Yes... bpcnabe, they probably could. In the past the trouble was in getting sponsored for the series 7 exam, as firms like Merrill Lynch and many of the prominent full service brokers just simply would not sponsor candidates that had criminal convictions, this effectively made it very, very difficult to get licensed. Nowdays you have entities like prop trading firms that do not work with the public, so they may be a lot more inclined to sponsor you for your licensing exams, if you seem serious and determined. The firms like Echo Trade, Assent, Hold Brothers, Bright Trading and Xeres trading will sometimes want proespective traders to have a clean U4, but they are often times looking to eliminate prospective traders that have commited crimes like fraud, once they were licensed. In addition a trader licensed at a prop firm will not usually need a state securities license (series 63) since they are not selling to, or dealing with the public. This means that they do not have to worry about the state securities regulators and administrators.
We are subject to actual rules and regulations from our Exchange and the Regulators too. We have "some" leeway, but not a whole lot. Don
So you are claiming that you make 300k (your break even point) gross per month or 3.6 million a year this is without ECN fees/Sec fees/acitivity fees too so unless you are credits trading your real gross could be 10-50% higher at 400k/month or 5 million per year? I call BS on that.
So you saying that the 20-cents per thousand those guys pay INCLUDES ECN fees/SEC fees/activity fees??? I call BS on that but if it does I would have to rework my math because I figured any trader at any firm would have to deal with those. I'm done after this post on the subject, I cannot stand talking about my trading, every time I say anything about what I do here I get 10 PMs from people wanting to be my friend or pay me to teach them. Being just another random poster is so much easier. PLEASE no one PM me. Different topic but is amazing how upset some people get too if you ignore their PM. So then you end up feeling like you have to respond to them just so they don't get upset with you. But I digress. I screwed up on the math in my earlier post and I answered the BS call very honestly and said so. Thought those were the same numbers just said differently but they weren't and I responded as such. Don't go on now calling more BS on me, I own up to my mistakes, but I am not some driftwood new trader here struggling to get by. I did the math on my commissions versus the other commissions and based it on giving up 30% of my P&L. Obviously 10% or 50% would change the numbers drastically in different directions, but I went with 30% since someone else said that number earlier. In 3 months of last year that would have been better for me, in 9 of them would have been a lot worse. For the year as a whole, a LOT worse. And if you think a 400K month is a lot of money you are still a piker, I have had 7-figure days guy. Call BS on that all you want, I prefer it if you don't believe it. I still think being with a regulated firm such as Echo or Bright beats an unregulated firm any day, I watched the Tuco mess unfold here and am so glad I did not have an account there. I remember when the Tuco guys were just another unregulated firm looking for traders. How do you know which unregulated firm will be next? Just the downtime alone if I was at an unregulated firm and had to get up and running somewhere else with no warning would cost me a ton. To be at a good firm and get to keep all of what you make seems like the icing on the cake, not the cake itself, which is fascinating that it is now the central point of the thread. I am not here saying these firms have the best rates in town either, I know they do not firsthand. I have been offered a lower commission by a firm not even mentioned in this thread but the gain financially does not offset what I think I lose in my own comfort level with the infrastructure and support I get currently. For anyone looking to make a CAREER out of trading instead of a hobby there are a ton more factors to consider besides rates. I could care less where anyone else trades, they all need to do what is best for them, which pisses me off that I even posted here at all. And I have also said one of those other firms is a better place to start if they offer good training. Doesn't matter if you trade for free if you don't know how to turn a profit when you push the button. I also believe that in the end it does not matter to me what firm I am with or what software I use, I can sit down behind anyone's L2 and make money, because I know how to trade. And I do realize that knowledge is a rare commodity in the message board world, I see all the thousands of guys searching for it and am very thankful that I found it many years back. Many guys never do. So I have chosen where I keep my accounts purely based on what I feel is best for me, some no name firm could offer me free trading and I would not take it because I keep very large sums in my accounts and need to know it is safe. Likewise, when it comes to long-term retail retirement accounts and such the only place I am comfortable with is IB. Does it mean everyone should open accounts with IB? No. Just means I am comfortable with them and I do believe their commercials where the actor talks about their financial stability. It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to know money is safe and I like it. I assume that they could not say something like that over and over on CNBC if they were lying and I hope I am right. The only reason I even chimed in in the first place is to figure out why people were talking about firms I hadn't heard of and not talking about firms I have heard of. Sorry but I do not know who Title, Golden, and Lion are, and if they are unregulated then I think no matter what the commission is I would only trust my money and time to a place I know has regulatory oversight. Maybe they are regulated, I don't know. This is taking too much of my time already, took me 2 hours to write this stupid response between going back and forth from my trading to this. I'm done on the subject, let me go back to being a hermit now please. I have learned my lesson about chiming in and will again sit quietly and take the other side of your trades.
NAZ To set the record straight I work at Golden AND THEY ARE REGULATED. There are 30+ quant guys here most are co-located at Nasdaq. I myself make more then 70% but do way more then 50 million shares a month so FOR ME its a no brainer. Everyone must be happy with their deal and FOR ME a regulated firm was A MUST.
As long as the felony conviction happened > 10 years ago... you're not subject to statutory disqualification.
I know the SEC Act of 1934 [ Sec 15:b(4)-b] says that if it happened more than 10 yrs prior it would not be a problem, but why does the U4 ask if you have EVER been convicted? In fact, ever since the merging of NYSE and NASD into Finra, the stipulation of "within the past 10 years" has been removed from the application altogether, making the association more broadly based?