Attached is the OP's most recent print. This is a public record and begins a track record for those doing due diligence on a potential business partner. I have found that the best way to attract capital (and this is unintentional as well) is to go to conferences and sit in sessions and ask pertinent questions. After the session do not move from your seat. Allow a group to form. The heaviest potential investors are those who "wait" to give you their information. You can see the "package" they want to give you in their favored hand. If a pen is in the hand, then avoid chatting with that person. There is one contract you need to know you would use. It has the following blanks: capital, your guarantee of income to them annually(a % ROI); amount of advance notice to cancel contract, and the schedule of payment dates for a given year. This is a harsh deal, of course, since you will be making and keeping the majority of the profits and you never show your hand at all. Epic is reciting the FI's "party line". People who use that are people who do not have any other alternatives. The friends to cultivate are those traders who cannot handle all the money being thrown at them. They need to take money and hand it off to others in order to grow optimally. They do go to conferences and are panelists. You can meet them after presentations and the conversation is mostly about poor delivery of custom built European cars. Hand offs are in multiples of 10mm's and usually the number is repeatedly doubled to gain the interest of the recipient.
Are you suggesting that a trader enter a contract with a capital allocator that includes a guarantee of income (aka guarantee of profit)? I'm sure the regulators and prosecutors would love to get their hands on that contract.
In business contracting most participants like to minimize risk. Signing a contract that assures a profit is common in things like bonds, annuities, and selling grapes or scrap steel or constructing buildings. A family fund in NYC does 99 year leases on old dairy grazing land just north of wall street. The leases guarantee a profit over the 99 years. I do trade OPM under an MAT arrangement. I do this as a courtesy since the OPM is used to help others. and I want as much money being put to use as possible. How much is guaranteed is determined by the provider of capital. They ask for what they want. I believe they shop around for the best deal. I have dealt with regulators who found that my profits in accounts of OPM traded on POA's was illegal. The regulators cited me for illegal trading. In the final analysis, the regulators withdrew their citations. They decided that I had so many illegal trades that their basis of how I traded could not be the truth. They concluded that I could not have known enough different people to have gotten as much non public information that would have been required. My lawyers, on the other hand, would not let me go through their computer tracking programs so I could correct the "illegal trading signals" they were mistakenly using as evidence. In the FI, the way money is made is through commissions and fees mostly by FI type businesses. The regulators and prosecuters know very little about extracting capital from markets as a profit making enterprise. That is what I do. People who want to use money as a commodity for making money think that only so much money can be made. In my case with regulators, they KNEW I could not be making money at the level I was as a way to extract capital from the markets. You seem to be stuck in the same place as these regulators. The regulators will never be able to monitor trader's profits correctly. They use computers which deploy software designed by people like you or GS or hedge fund quants. you may notice I post trading logs for intraday trading. You may have seen the third party evaluation of a 100K shares trade that netted 17 points in stock trading. None of these facts can be processed by regulators nor prosecuters. They just happen and are considered as not possible. In some advanced fields of science I am hired as an expert witness. I have seen opposing lawyers standing and screaming with regard to my testimony. They all get their turn to show their ignorance when I present actual facts to them which they, mentally, cannot process. I tested a proposed inter watershed pumped water transfer BEFORE the pumps were installed. I showed the erosion and damages to the conduit with photos and both qualitative and quantitative facts. Why could not their engineers and scientists do the same?? Who cares about why they were so dumb. I proved that the pumping could not be installed and that was the QED. you post is sophomoric. So what ? Who cares??
"you may notice I post trading logs for intraday trading. You may have seen the third party evaluation of a 100K shares trade that netted 17 points in stock trading. None of these facts can be processed by regulators nor prosecuters. They just happen and are considered as not possible." The above was posted in the same post you quoted. this reference just quoted involved 11 accounts. You mention 100K as money. I mentioned 100k as shares. To make a trade where the net is 17 points/share takes more than 100K in capital. the math of trading 100,000 shares for 11 people and netting 17 points a share was significant to those people. We all know it is not significant to you. That is fine with me and those for whom I trade. 100,000 shares times 17 points is more than 100,000 dollars you mention. It is also true that I posted 100 contact opening trades in ES on several consecutive days whilst using OPM. WE can agree that those prints were just chicken feed and only deal with 4 and 5 digit profits over a few minutes. Anyone can do the math on what the returns are for whole days of taking the full offer. doubling occurs frequently as has been posted.
Methuselah, The screen grab was an IB Universal account in which you were trading INDEX FUTURES. There was a bit under $100K in commingled capital in the account. This was a thread in which you posted fictional entries and exits. Once you posted a "fill" price that hadn't traded... and you still lost money on the thread.
You posted the run to this thread: http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index.php?threads/doaks-challenges-hershey.246176/ Do you remember that challenge? You falsified fills in your favor and STILL lost money. IB's Universal accounts begin with a "U" ... as in U1234567890 You refer to the "big leagues" and you're trading less than $100K of POA... in your 80s.
I don't really have to get into it with you Jack. It really has nothing to do with whether or not your trading was legal or profitable. It is obvious that your fundraising claims are very dislocated from reality. I'm sure it seems very realistic to everyone here that there are sophisticated managers sitting on expert panels at the conferences jumping at the chance to make a $20MM hard money loan to some completely unknown trader without conducting any diligence. That is what you are suggesting, not anything related to managed accounts. Managed accounts are discretionary advisory accounts where the managing trader has power of attorney only in placing trades and charging a fee to do so. There is no taking custody of capital, or guarantee of income. The fees are stated up front and all other profits are retained by the investor. You are suggesting that the OP, who evidently would have difficulty coming up with $10K to trade in a personal account, try to go get a $10MM hard money loan without providing any history on himself or the trading methodology. Instead you are suggesting that all he needs to do is look smart as an attendee at a conference and ask intelligent questions. Even if he could manage to figure out a way to legally contract the hard money loan, the allocator could be sued for negligence if things went bad. Taking commingled client capital and making zero doc hard money loans with it is just asking for a law suit. Even better if the OP were to make a few of these deals. Then as he hit a slow period and was unable to generate enough trading profits to make the guaranteed minimum he could start using the commingled principal to make the minimum profit distributions. Wait, I think there might already be name for that kind of situation! Let's get back to reality here. To the OP, you are literally NEVER going to attend a conference in your situation and walk away with any kind of big investor without lying to them. The old days of completely opaque private funds are long gone. The regulators require greater disclosure now, even for exempt funds, and virtually every legitimate investor or allocator has a pretty extensive due diligence process. There are exemptions from registration and disclosure, but they don't exempt you from the anti fraud provisions of the investment acts. So even a 3c7 exempt manager still cannot mislead investors. Anyone who says otherwise is completely unfamiliar with modern regulations.
I must warn the posters here that these proceedings are being forwarded to the following concerned parties, re: any dialog with one J Hershey. http://www.preventelderabuse.org/