there are scum bags in every line of work.
anything with finance/commissions/services/large pay outs the sharks have bigger teeth.
anything with finance/commissions/services/large pay outs the sharks have bigger teeth.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Prop firms - why the scum bag image?
- Thread starter DEM BONES
- Start date
Quote from DEM BONES:
Cotton,
not a matter of being lazy.The issue is a dearth of people that are honest and who can be trusted.Your list has zero value.
Very true. I went thru the list some years ago, writing to them asking questions. Even if it was not so before 2008, most of them now are seeking a training fee of 5-10k or more. The trader loses 10k or more in the training scam before he has a chance to get started.
With the dearth of good jobs out there, soon more employers will require training fees, background check fees, etc from job seekers.
Quote from ksmetana:
IB's website says they charge $1 per 100 shares in commissions. How is that better than a prop firm?
Are you sure? That is an error. It's $1 per 200 shares in commissions for bundled. It's cheaper with unbundled (cost plus as IB calls it now), if you're providing liquidity. Actual cost varies based upon routing. I've seen it as low as $0.34 per 200 shares and high as high as $0.94 per 200 shares.
Quote from DEM BONES:
I think if of one of the more reputable firms such as a Charles Schwab could offer the same set up it would put the low lifes out of business.They are close but not quite there yet.
Yeah, the problem is how would they get around the current PTD rule of 25k as a FINRA firm?
Perhaps they could create another entity, for example, "Schwab Prop, LLC" or something similar. They could put in 20 to 50 mil with their clearing firm, offer "Class B" sub-accounts that weren't SIPC insured, take in capital contributions and match the buying power, payouts and clearing rates of any current prop firm.
I've asked Fidelity and Ameritrade why they don't offer per-share pricing, and they simply don't have a response other than to say it's not offered. However, given that Speedtrader offers 39 cents a hundred with no minimums, perhaps other firms will take notice.
Again, the main issue is probably not the fees, but the PDT rule that these big firms must follow.
Quote from Roark:
Are you sure? That is an error. It's $1 per 200 shares in commissions for bundled. It's cheaper with unbundled (cost plus as IB calls it now), if you're providing liquidity. Actual cost varies based upon routing. I've seen it as low as $0.34 per 200 shares and high as high as $0.94 per 200 shares.
You're right, however 100 share lots would be more in "cost plus", as IB's footnote number 2 under their "cost plus" structure:
"USD 0.7 minimum per order."
Here's the link with the "fine print"...
http://interactivebrokers.com/en/p.php?f=commission
So getting filled on the bid in two lots of 100 would cost $1.40(less the rebates). It seems the breakpoint comes in when you do 200 share lots, since the "cost plus" would be the same for 100 shares or 200 share lots given the minimum per order.
because people who can't take responsibility for their actions and losses need to blame them on someone else.
IB is a great broker btw. Very cheap. Horrible charting tho
IB is a great broker btw. Very cheap. Horrible charting tho
6:1 and high rates
vs
as much leverage as you want/need if you can bargain, multiple software from one firm, etc.
The truth is that with the explosion of these big-money retail firms, prop firms are closing right and left and the smaller more reputable firms are replacing them. Websites like profit.ly and investimonials.com are bringing more and more transparency to financial services.
Every trader needs a unique fee schedule/commission structure based on their trading style and frequency. Prop firms have a lot more leeway for professionals in terms of bargaining power. Besides, the negative stigma is in large part the fault of the trader who screws up and blames the firm to avoid taking responsibility for losing their money by not being professional.
vs
as much leverage as you want/need if you can bargain, multiple software from one firm, etc.
The truth is that with the explosion of these big-money retail firms, prop firms are closing right and left and the smaller more reputable firms are replacing them. Websites like profit.ly and investimonials.com are bringing more and more transparency to financial services.
Every trader needs a unique fee schedule/commission structure based on their trading style and frequency. Prop firms have a lot more leeway for professionals in terms of bargaining power. Besides, the negative stigma is in large part the fault of the trader who screws up and blames the firm to avoid taking responsibility for losing their money by not being professional.