Which prop firms aren't a joke?

Discussion in 'Prop Firms' started by Insurinator, Mar 2, 2010.

  1. I have been looking around at prop firms and attending webinars for a few of them just to see what information they provide, and gain a little insight as to how they work.

    I basically come away with the thought that they are businesses that provide leverage at your expense only and leech money from you. Other than that, the knowledge you may gain at a prop firm from a professional trader is the only advantage, and that doesn't mean that your guaranteed to make money.

    A lot of them require absurd education fees. The ones that don't charge for education, require office desk fees which are not reasonable for smaller traders seeing as how many traders they can house.

    Are there any prop firms that would allow you to trade remotely and openly allow you to gain education whether it be online or going in the office for no charge?

    My issue with the firms I've seen so far is that they charge so heavily it makes you question whether they are really wishing for you to be successful for them or if they just want to take your money and run. When you are successful for them... 30% of your profits certainly could offset even a very successful trader.
  2. Most of your concerns are legit and rightly so. Only a few firms offer acceptable arrangement where there is mutual benefits. Practice buyer beware and if you gut feeling tells you so.. go with your gut feeling.
  3. What you're looking for doesn't exist. There are a few shops left that will let you trade their money and rape you on commissions. Usually maybe 10% of the people make any significant money, while the rest just break even and generate tons of commissions. That's about the only option you have, unless you have a Phd in statistics, which obviously you don't since your on here asking for advice. It's just the reality of this business.
  4. I'm not looking to trade anyone elses money... I would be in terms of leverage, as is the point of all prop firms. I would always assume to take all the risk while using the firms leverage.
    I see no issue in placing capital into the firm so that while you are trading their money in terms of leverage the actual cushion for losses if provided by you the trader. A prop firm should never have to take the risk in order to make a successful trader, that's just dumb business.

    I can't understand how they wouldn't make piles of money offering in house education for free, lowering desk fees, yet letting the trader use the prop firms leverage with the traders personal capital as a cushion. This way I'm sure you would have a lot more traders comming in your door and because of that you would have more successful ones. You could even catch a moron you attempted to educate, who thinks it would be great to leverage a trade 100:1 and have it end up a winning trade. If the trade is lost the prop firm loses nothing.

    The prop firm would make tons of money either way, the advantage this way is that the prop firm would actually show sincerity about educating traders instead of trying to rip them off and caring less about if they are successful or not.

    Charging education, flat rate desk fees regardless of profit, and %10 - %40 commissions just shows pure greed and a "who gives a shit" attitude about making their traders successful.
  5. Unfortunately that's what this industry has came to. With so many suckers being sold dreams of easy profits, its simply the way things have become. Welcome to an industry of sleezy scumbags...
    autowealth likes this.
  6. haha, I guess all that money is going to good use funding the CEO's gambling account.
  7. We would be better off scraping up 50k and buying up a broker dealer and raping everyone else.... :)
  8. 50k? only 1 on 2000 ET members have that much. Avg bankroll is $12.56
    autowealth likes this.
  9. Surdo


    I assume you are the exception with a $125.60 balance, playa?

  10. My background is in public accounting and financial fraud examination and detection b4 I became a active trader 4 years ago. Statistical research showed that about 90% of intraday trader failed miserably and the winners are the brokerage houses. Churning, a common practice encourage by many firms to generate commission income is always generally supported by high volume trading. Obviously, if minimum volume of shares are required to be traded per month, this is a strong indication of churning disguise under low pricing. Of cos', there are other fixed costs - software cost, "training" cost, fees, etc. The odd of becoming a profitable trader under this conditions is very remote. And, yet many wanabes still continue to trade under this conditions hoping to strike it rich quick. Suggestion: don't set yourself up this way. It's a sucker's bet. Profitable trade depends on the quality and quantity of the trade, NOT just the quantity. And, risk management.
    #10     Mar 3, 2010