don, the "if the school was making money from you" is the key to my point the school is risking and probably if anything losing money - when that situation has turned round and you know for sure you are making money - then is the time to get an agreement - who would want to be tied to an agreement they made when the were still a learner - the answer is - no one
when i was at ETG Bob Kanter tried to cram some god awful contract down our throats after the fact. he lost a lot of good traders pulling that crap!!!!!!!!
you are NEVER ever going to get a better contract before you have learned - it is always going to be better after you have learned - absolutly 100% - if anyone disagrees with that - you need a manager and as you are new i will only charge you 50% managment fee - i'll cut that to 5% for any experienced people
The scenario you outline above is precisely the source of my paranoia. Why would any firm bring you on as a trainee without making you sign something first? How would they properly "incentivize" you to stay with their firm?
Just because you don't have a signed, written contract doesn't mean that the firm doesn't have their "rules" or their own "agreement" that you must follow. You could get profitable and ask them for some $$, and they can simply say "well, that's not how it works, we keep that money until xxx years, or " whatever..anyway, there has been plenty of good advice on this thread from several people. We've said it before on other threads, the days when firm's where actually "hiring" traders, and paying them to learn, are long gone (and the rare firm that allows traders in for free, really aren't when you consider what you end up paying in excess fees or profit splits. We (BT) have been bombarded by people who have recently "left" those types of firms, and have not gotten even the most basic of training, and have not been able to put up any money to start their own trading business. And that is what this is really all about...starting your own trading business (albeit within another firm), and it should be treated that way. A business, not an "employer-employee" relationship where you have virtually no rights at all. **I know this sounds biased towards our way of doing business...but if you think about it, couldn't we do business any way we want?? And if you had the choice of doing business the "better way" (for the trader and the firm, after all, how good is a firm with no traders>) wouldn't you choose it? *** I hope that made sense. When all is said and done, we can all do whatever we choose...so good luck in whatever avenue you all choose.
hey New Kid On The Block, I have some property I'd like to sell you really cheap. Southern California waterfront, absolutely beautiful. But I'm not going to give you a contract after you pay me. IM me so we can work out the details.
if i was running a trading company, i would absolutelywant you to sign a contract from day one, because all the cards would be stacked on my side - you sign the deal I give you - or I wont let you work for me - and you know what - no mattter how you look at it - the deal would be stacked in my favour - big time - so if you have idiots who would put their money behind you - and not ask for a contract signed in their favour - go for it - but i must admit - that i personally feel that the people who would give you that contract would be idiots - so maybe they have another edge - or else why would they put you in such a great spot if i offered someone a deal where i train them and also provide them with the money to learn trading - and then they wrote to a forum asking advice - i personally - rightly or wrongly would kick their arse and send them on their way
I may take exception in your statement above. We have to go out of our way to protect the trader and the firm. We are a very heavily regulated industry, and we cannot afford to have a trader yell "foul" - so we try to make the agreements as straight forward as possible. I would agree with you in most cases, but not in this case.
nkotb - A clarification question - Are you starting at the firm as a trainee as an employee?? That was my initial impression but most everyone seems to have assumed that you're "joining" the firm (which should require a contract). If they're just hiring you (i.e., putting you on the payroll and making you a W-2 employee - regardless of whether there's also some bonus based on performance), there's no reason for them to have to offer a contract (most companies don't have employment contracts such junior positions). However, as with any job change, before you quit your current job it's reasonable to get a brief letter that says that they've made you a job offer and briefly what it involves. At the least, you should draft a letter to them outlining what you understand the job offer to entail and ask for their acknowledgement. Good luck.
don, whatever i said that you felt you had to disagree with - and i am not sure what it is - is probably because i am crap writing what i mean whatever deal you give a new person is going to be stacked in your favour - in comparison to the deal you would give a seasoned trader - it does not mean the new person gets a bad deal - its just not going to be as juicy for them as it would be for the seasoned guy if someone can then show they can make money - without an inequitable draw down - you and they are always going to be able to work out a deal - as long as u both see the other as they see themselves