My pleasure. Thank you. Jason Diamond: Thank you for joining us. We'll be back with a new episode next week, so be sure to listen in. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 2 A Special Industry Update with Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond. Jason Diamond: Welcome to a replay of one of the most popular episodes from our podcast series for financial advisors, The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between. It's Part 2 of a 2-Part Industry Update with Mindy Diamond. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner, well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: There’s been a noticeable shift in how advisors are approaching decisions about their business, not necessarily in whether they’re exploring change, but in what they’re focused on when they do. Mindy is back with me for a continuation of our earlier conversation on the Advisor Transition Playbook. Last time, we spent time on the mechanics, how due diligence works, what a move actually entails, and how to think through the process. What’s become more apparent since then is that the inputs into that process are evolving. The traditional drivers are still there, but layered on top are a set of considerations that didn’t carry the same weight before. AI is one of them, and not just as a tool, but as a differentiator that advisors are starting to diligence more seriously. Enterprise value is another. Showing up in conversations, even for advisors who don’t technically own their business, but are thinking more critically about what they’re building over time. And then there are questions around stability, ownership, and flexibility. What happens to the firm itself and whether advisors retain the ability to adapt again if circumstances change. None of this is theoretical. It’s showing up in real time conversations. What we want to do here is unpack those new triggers of advisor movement and what they suggest about how decisions are being made today. So let’s get to it. Mindy, the legend, thank you for joining me. So glad to have you on. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. I’m so happy to be here. Jason Diamond: Great. Let’s dive right in. I’ll set the stage really quickly one more time. When we spoke about this topic last, we talked about the drivers of movement, what we’ll call in this conversation as the old or the legacy drivers of movement, and we spoke about the mechanics of the move. Before we get into the new drivers of movement, which I want to be the meat of the conversation, remind us, when we talk about the legacy drivers of movement …. And by the way, by saying legacy, I by no means want to suggest that they’re not valid today, because they’re equally valid, if not more so today than they were then. But when you think of the classic drivers of movement in our industry, what are they? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I would say, first of all, let’s start by saying that for every advisor, they’ve got a unique set of needs. So the first thing to say is that while you and I can talk about the categories of frustrations or things that might bother an advisor, they show up differently in each advisor’s life. So it’s important to note that everyone is unique. But generally speaking, if I had to package them, I’d say it’s number one that shows up most of the time is too much bureaucracy. A feeling that a firm or a model is just too hypervigilant in terms of compliance and it’s too bureaucratic and too hard to get things done.

Denise George tried to attack Jeffrey Epstein's operation through the money trail, not just the sex-abuse allegations, by using the U.S. Virgin Islands' civil enforcement power to subpoena banks and financial institutions that handled Epstein's accounts, entities, trusts, charities, and shell companies. Her office sought records from major institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, and others, looking for account records, transaction details, communications, cash movements, and the financial architecture around Epstein's estate and business entities. George later sued JPMorgan, accusing the bank of helping Epstein finance and conceal his trafficking operation, and her office had already reached a settlement of more than $105 million with Epstein's estate and related defendants. In other words, she was trying to prove that Epstein's crimes were not just enabled by recruiters and household staff, but by banks, lawyers, accountants, and institutions that moved the money and ignored the warning signs.A separate financial trail later raised similar questions around Ghislaine Maxwell. Reuters reported in 2026 that UBS helped move money connected to Maxwell before her arrest, including funds that ultimately helped purchase her secluded New Hampshire hideout, even after UBS had received a grand jury subpoena seeking information about her financial dealings in a child-sex-trafficking investigation. UBS had told Maxwell it would close her accounts, but documents showed millions still moved through the system before the shutdown was complete. That is what makes the institutional side of the Epstein story so damning: while George was trying to force major banks to explain how Epstein's money flowed for years, other institutions were still handling Maxwell-linked money in the aftermath, showing once again how elite clients could remain bankable long after the red flags should have been impossible to miss.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ethereum Institutional has launched as an independent nonprofit focused on accelerating adoption of Ethereum, its layer-2 networks, applications and broader ecosystem among major financial institutions. The new organization brings over 500 institutional relationships and a forum of executives overseeing $250 trillion in assets. ~This episode is sponsored by Tangem~ Tangem ➜ https://bit.ly/TangemPBN Use Code: "PBN" for Additional Discounts! Guest: Rand Hindi, Co-founder and CEO of Zama  Zama - Shield Your Tokens ➜ https://bit.ly/ZAMAPP 00:00 intro 00:10 Sponsor: Tangem 01:10 Institutional Eth goes live 02:30 Impact 03:30 Thoughts on OUSD vs USDC 04:00 Jeremy Allaire “Kiss The Ring” 06:30 Does this mean CLARITY wont pass? 08:15 Joe Lubin: Metamask will be unrivaled 09:45 MetaMask yields, will this kill paid subscription-based fintechs? 12:00 Coinbase Steakhouse yields vs Zama yields 14:45 Will people trust $STRC or DeFi more? 16:15 How long will these yields last? 19:00 Thoughts on this UBS test on ethereum 21:15 Biggest loser if Ethereum gets native privacy? 22:00 Aave Security back loans and lending 24:20 Pyth infiltrates Nasdaq 26:00 MiCA Day 27:30 Zama on Tangem? 28:10 Will JP Morgan acquire Circle? #Crypto #Ethereum #stablecoins  ~Institutional Ethereum Launches!

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Nando Sommerfeldt und Holger Zschäpitz über den Circle-Schock, die Abivax-Erleichterung und Ernüchterndes von Nike. Außerdem geht es um Siemens Energy, Citigroup, Siemens, Bank of America, Abivax, SMA Solar, Jefferies, Circle, Visa, BlackRock, Alphabet, Coinbase, Cognizant, Intuit, Charter Communications, Boston Scientific, Oracle, Trimble, Leidos, UBS, OHB, iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor Advanced ETF (WKN: A3CUJS), iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor ETF (WKN: A12ATE), Vanguard FTSE All-World High Dividend Yield ETF (WKN: A1T8FV), iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility ETF (WKN: A1J781). Und hier der Podcast-Link zur Cash-Burners Lilium-Story: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0aFq46uMdsSDB7gRA1IXri?si=E66fBk32QEKoKAmgQRSp4g&nd=1&dlsi=e4be74d32e4148ff Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

In this week's episode of the Coin Stories News Block powered exclusively by Ledn, we cover these major headlines related to Bitcoin, macroeconomics, and global finance: Strategy's preferred stock STRC crashed to $71 - then Saylor announced a plan to fix it: full breakdown on Strategy's Digital Credit Capital Framework Jeremy Grantham says Bitcoin will "dwindle away with a whimper" The IMF and UBS both just said the quiet part out loud about the dollar Ledn partners with Tether to let you borrow against gold - our interview with Mauricio drops tomorrow Illinois just passed the most punitive crypto tax in America ---- Order Natalie's new book "Bitcoin is For Everyone," a simple introduction to Bitcoin and what's broken in our current financial system: https://amzn.to/3WzFzfU  ---- Upcoming Events: The best time to plan for Bitcoin 2027 is right now. Early bird tickets are live — grab the lowest pricing available and use code HODL for 10% off: https://tickets.b.tc/event/bitcoin-2027?promoCodeTask=apply&promoCodeInput=HODL  ---- References mentioned in the episode: Michael Saylor — Digital Credit Capital Framework announcement Strategy Announces New Digital Credit Capital Framework  Strategy Opens the Door to Selling Bitcoin Under New Capital Plan Saylor's Strategy Initiates Buybacks, BTC Monetization Program, Lifts STRC Dividend Strategy Says It May Sell Up to $1.25 Billion of Bitcoin Billionaire Investor Jeremy Grantham Says Bitcoin Will 'Dwindle Away With a Whimper' Stock-Bond Diversification Offers Less Protection From Market Selloffs Global Family Office Report 2026 ---- This podcast is for educational purposes and should not be construed as official investment advice. ---- VALUE FOR VALUE — SUPPORT NATALIE'S SHOWS Strike ID https://strike.me/coinstoriesnat/ Cash App $CoinStories   #money #Bitcoin #investing

Denise George tried to attack Jeffrey Epstein's operation through the money trail, not just the sex-abuse allegations, by using the U.S. Virgin Islands' civil enforcement power to subpoena banks and financial institutions that handled Epstein's accounts, entities, trusts, charities, and shell companies. Her office sought records from major institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, and others, looking for account records, transaction details, communications, cash movements, and the financial architecture around Epstein's estate and business entities. George later sued JPMorgan, accusing the bank of helping Epstein finance and conceal his trafficking operation, and her office had already reached a settlement of more than $105 million with Epstein's estate and related defendants. In other words, she was trying to prove that Epstein's crimes were not just enabled by recruiters and household staff, but by banks, lawyers, accountants, and institutions that moved the money and ignored the warning signs.A separate financial trail later raised similar questions around Ghislaine Maxwell. Reuters reported in 2026 that UBS helped move money connected to Maxwell before her arrest, including funds that ultimately helped purchase her secluded New Hampshire hideout, even after UBS had received a grand jury subpoena seeking information about her financial dealings in a child-sex-trafficking investigation. UBS had told Maxwell it would close her accounts, but documents showed millions still moved through the system before the shutdown was complete. That is what makes the institutional side of the Epstein story so damning: while George was trying to force major banks to explain how Epstein's money flowed for years, other institutions were still handling Maxwell-linked money in the aftermath, showing once again how elite clients could remain bankable long after the red flags should have been impossible to miss.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Donald Trump doet alles waar economen 's nachts wakker van liggen. En toch groeit de Amerikaanse economie harder dan voorspeld. Tart de president de economische wetten, of is er meer aan de hand? In deze aflevering duiken Maarten en Marike in de Amerikaanse economie. Wat doet Donald Trump fout? Op welke gebieden gaat het wel goed? En wat voor groei hebben we het eigenlijk over? Hoe vertekend zijn de Amerikaanse cijfers? Marike buigt zich over de langetermijngroei van de VS, terwijl Maarten zich afvraagt of Europa nou echt steeds verder achter raakt bij de Amerikanen. Oftewel, om met voetbaltrainer Louis van Gaal te spreken: zijn zij nou zo rijk, of zijn wij nou zo arm?Heb je een vraag over economie? Mail ons op zosimpelishetniet@nrc.nl.Shownotes:Het artikel in The New York Times over hoe kleine bedrijven de dupe van economische onzekerheid zijnHet artikel in Financial Times over witgoedbouwer GE AppliencesHet artikel in The Economist waarin de MAGA-taks wordt berekendHet onderzoek van UBS waar verschillen tussen gemiddelde en mediaan inkomen in landen wordt berekendHet onderzoek over het krimpende aandeel van arbeid in de Amerikaanse economiePresentatie: Marike Stellinga & Maarten SchinkelRedactie: Ilse EshuisMontage: Misja van WaterschootMuziek: Rufus van BaardwijkFotografie: Folkert KoelewijnArtwork: Yannick MortierZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Anthony Guagliano is a founding Partner at Gallant Capital and is responsible for all aspects of the firm's activities. Prior to founding Gallant in 2018, Anthony was responsible for leading investments at The Gores Group.  Prior to joining Gores in 2011, Anthony was a Managing Director with Moelis & Company where he led M&A execution for transactions across various industries including technology, business services, consumer and retail, media, healthcare and biotechnology. Prior to joining Moelis, Anthony was a Vice President at UBS where he led the execution on a variety of assignments, including mergers and acquisitions, equity and debt security underwritings, and other advisory assignments. Anthony also previously worked as the Director of Finance at Nomadix, Inc and was an Analyst at DLJ. Anthony serves on the Board of Directors of all Gallant portfolio companies. Anthony received a B.A. in Business Administration with Honours from the Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario.

Our Kristina Partsinevelos covers Micron's results in the latest test for the AI rally. Julian Emanuel of Evercore assesses the broader market backdrop and explains how Micron fits into the next phase of the AI trade. Mehdi Hosseini of Susquehanna reacts to the earnings report and outlines why he remains bullish on the company's outlook. UBS analyst John Lovallo explains how yields, housing earnings and policy developments are reshaping the housing market. Casey's CEO Darren Rebelez discusses the state of the consumer, spending trends across the Midwest and why pizza sales can provide a unique window into the economy. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

KB Home (KBH) posted mixed earnings and continuing pressure for the homebuilder space. However, as Sam Vadas points out, the stock still rallied after the opening bell. In the tech space, Sam highlights UBS raising its price target for AMD Inc. (AMD) and BTIG initiating coverage on Take-Two Interactive (TTWO) with a buy rating ahead of Grand Theft Auto VI's launch. ======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

LIL #004: How the Ultra-Wealthy Actually Invest Their MoneyThe stock market isn't their strategy. It's their holding tank. Here's what the data reveals.Episode SummaryIn this episode of The Lifestyle Investor Podcast, host Justin Donald breaks down how the wealthiest families in the world actually allocate their portfolios, using data from Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, and UBS. You'll learn why the ultra-wealthy borrow against stocks instead of selling them, where real wealth is created in inefficient markets, and why the "safe" 60/40 portfolio had one of its worst years in a century.Question of the DayWhat percentage of your portfolio is currently in the stock market vs. alternative investments? Drop a number below - no judgment, just curious where everyone's starting from.Key TakeawaysThe wealthiest families hold over half their net worth in alternatives, not public equitiesBorrowing at 4-5% to invest at 12-15% is how the ultra-wealthy compound without sellingEfficient markets offer no edge for retail investors - inefficient markets are where wealth is createdOne group of Austin centi-millionaires collectively holds just 5% in stocksConcentrate to make money, diversify to keep it - not the other way aroundTimestamped Outline00:00 - Introduction - the shift from public to private markets00:28 - Why wealthy families keep money in stocks (not the reason you think)00:52 - The arbitrage game - borrowing at 4-5% to invest at 12-15%01:38 - Stacking returns - stocks, whole life policies, and compounding leverage01:57 - The stock market as a holding tank, not a strategy02:15 - Efficient markets vs. inefficient markets03:02 - Where the real opportunity lives - private businesses and real estate04:01 - What the ultra-wealthy actually invest in (family office data)05:42 - The Austin centi-millionaire group that holds just 5% in stocks06:46 - Why the 60/40 portfolio era is over07:26 - Concentration to make money, diversification to keep it09:00 - The shift from public to private - and what's coming nextLinks & ResourcesFlash Boys by Michael Lewis (recommended read on retail investor disadvantage)The Lifestyle Investor Lens (weekly newsletter) - https://lifestyleinvestor.com/newsletterConnect & CTAEnjoyed this? Subscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts.Every week, The Lifestyle Investor Lens breaks down what's changing in the world of wealth, what the wealthy are doing differently, and how to build passive income that funds your life today: https://lifestyleinvestor.com/newsletterCreditsHost: Justin Donald © 2026 Lifestyle Investor. All rights reserved.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

durée : 00:29:31 - Les pieds sur terre - par : Sonia Kronlund - Quand Stéphanie Gibaud entre à UBS, en 1999, elle est chargée d'organiser des événements haut de gamme pour des clients ultra-riches. Huit ans plus tard, sa cheffe lui demande de détruire tous ses fichiers. C'est le début d'une descente aux enfers et de la première grande affaire d'évasion fiscale. - réalisation : Valentin Rémy, Adèle Tocquet Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France