According to what we filed for Tax return 2013 I spent about $1600 on Combines. I should have covered it all after first 2 months of trading. I mentioned I had not withdrawn anything until this week which was mistake. This week I covered half of my Combine expenses by taking part of my profits off.
Since I don't see the kid's posts, it looks like he has been improving. We might succeed in making a MAN out of him!
Never a dull moment, since imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, here is the new kid on the block: http://www.futuresprofile.com/difference2.html They are so new, they didn't even have time to finish the website. But further research revealed that they only pay out 30% of the profits from the start and that can go up to 50% later on. Now here is what I don't get: I know of 4-5 TST copycat firms now, and they all look farking sketchy. Is it possible that the original one, TST is the only shining white knight and everybody else is dirty like Harry, or maybe something else is going on??? Time as always will tell... After further research, the company is listed among these: http://www.daytraderjobs.com The Director of Operations is this Turkish gentleman: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sasisman They are located in Bethesda,MD just North of Washington DC.....
Ya, I saw a post by another trader on a different thread regarding this new firm. It's "sketchy" when a firm states "Trade for 30 days demo and if you pass then you're funded." However, it doesn't list any of the terms, just a maximum draw of $5,000. And any experienced trader knows that "$25,000 to $500,000" are irrelevant numbers when it comes to futures. The true account size has to be compared to a retail account: (maintenance margin per product x maximum lot size) + maximum allowable draw = true account equity value. At least they are starting off with one thing right... "Q. Do the rules change from demo to live? A. No. It is important for the trader that everything stays the same."
Funny you said that, because that is exactly how TST did a few years back. Nobody ever heard of LTP back then, it was kind of a secret (they somehow "forgot" to mention it in their full disclosure and transparency). Nowadays they still say it is not obligatory, but we know it better. -------------------------------------------------------- But anyhow, I would like to ask for a thought exercise from the posters of this thread. Let's say YOU are the one who has a little extra capital (it doesn't have to be millions, after all we are dealing with intraday margins) and YOU would like to BACK a few traders. You want it in the easiest and safest way possible, and you are not looking for huge returns, but something better than 3% annually. So how would you go about it? Remember, you want it ease, so you don't want to hire extra people or build websites or make complicated legal contracts, but you also want it safe, so you are not looking for gunslingers, but rather steady earners. And again, you want only a few people, who wants to deal with dozens of Chinese teenagers? So how would you do it? How would you set it up and what would be your rules? What would be your profit share? Your max. allowed DD? etc.etc I have my own idea, but before I share it I am curious what others think. The reason why I am asking this is because anytime when I look at these TST type business models, I think they just over complicate it way too much. But maybe I am missing something....
Damn!!!! Pekelo : first thing is to say clearly you are looking for 3% per year. Seriously: are some investors just looking for 3%???? Even TST asks for around 10% per month during their test period.
First you missed "better then", second, don't get distracted, just answer the question.... Third, % is tricky with futures...
For investors : would talking about "better then" insinuates some degree of greed ? And then this 3% number : why 3% , rather than 3.1%?
Now August is over and September is fully underway I am going to start my combine (I passed the 1st combine but failed FTP - see previous posts). I will be doing the same as last time and trade it in parallel to my personal account. Spot euro & pound only person account versus 6E/6B futures in the TST combine account. Let me show the douchebags how it's done. GT.
Simplicity is best. Yes, there are too many complex rules with TST, even though they are spelled out in their FAQ's and easily obtainable. No need to reinvent the wheel, as TST has already built a solid infrastructure. Many posts on ET and Big Mike have questioned why a backer would fund you after only 10 days worth of stats, claiming that TST only has interest in combine fees, and not on actually funding profitable traders. I can't blame anyone for having such views, especially when it's common knowledge that piker accounts do not have high odds of making money, and when there are only 10 days to build equity in the live account before the backing of a draw is removed (the backer of course still provides the maintenance margin). Here are some ways to change the model: * Convert the combine into a series of "training combines", and see how a trader can manage risk while scaling up, since it's the scaling up over time that benefits BOTH the trader and the backer. Example: start everyone on the piker 10k combine, then move to the 30k, then 50k, as in stages, with each stage being at least one month in duration, with a minimum number of trading days for each (to prevent a "one off" event where you crush it on one trade). * Eliminate funding for the smaller combines, since the odds of a trader generating profits and the odds of the backer making their 20% are too low, given the 10 day rule to build equity in the live account. * After passing the "training phase", then take the 100k or 150k "funding combine." In addition, a trader may also opt for the $35 practice account for each incremental stage, because it still follows the combine parameters. The only difference is it's not reviewed. Now, if someone creates a fuss and says, "but I'm ready to take the 100k on day one" then they can look elsewhere, no need for TST. If you can make $9k in a combine with strict rules, then it's certainly possible to make $1k with strict rules! Trading ES with 1 lot on a 10k combine requires a 1 by 2 r/r with 50% win ratio until the P&L is met. * Forget the LTP nonsense, as it's not necessary if a trader goes through the 90 day "training combines" and then shows how their edge is coupled with EQUITY of the larger "funding combine." Regarding fees, I'm not sure what fee is appropriate, it depends on what a trader sees as perceived value and what the firm feels is necessary to cover overhead and make a profit. Instead of a myriad of different combines with different fees, charge just ONE fee for the training phase, plus the actual costs of live data. Again, simplicity is key. Regarding the "no fee" model such as with the firm you posted, I find it less effective. The combine is as close as you're going to get to a live account, in terms of psychological pressure. It's not the same as getting a practice account with AMP. I know others will disagree however my guess is they haven't traded a combine, so their perspective is limited. The P&L splits are fine, and traders will always have differences of opinion regarding max daily DD and trail max DD, so a trader simply needs to accept whatever is presented and determine if it's viable. Perhaps there are other changes/modifications that benefits both trader and backer, however those are what I could think of for now. Ok Pekelo, what say you?