Prop Trading Firms - Note On Threatening Regulatory Developments

Quote from giggollo:

What I don't understand is why it's Robert Green publishing this update and not the SEC/NASD. They need to come out and put an end to all the uncertainty. I don't see how they can stay silent when Robert Green publishes this info about what they are doing publicly. I think this hurts their credibility and just creates more misinformation.

Robert Green is shilling his tax services. Yes, there is a reason why the SEC has not made a public statement, because there is no statement to Make!!! Oh wait, it's a secret. Yes, our already intrusive government is going to start changing the laws on us without telling us, that way they can get us easier. Ha! I love it. Reardon Metal is actually starting to look rational now!
 
Quote from giggollo:

What I don't understand is why it's Robert Green publishing this update and not the SEC/NASD. They need to come out and put an end to all the uncertainty. I don't see how they can stay silent when Robert Green publishes this info about what they are doing publicly. I think this hurts their credibility and just creates more misinformation.

I don't understand. Why would the SEC do anything to help anyone? Why would they do anything constructive at all?
The sole function of government is to repeatedly fuck us over while calling it 'Liberty', hands in our pockets and boots on our throats. Would you expect the mafia to post a helpful notice, clarifying their shakedown terms to their victims?

The NASD on the other hand, is capable of improvement. Election of Sam Lek would be a good start.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

You make a valid point. This is one of the reasons I am laughing at this controversy. All a trader would have to do, or a firm for that matter, is create an LLC and bring traders into that LLC to trade. For example, I could start Mavco, a sub LLC of Bright. In Mavco, I make my class b partners deposit 10k towards the LLC. They then would trade out of the pool. I would mark up their commissions as the class a partner and a round and round we go. Now, it's not Bright Trading, but Mavco that profits. Bright would then charge Mavco, who is a legitimate customer of Bright. See how silly this is? Good. Carry on.

I knew that you had this whole plan already devised, and that you have always been a "closet Bright Trader"....LOL.

"Mavco" - I like that!!

Don :D
 
Quote from Don Bright:

I knew that you had this whole plan already devised, and that you have always been a "closet Bright Trader"....LOL.

"Mavco" - I like that!!

Don :D

Don, are you behind this whole SEC thing to get Mavco off the ground. I smell a conspiracy here!
 
Quote from pairsarb:

Don, when I called your firm, a rep from your remote division said that you payout only 75% when a trader's equity drops below 15K. If that is true, than surely you take a percentage of their profits, correct?

Is this true?
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Don, are you behind this whole SEC thing to get Mavco off the ground. I smell a conspiracy here!

I can't imagine it would be very difficult for the SEC to enforce an action against the sub-LLC.
 
So to clarify, would the following be affected or not under the supposed changes?

- LLC operating as a a Reg T account holder with a firm, 4:1 BP max.
- LLC has partners that maintain a contribution in the partnership
- Partners are allocated a large percentage of profits (80-100%) generated by trading for the partnership and assume responsibility for losses incurred.
- Partners pay fees such as commissions associated with trading for the partnership.

And how is this whole situation different from the hedge fund world where the LP or LLC is effectively a group of active traders using leverage as people have mentioned?
 
Quote from MiamiHurricanes:

And how is this whole situation different from the hedge fund world where the LP or LLC is effectively a group of active traders using leverage as people have mentioned?


The vast majority* of equity hedge funds do not exceed Reg T. The hedge fund is a pooled investment of OPM, not primarily consisting of contributions from the fund's traders.



*Hennessee: http://sec.gov/spotlight/hedgefunds/hedge-gradante.pdf#search="hennessee reg t"
 
Quote from Rearden Metal:

I don't understand. Why would the SEC do anything to help anyone? Why would they do anything constructive at all?
The sole function of government is to repeatedly fuck us over while calling it 'Liberty', hands in our pockets and boots on our throats. Would you expect the mafia to post a helpful notice, clarifying their shakedown terms to their victims?


Agreed, but you're missing the main point: now that Hedge Fund regulation is dead, they (The SEC) have NOTHING TO DO. So, to keep their bureaucratic jobs, they've had to come up with SOMETHING. As you can see, unbridled bureaucracy leads to more bureaucracy....and yes, sometimes with disasterous effects (via legislation).
 
According to the article on Green's website, this was brought on by REFCO traders complaints. They were trying to get there money back by claiming they were disguised retail traders.
 
Back
Top