I'd disagree with the term "babysitter" .. when I traded in an office we were free to do our thing for the most part. The guys who ran the office were supportive and helpful. They truly wanted us to be profitable since they knew if we washed out they had to recruit a replacement "body". No big deal as they were in business to make money. But ... as remote became a more viable option it did cut into the business as some guys realized they could be as profitable at home as at the office. They could eliminate the daily commute. But that in turn could adversely impact (to some degree) the profitability of the office. As I stated earlier, there's no single solution for ALL traders. Some love the camraderie of an office .. others prefer the solitude of being at home. The only thing I miss is the catered lunches at the office.
2% for remotes is too low. I talk to 5-10 remote traders every day that are profitable. Does that mean there are 1000-2000 unprofitable traders to offset just these guys?
Dustin we are talking all traders here. Anyone that has a retail account. This could be uncle Fester that trades penny stocks. Keep in mind that only 10% of all traders are net profitable. So of those maybe 20% of them are profitable. I don't see anything wrong with those numbers.
Actually some of the guys I traded with liked the "structure" and going to an office each day .. no different than going to a 9-5 job I think. I think some guys may be less disciplined if they trade at home. Being in a more "formal" (trading) environment was perhaps what they needed and helped with them achieving success. Without discipline most, if not all, traders will fail. And discipline can cover a number of areas of trading, including WHERE they trade.
Okay ... then you're comparing apples to oranges. Not too many "Uncle Fester's" come to the office each day I bet!! If you count all retail wanna-be traders versus guys in an office then you tilt the numbers a lot more in favor of the office guys being successful. But .. if you did an apples to apples comparison ... of "serious" remote traders versus the office guys I think it would be in the same ballpark as far as success goes for each group.
You can't do that because serious is subjective. How do you define serious? Just because you post on ET does that make you serious. Uncle Fester is not trying to lose money. Neither are you. Just because you question what he trades or his style does not give you the ability to say he is not serious. We have to make the assumption here that no one wants to lose money. If that is the case, then Uncle Fester is just as serious as you are. How do you define wannabees. Most people would say 98% of ET is nothing but wannabees. It's too subjective. We can't scientifically determine what a wannabe is or what serious is.
I said ALL traders. Dude, you are the one that said 100 times you don't need a babysitter implying you are trading retail to which I responded all traders both prop and retail have risk managers. Do you even read what you post. God knows you are not reading what I post.
How do you define trader ? It is subjective too. I think your statistics are mixing traders with investors such as uncle fester.
My point is that a "serious" trader will likely come to an office, at least for a while. But .. over time he/she may not see the incremental benefit of coming to the office. Thus, the decision (for some) to go remote. Just as in 1998, 1999, there are still today plenty of people with Ameritrade, Scottrade, E*Trade accounts that trade now and then .. bored housewives, guys taking a week of vacation, retirees .. but they're not serious in that this (trading) is a BIG part of their income (if not their sole means of support). So I think the two pools of traders are not alike as far as goals & objectives. Agree with that?