Not trying to get into a battle here...but there simply is no SEC rule that I have ever heard of that requires the holding of money by a firm. I have asked our Compliance Officer to research this on more than one occassion, and we still haven't found it to be true. Note: I am just diving into this thread at the end, and have not read all the notes, but let's be careful about quoting rules. Post up the exact rule from the SEC, and I will check it out. Thanks, Don
Don, Not to attack BT or anything, b/c I'm really neutral. But doesn't Bright hold back like 20% or something? I think I've read that on this post. Excuse me if that was misinfo. just wondering.. trader99
Good point Don, For those firms who hold trader money for a year (Echo, et al), put up a reference to the SEC or SRO rule that requires you to do this. My guess is that firms are using this "rule" as a convenient way to lock traders into one-year contracts--which, if true, is underhanded IMO.
BT holds back nothing from it's traders. The above discussion was pertaining to the actual keeping of traders initial deposit if they decide to change firms or quit trading. A lot of this has to do with the capital of the firms involved. As always check the balance sheets before signing anything. (again, for Any Firm, not any specific firm).