we share, i do not share? this isn't english grammar i'm familiar with. so, you personally don't share strategies/concepts, but bright trading does? are you seriously trying to make that distinction or are you trying to make freud look good? your risk distinctions have no relevance to this discussion and were created by you to deviate from your statement below: it's CLEAR you were talking about _fill in the blank_ RISK and that you 'SHARE some of the CONCEPT', IN RETURN. i'm NOT accusing you of this, these are YOUR words NOT mine, and you've been met with having to take responsibility for saying them. own up. by taking the exact opposite stance, completely contradicting yourself, you shirk the responsibility of your word and come off like a two faced liar. period.
I am way out of my league here...the posters here in this thread probably make millions working in prop firms... But I know that if I were to start with a career in "real trading", I would start with Bright Trading. Maybe the deal is not the best commish...but as was said...commish is not everything. I would be very scared of washing out and I probably would not trade enough to make it worthwhile for a prop firm...but I would have my best chances with a team that would "share". I think prop firms make a lot of their money on "bringing along" a trader to be...you experienced fellah's have very high requirements and really should be isolated in a trading room away from newbies and such... By the way...If I had a successful code that was written for me and paid for by me...well it would be mine...I would be using a prop firm for Forex type leverage and they would be using me for my successful volume...Actually then the deal would be more important...so thus this thread....but Bright Trading fills a niche for the dreamers who believe they can be "Professional Traders". This is my opinion of course and I could be all wrong about Bright Trading. If I am out of line for posting in this thread...well I apologize in advance. Excuse me if I am cheerleading....but Don or Bob or whoever they are..have always been real nice to me over the last 7 years or more...and they probably have made a lot of millionaires out of new traders. ElectricSavant (this is an alias)
Sorry about the sad panda.....anyway, my distinction between "I" share (collectively, as with the "Firm" sharing individual's strategies without their approval) vs. "we" share, as with the traders sharing with one another. And "we" as with Bob and I sharing our strategies, of course we do...a constantly changing search and adaptation to try to stay ahead of the game. Love us or hate us, no one has ever accused us of being stupid, and it would be stupid to not do our best to make our traders proftiable. Now, one more attempt at defining "risk" in two ways. One is the procedural, or software risk of tieing up a pipeline and the strictly financial risk of monitoring a traders overall risk per stock, dollar amount etc. Yes, they can overlap, but my initial comment about the trader "unplugging" his machine was more about stopping the orders being sent incorrectly. So, now I'm attacking you? I didn't see that ...my note about credibility was my simply answering your question. Now to come back to see "two faced liar" - well, I guess it's time to bring back the panda face. I guess I'll use that new word called "sarcasm" and say "well, you sure showed me, yep." ..with yet one more LOL - ".... wow. Enough for now, geez...hope you enjoyed your Thanksgiving... Don
Not out of line at all, thanks for the comments..... and, for others, a definition/history might be well served here. The business model we use is, exactly as you say, to fill a niche market. My brother and I engaged in the same model, albeit from the othe side, when we were trading on the trading floors. We had to buy seats and all that, but after doing so, we thought it was great that we could put up $20k or so, and use what is now Goldman Sachs money to trade with. This access to money made all the difference in the world...allowing us to engage in good, working strategies vs. what most newbies were doing at the time. This floor trading model worked so well, that we were able to open Bright Trading - and the first 50 or so traders were from various trading floors...simply going "upstairs" or "off-floor" as many were doing in the early 1990s. Maintaining their independence, while still having access to capital. We formed the Broker/Dealer (while only acting as "dealer"), we bought the exchange memberships, paid all costs involved to be able to bring on traders without them having to buy exchange memberships. Then, the big rush in the 90's from retail type traders, SOES bandits, etc. ..all wanting to take part in this business opportunity that had arisen, where there once was none....many firms were started (most gone now, for various reasons)...several remain, and a few thousand total traders, discretionary, independent, etc. work in this "niche" marketplace. We've done our best to help traders, maintain financial viablility, provide service to our people. (this may sound like "blah blah blah" to some, but we take our place in the industry very serious). We are not a fit for everyone (as you pointed out), but we offer a safe, secure place to trade for those who want what they cannot get via retail...or simply a professional atmosphere with others of the same ilk, to work together. OK, time for leftover turkey, to prepare for my next in a never ending round of diets, LOL.... Don edit: your comment about "experienced fellahs" is correct, and those same fellahs help us with the newbies as well. I/we work hard to put these types of things together for our members... Just for fun, this is what we're providing our traders this coming up weekend, at our Retreat. Our top traders and friends are donating their time and paying their own expenses to fly to Vegas to "share" with all the other attendees and watch the webcasts. (Oh yeah, for full disclosure, we charge either $49 or $30 to cover overhead etc.) Bob Bright - "MACRO ECONOMICS AND INDICATORS." Ken Jones - "LOW LIQUIDITY STATISTICAL ARBITRAGE." Sini Sorgic - "NARROW SECTOR PISTON TRADING." Mark Turlington - "CONSISTENCY. GRINDING OUT A LIVING, DAY BY DAY, BY FOLLOWING A HANDFUL OF TRADING PRINCIPLES." Dennis Dick - "TAPE READING IN A HFT WORLD." RELATIONSHIP TRADING. BACK TO THE BASICS OF MARKET FOLLOWING STOCKS." Darren Clifford - "THE POWER OF CHANGE - WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS WRONG." Don Bright - "RELATIONSHIP TRADING. BACK TO THE BASICS OF MARKET FOLLOWING STOCKS." Special Guest - Ben Lichtenstein, CEO of Traders Audio Squawk Box. We listen to Ben every day, now we have a chance to hear the latest from this industry expert. We've seen him on CNBC, now he's agreed to join us again here. Ben brings us the latest from Chicago and the Exchanges! We have a new SOFTWARE SESSION this time around. Ullrich Fischer: PairRangeTrader Rob Friesen. Portfolio Watcher Automated
never trade for a broker where the principals finance their own proprietary trading or engage in any of their own buyside/prop activity. Your trading data will be analyzed and even worse, could be used to steal liquidity from you. they may deny this, but they will NEVER put this in writing. verbal agreements mean nothing NEVER send all your orders to 1 broker. ALWAYS use 2 or more brokers. have orders sent randomly to your brokers. and then use an OMS to manage net positions across brokers. never trade with a broker which does not know what an OMS is or says their systems don't work with any of the main oms vendors never trade for a broker which will not distribute/wire funds next day of request never trade for a broker which holds your capital for 1 year never trade for a firm which asks you about your source code or strategy. trade execution brokers are meant to be a service provider to you, the CUSTOMER. not information gatherers. any broker which claims that you work for them, run far away.
Wow this whole thread reminds me of the story about one of the turtle traders who did poorly and decided it wasn't that he didn't follow the system, it was that Dennis was instead secretly giving info to the other traders. There was zero willingness to share blame for his own failures, everything was someone else's fault.
don, that, and your prior explanation, aside from being completely convoluted and confusing, don't reference appropriating strategies due to risk. your words now hold very little resemblance to your original statement. you keep intentionally leaving this quote out when you quote me: this thread is a really good lesson for newer auto-traders of what happens in this industry with a strategy that's even remotely original or sensitive. lot of sharks. careful who you talk to about them, or where you play them.
Trading plan says "will analyze depth of data derived from various news sources, 1 minute bars, and time of day...and respond with a limit order to buy or sell a stock or an ETF that may be a day order or perhaps an immediate order" Well, ok, that sound ambigous enough to have absolutely no idea of what the trader is trying to accomplish...I think we can all agree on that. My read is: program looks at "stuff" and may or may not send in orders. I might ask how many orders per minute or per second, or potential fill rate (because we "may" be held liable for costs attached to orders vs. fills etc.). That would be about it. If you think anyone is going to hand the reins over to their entire platform with less information, well...I don't think you would. Don
it's not possible to "share some of the concept" if you have absolutely no idea what the trader is trying to accomplish. you're contradicting yourself. regardless, your example is incredibly unambiguous, but its good that you clarified what the bright's idea of 'vague' is. since you know symbols and trade times as well, that strategy or elements of it are easily replicable and sharable. without a profit sharing or royalty agreement in place for the original trader, it is straight up ip robbery. any firm wanting to know information like that and not compensating for it puts themselves in a serious conflict of interest situation. exploiting that conflict by sharing the concept, not compensating, and even charging commissions on top of it is unquestionably unethical. firms that are not interested in sharing strategies are interested in knowing: portfolio/trade exposure, dollar/size per position, trade frequency, and hold times. risk can be properly managed with just that. no shareable concepts are needed. any firm looking for more, should have a very transparent profit sharing/licensing agreement in place. for newer traders, if your firm wants to know anything more specific than if your strategies are directional or non-drectional (outside of those risk metrics above), and has no profit sharing or licensing agreement in place, you should be looking for a new firm. value your ip, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Please just understand, that even though I have been given hundreds of plans, from simple to very sophisticated...all asking for critique or input, or whatever you want to call it - my normal resonse is "why not try it, see how it does?" - as long as it doesn't screw up the platform or cause excessive risk. As I've menteioned many times, I have traders who have made millions who I have no clue what they're doing - sure, I guess I could review their sheets, but the truth is, I just don't care - AS long as they're within reasonable paramters and not causing platform issues. We've beat this to death. Please trade your system wherever you like, make lots of money, there is no "winner" here - only if you make money (in this game anyway, LOL). Enjoy.... Now, go keep the VIX above 22 for a while... Don