Guys, it's labor day weekend. It's a holiday! It's a weekend! He is not going to respond back to you until Tuesday. Nobody is stonewalling. Man you guys are something else. I just thought of a terrific idea. I don't know why I didn't think of it earlier. Fund your own accounts!!!!! Stop begging other people to give you money. Stop begging other prop firms to hire you. Just fund your own account. Make up whatever rules you want. And trade!
Sorry to break the news to you. But people in this thread are quoting CFTC injunctions and civil penalties etc. in very similar cases. Do you think Patak is going to be holidaying when people are debating such serious issues about his firms 'supposed' malpractices and mis-representation. He is not answering because there are no easy answers. And he knows if he gives wrong answers, and the matter does go before jury, all this evidence will make his case even worse. LOL. If you were running a firm and you suddenly found yourself in such a soup, do you think you will be relaxed. I bet you would be staying up all night trying to think how to calm people's nerves and how best to give answers to their legitimate concerns.
i heard they had 500 in the combine in april and 17 backed traders, i would say thats probably the correct ratios. what do you think?
I know this might be news to you and Don, but there are some people here who are not interested in this program, not looking for an "entitlement" or backing from anyone (I don't need your money, my bank account is very very nice)....and only want to participate in the conversation if this is a churn-n-burn operation they should be called out for it.
This is pure hyperbole. You are accusing him of having too strict rules and you are equating this to a CFTC investigation? What are you charging him with? Get it on the record and put your name on this thread so he can sue you properly for slander. And for the record, churning is not illegal. It's illegal for "retail brokers with customer accounts". Anyone here with a series 7 would know that. You can't accuse someone of churning with monopoly money. And you can't accuse someone of churning if they are backing you.
You need to study for the 7 and look up the definition of churning. Nobody on this thread seems to understand what the word means which of course is par for the course. This is "elite trader"!
No way. I'll make a market on this. I have a slight edge as I've been in their chat room and saw the number of badges in there. My exact guess would be around 75 or so but I'll make the market at 100 current combines of which 80 are paid for. That's current as in Friday's numbers. My guess is they had much bigger numbers in the spring. I would also guess that the numbers are very cyclical. Meaning, when the market starts moving and becomes very tradeable, they probably see a spike in combine starts. When the market is dead like it is now, people probably hold off. That is my guess. Edit: I misread your first statement. You were not asking how many were in there now. I have no idea back in April. The market was much better then so I'm sure they were at a cyclical high. I have no idea how high they get, I'll throw a number out there of 275 though. Just a wild guess.
If I ran a company like this, I would run it a little differently. To be honest, I would make it harder but also more fair. I wouldn't do a 10 or 20 day combine. I would do a 6 month combine and charge A LOT more money for it. I would relax some of the rules at the beginning and basically with each passing month make it a little big harder. Think of it like a workout. You don't start a guy off who is 200 lbs over weight with some super meathead workout plan. First month you start with the basics then get progressively harder. I think especially for new guys. They need to get comfortable with their strategy and the market. Let them make mistakes. Let them see what their limits are. Then with each passing month, you start raising the bar. The last month would be very tough. See, I wouldn't want guys signing up for 10 days and trying to game the system and get lucky. Only to have them fail and come on ET and threaten to sue me. I would want guys who are in this for the long haul. But I would not be charging $200. I would probably charge $1500 to $2000. However, when they went live, they would have a lot more latitude. Because I would know that they went through a rigorous 6 month program so they most likely did not get "lucky". I would charge high commissions though. But in return they would get far more liberal rules and restrictions. Again, as a backer, I would feel more comfortable with 6 months of trading to evaluate them. Obviously they are setting the bar low to go after quantity vs quality. They are actually doing that for "your" benefit. It's much easier for guys to scrape together $150 vs 2k. Of course this back fires on them when they see how temperamental guys can get when they fail at something over and over. I suspect 12 months from now their combines will be even much more different then they are today. I will give these guys credit for the fact that they do listen to the criticism and they make the proper changes.
we all know what churning an account means... i believe what some are referring to is churning people. big difference.
GMST Respect for calling it like you see it Mav For someone who profess not to have a dog in the hunt regarding patak â you are sure going out of your way trying to defend him / it Just an observation RN