Well, they WERE two of the best deals available. Now IMHO, its probably one of the worst. If a trader has to risk 100% of his own money to make 50%, then that's a statisically bad trade. Initially, your no money down, no commission, 35% payout was a very good deal. And then your 55 cents per fill, nothing down, and 50% payout from the first dollar was even a better deal for me. Anyway, good luck.
Banks are only a few thousand dollars. To think a guy would pay more should he loose his bank is foolish.I have had many traders loose 5 times their bank and walk away.Putting up a small bank is FAR from assuming the risk.I have guys with 5-10k banks that have million B/P'S.Finally the bank was created for one reason ONLY.Its because traders wanted to loose more then the 300 under the no bank rule.Finally my good traders DONT loose at the end of the month and the banks mean nothing to them. Traders who are scared of a few thousand dollar bank are traders who will probably loose anyway. Show me a good trader wanting to put up no bank and live with a $300 a day cut off NO PROBLEM hes hired.The facts speak for themselves 50% payouts 27.5 cents per fill ,its a FAIR deal for all ionvolved
This is exactly my point. If a trader puts up a few thousand and is trading large positions, then gets whipsawed out of a trade and loses his bank++, what is he supposed to do? Quit trading because one bad trade. Huh? What do you mean? Of course you were going to say this. But in the end, whether they lose or not, they are risk 100% of their money to make 50%. I'm not scared one bit. All I'm saying is that a few thousand could be gone in a couple of days at the beginning of the month if a trader takes a couple of losses and you combine that with the fact that commissions etc. are being charged to the bank. If you offer 27.5 cents per fill, no capital up, 50% payout from the first dollar, then I'll be in Montreal on Oct. 1st. Look, I'm not trying to start World War IV here, (World War III was Don Bright vs. everyone else) , I'm just sharing my opinion that I think risking 100% to make 50% is a shitty deal. I'm sure most people would agree on this board. But also let me point out that risking 100% to make 100% while paying $0.01 per share is a very shitty deal (maybe shittier). Of course all of this is relative to one's trading style. Cheers.
As I know that Moderator very well, here's what's up. Prior to yesterday, with the exception of some links (and phone number) to his company, NO POSTS of trader12345 (the man who runs GMMI) or anyone else were deleted from this thread. Sorry to disappoint you with facts axehawk, but don't let that stop you from making false claims. As a matter of record, all of the following still stand in this thread: Blatant spam by someone who was warned on 7/25 yet proceeded to promote and recruit for his company at many opportunities (under the guise of "just setting the record straight"). The only posts removed were yesterday, when he seemed to be confirming an appointment with you (off topic, well suited for a private PM), and his farewell "speech". Said speech, by the way, was posted about 15 minutes after he had promised me in a PM that he would no longer post on ET. Imagine my surprise. In that same PM he said, "Let me set the record strait. I NEVER started the tread and never advertise." Anyway, that speech was another example of painting himself unselfishly (as he did in his PM to me), stating how he's only "helping the traders in here" etc. while once again promoting his firm. For free. Maybe he is altruistic and only means well, I honestly don't know, but non-paying companies who are not sponsors do not get to use ET for free advertising. This is not rocket science. Most folks understand that this is Baron's site, those are the policies here, and they abide. Others attempt to regularly abuse it (see multiple posts above). Signed, That Moderator
Hmmm, You accuse me of making false claims, yet in the same post admit to deleting a couple of posts (coincidentally the exact posts I was referring to). Anyway, I'm willing to let it go. I'm tired of arguing with everybody. Let this die. Have a good weekend everone.
Just to set the record straight, the best prop deals are 80-100% payout which is very common among experienced traders. Nasdaq traders that do several million shares a month can bring their all-in costs per share to about 4 tenths of a penny if they add considerable liquidity. With Golden, you STILL have to pay ECN pass thrus (around 3 tenths of a penny). Thus, to save 2 tenths of a penny per share with Golden's deal, you will give up 50% (or more) of your payout. This is not a good trade-off! Do the math: A ticket writing machine trader (greater than 5 mil. shares/month) can make a good living with Golden's deal because commissions are super-low, but a selective low-volume trader (less than 1 or 2 mil. shares/month) who has a high ticket average (P&L divided by # of shares per day) will be screwed by the low payout. To summarize, Golden's deal works ONLY for high-volume rebate traders, not for traders who do low-volume and know how to place meaningful trades with high profit potential. Lower volume traders should seek an 80-100% payout and commissions that are around 6 tenths of a penny per share. So trader12345, please stop harping that your deal is the best one. It is ONLY good for ticket writing machines. If you do less than 5 mil. shares per month, you are better off going after a 90% payout with 4 tenths of a penny commissions (after rebates) which is quite common in this country. Oh, if the Canadian traders only knew what they could get across the border... 'Nuff said.
I received the following PM that raises a very good point which I want to address here in light of recent posts: In short, how does a firm defend itself, give their side of the story, "set the record straight", etc. without being considered spam? I suggest it's quite possible, as long as the respondent is sensitive to the no free advertising mandate, quickly and without fanfare rebuts any false information, and stops right there. No little plugs for his company, no telling of new "features" of the firm, no payout specs, no claims of BEST IN THE INDUSTRY, etc. etc. Yes, it requires discipline and restraint as the temptation is huge to use every such opportunity to make a plug, even if one of the intentions of those plugs is to just "help other traders". Is this all 100% clear-cut? No, it's a judgment call on my part but I've been doing this for quite awhile and have a nose for these things. And I prefer to err on the side of caution when in doubt. Given changing times and evolving community standards the Supreme Court, in their "definition" of pornography, said they can't say exactly what it is, but they know it when they see it. In the same vein, I know spam when I see it, and my previous post quoted many instances of such. I allowed those to stand, although a strong argument could be made that I should have removed them all, but I was bending over backwards, trying to give trader12345 every benefit of the doubt. Finally, enough was enough.