pt. is in old day you didn't need a series 7 to trade firm capital. your pt. is also correct my pt. was that disguisng small amount of capital contributions to get around around reg t requirements helped bring in series 7 requirement for prop. traders nothing new when you bring in masses i.e. lower requirements you end up with regulation. e.g hedge funds etc..... ps your timeline is more accurate
I disagree. In the mid 90's, you were able to SOES with a series 7. You were allowed to have an unsolicited account to trade. I agree with you saying Carlin is the customer arm of Generic.
No, I believe you are right. Technically the SOES traders were trading the seperate accounts of investors. Anyone can trade a limited number of accounts with discretion and not as a professional. I may be wrong about SOES being for non - pros, but I am pretty sure that was the case. In any event, when the shit hit the fan at some of the big firms, large fines were paid by the principals, SOES trading disappeared and the very same traders were required to become licensed (series 7) to trade. They never traded SOES again. Now THIS is not a guess. This is exactly what happened. Peace, RS
You need a series 7 if the prop firm is actually trading an account for a broker dealer. If it is a private firm you don't need it
Yes, this is probably part of the reason the large fines I mentioned were imposed. While I am not sure what the specific breakdown of violaations was that incurred these fines (trading firm capital, phantom "loans" etc.), I am positive about the magnitude of the fines. And about the elimination of SOESing in the situations I referred to. There are no secrets about this. It is all public record. I guess if anyone was interested enough, they could find out all the details by going to NASDR.com and checking the big name trading firms and the principals involved. But its pretty dull and old news though. Peace, RS