How long do you think it is going to take for this thread to disappear, given that FT sponsors this section? She has openly stated that there is no real money. I have done a lot of work for several of these 'prop firms', and can assure you there is almost never any real money being traded. (Even the biggest ones.) However, as long as they pay, then it doesn't matter. Her not paying is a totally different thing altogether.
One thing is clear to me. Funding Talent is simply a very bad deal mathematically (in my opinion) compared to other “funding” companies Most of the other “funding” companies are not good deals as well in my opinion but Funding Talents math is even worse https://fundingtalent.com/pricing/#1619409473716-4e9c0a12-4ed9 look at the $300,000 flex aggressive acct you pay $1,950 upfront plus $750 a month You ONLY get credit for 20% of your profits to go towards making the 8% profit ($24,000) to pass the 1st phase of the evaluation - that means you must actually make $120,000 in profits to have 20% of the profits actually credited towards the $24,000 in credited profits to pass phase 1 (ok so now we know why they charge $750 a month—because it’s going to take quite a while for most people to generate $120,000 in profits to pass phase 1 . Then remember you also have to pass phase 2 after phase 1. With phase 2 you have to make 4% so in this case 4% of $300k = $12,000 but remember that’s $12,000 but you only get credit of 20% of the profits you generate towards that $12,000 so actually you have to make $60,000 in profits to have 20% of that = $12,000 necessary to pass phase 2 then after you’ve paid all those monthly fees and if u were lucky enough to pass both phase 1 and phase 2 now you finally get your funded account—-but guess what??? They only fund you With the amount of credited 20% profits. so after all that you get screwed in the end and only get a verysmall funded account FundingTalent $300,000 Flex Agressive $1,950 upfront plus $750 a month til you pass phase 1 & phase 2 (or you fail and have to pay to start all over again https://fundingtalent.com/pricing/#1619409473716-4e9c0a12-4ed9 Access Elite account faster No rules on trading style 20% of profits are added to Elite account bi-weekly (no cash Talent Bonus) 90% profit split on Elite account Monthly Fee: $750
What would happen if just by chance some trader max out his margin and do a once-in-a-lifetime profitable trade?
This is definitely not the way how you get a trading job. You have to offer something in exchange to your employer to expect him to hire you. Hiring total newbies just doesn't make sense most probably its just yet another way to extract money from your either from selling you an education course or selling you as a lead to some broker
Modern day bucket shops. https://jesse-livermore.com/bucket-shops.html Stock Trading in Bucket Shops Jesse Livermore’s Early Trading Career In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the little guy who wanted to trade stocks usually did it in a bucket shop rather than through a stockbroker. Bucket shops were set up in all sorts of premises, such as drug stores, hotels, cafés, etc. In bucket shops, “trades” were carried out instantly at the price quoted on the board. The prices came from Wall Street by a variety of means, including ticker-tape and telephone. The advantages of trading in a bucket shop were: • Bucket shops were happy to deal in very small amounts of money. • There was no delay in trading caused by the time taken to telephone the order to the trading floor on Wall Street. • Each bucket shop was an internal market, trading on quotes from Wall Street but not on Wall Street itself. Bucket shops, in truth, were little more than betting shops, where fools were quickly parted from their money. Although most bucket shops were not dishonest to the extent that they would refuse to pay a winner or that they would pretend prices had fallen when they had in fact risen, they were adept in employing more subtle ways of profiting from the greed of the would-be stock trader. Trading in bucket shops invariably involved margin. If your stocks moved in the right direction, you would profit handsomely. If they moved even slightly against you, you would lose all of your money. The natural ups and downs of daily trading served to wipe out most positions, resulting in bucket shops frequently taking all of the money an individual had “invested”. Livermore’s ability to interpret patterns in the stock prices enabled him to beat the bucket shops. He always traded alone – a lifelong habit. “I began in the smaller bucket shops, where the man who traded in twenty shares at a clip was suspected of being John W. Gates in disguise or J. P. Morgan traveling incognito.” “I kept my business to myself. It was a one-man business, anyhow. It was my head, wasn’t it? Prices either were going the way I doped them out, without any help from friends or partners, or they were going the other way, and nobody could stop them out of kindness to me. I couldn’t see where I needed to tell my business to anybody else. I’ve got friends, of course, but my business has always been the same – a one-man affair. That is why I have always played a lone hand.” Livermore’s Fortune Reaches $10,000 – But There’s Trouble Livermore’s success soon caused him problems. Bucket shop owners began to recognize him as a consistent winner – and they only wanted to trade against losers. He began having to take smaller positions than he wanted to, or even lose money in his first trades, only to later hit the bucket shop with “stings” where he took large winning positions. As he became widely recognized, the shops began refusing to take his trades. They called him the Kid Plunger. (Plunger = reckless speculator.) “I tried the other branches one after another, but they all got to know me, and my money wasn’t any good in any of their offices. I couldn’t even go in to look at the quotations without some of the clerks making cracks at me. I tried to get them to let me trade at long intervals by dividing my visits among them all. But that didn’t work.” Despite the bucket shops refusing to deal with him (if they recognized him – Livermore took to disguising himself) or only trading with him under severe handicaps – such as Livermore paying higher prices for stocks he wanted to buy and getting less for stocks he wanted to sell than other customers – Livermore continued to trade profitably. By the age of 20 his fortune had grown to $10,000. He had now reached a point where bucket shops began cheating on prices to prevent him winning. It was time, he realized, to move on and begin trading through legitimate stockbrokers.
Her not paying is EXACTLY the problem. That's the beauty of their scheme. Not taking your money initially but make you pay to cultivate your hobby is very much like a casino that doesn't take your money but make you pay to play each round of Blackjack not in the form of a bet but in the form of user fees. The mechanism is the same, pay to play and this is exactly the same as what they described in their mission statement. But casinos only pay up when you were able to win purely by chance while subject to all the rules that they put in place that give them higher odds of winning and kick you out when you manage to increase your chance of winning and win over them, the same as when they refuse to pay you when you have not traded according to their system that's designed for you not to profit or at least not as much as how much you are paying them in fees. If you think about it, it's very simple. The company only has one revenue stream, the fees that you pay to them to trade and their cost is their payout that they promise to pay to you when you make enough profit. Imagine if everybody is making more profit than their fees then the company would have to pay out more than the user fees that they are collecting, how are they going to make money? They will go bankrupt! They are a for-profit business; they are in it to make money not to run it as a charity. So if they are making money, then that would mean the opposite must be true that you would never be able to make enough profit to get more payout than your fees, thus you will always be losing money to them aka always be paying them. This is exactly the same business model as the market-making brokers where they trade against their clients. They can only make money at the expense of their clients and vice versa. It is just using different terms. Initial investment => user fees. Takeway profit => payout. The result is exactly the same. So don't believe all those online posts showing off all those outrageous payouts requests honoured. You never know who were posting them. And even if they are true, you never know how long they can keep getting those payout requests honoured the same as how long the casino would allow you to keep cashing out on them until they catch on with you. They might honour those payout requests one or two times, if they are really genuine, just to help them get the word out so they can attract more suckers but if these payouts start to affect their bottom lines, two things would happen: either they go out of business or they stop honouring your payout requests or even kick you out as a client which is quite common with market-making brokers in currency trading.
Somewhere in this world there is a YT video explaining how Jessica had to pay one of the top traders and a handful of other smaller winners. It worked out to be something like 5 percent altogether of entries, so they don't need to worry about going broke would be my guess.