Ray Bitar and Bright Trading

[JackDogII]

Quote from Maverick74:

Don, the only two firms I can think of that might be able to merge with you is Avatar and Great Point. Especially if you are talking about 200 traders. I doubt G2 has that many guys left. I was in their office this spring and it looked like a ghost town. I have no idea why would you want to bring on "more" equity guys. I'm sure you have some reason I haven't thought of.

Regarding Ray Bitar, I don't know anything about the guy but you are kind of brushing it off as he was this independent guy so it's not our problem. Don, who you "choose" to associate with in this business speaks volumes about the lengths you are willing to go to to make a dime. Now I don't think you had any idea this guy was a con man when you met him, but I also doubt he smelled like roses. I think it's unfortunate. I saw this first hand at my old firm how men in power will look the other way if it means a few more dollars in their pocket.

Anyway, if I were your adviser and I was advising you on an acquisition, I would tell you to find a group of guys in another sector or area where you are NOT already involved in and expand your offerings. Find an automation group, a futures group, options group, portfolio group, etc. Don't just go with more of the same. Anyway, good luck with whoever it is.

Mav

Another great post - thanks.

As you say with the Ray Bitar thing there is that point about "in bed w/dogs - get fleas" thing. Don's casual acceptance of the facts in this case does him no good.

From your statement "Find an automation group, a futures group, options group, portfolio group, etc." I think the 2 areas you left out were information group and technology group.

I recently paid to trademark the slogan "Information = Equity." The 2 points that I believe would change everything at Bright are 1) technology and training that produce enough trade decision support information to add an edge to each trading decision and even more important 2) a model where Bright profits are mostly related to and dependent on trader success.

The model that is 100% dependent on juice screams that he really has no faith in his ability to produce successful traders.

Surely all those "smartest guys on the planet" claimed by Don could come up with something. If they did, then with training that produced results AND providing capital Don could then claim a piece of those trading profits.

For me I think he is too greedy and gutless to share that much risk and doesn't have the confidence in his training, model or team to try.

Don is lucky to have an advisor with your reach and understanding but I think you are talking over his head and beyond his or his team's abilities, brains, ethics or guts.

Mav - Please don't forget my invitation to tequila and tapas next time you are in Vegas - cheers

Jack

 

[nkhoi]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Very interesting, I am surprised to see Jesus Ferguson potentially one of the bad guys--- i don't follow poker, so this is all new to me.



http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...ticleId/9480/A-Look-At-The-Lederer-Files.aspx

au contraire.

... and not only that, Lederer claims Ferguson also sent the $5 million dollar disbursement back to the company, for a total of $14 million dollars worth the aid to FTP. Lederer painted a picture of Ferguson to make him worthy of the nickname "Jesus" he has had for many years.

 

[HurricaneUS]

Quote from Don Bright:

Ah, Jack. I was simply using examples. I bring our top quant's and others who show a great proclivity for trading and teaching, makes my life much simpler. I provide some basics, and turn things over to my top guys.

As far as the Industry goes, sure there has been some consolidation, thank goodness....way too many fly by nights a few years back, bad for everyone. And, as mentioned, I'm being asked about adding a few hundred traders from another Firm. Waiting for more details.

At Bright, we are in the process of diversifying our own business model, and I will be discussing it here. I think I may know which webinar you attended, and I think I was simply answering email type questions, which is part of what I like to do. And, it helps some of the newbies.

Coming up soon, hopefully (regulatory hurdles etc. going our way) - new and better ways to trade, for a wider range of individuals and funds.

Don

edit: (still logged in, read the rest of your post)... ah, the futures. In our experience, we've had everyone except our family lose money trading emini's. Did I speak in an absolute that of course is not correct? Yes, but when someone says "the best hamburger in the world" do they really mean it? Sorry if that bothered you, seriously. A lot of friends make money trading futures, we don't have a good rate with GS, and don't offer them. We Prefer to use SPY or other ETF"s.

edit #2 (still trading a pair with earnings after the close, LOL)...

You would be more than welcome to join us Jack, thanks for the consideration. I don't hold grudges, not healthy.

I hope that helps a bit,

Don

Don, you're anti-confrontational aren't you?

I haven't figured out whether it's your real personality or simply a business-minded ruse persona.

Which is it? the latter or the former?

 

[optionbull]

Quote from JackDogII:

Mav

Another great post - thanks.

As you say with the Ray Bitar thing there is that point about "in bed w/dogs - get fleas" thing. Don's casual acceptance of the facts in this case does him no good.

From your statement "Find an automation group, a futures group, options group, portfolio group, etc." I think the 2 areas you left out were information group and technology group.

I recently paid to trademark the slogan "Information = Equity." The 2 points that I believe would change everything at Bright are 1) technology and training that produce enough trade decision support information to add an edge to each trading decision and even more important 2) a model where Bright profits are mostly related to and dependent on trader success.

The model that is 100% dependent on juice screams that he really has no faith in his ability to produce successful traders.

Surely all those "smartest guys on the planet" claimed by Don could come up with something. If they did, then with training that produced results AND providing capital Don could then claim a piece of those trading profits.

For me I think he is too greedy and gutless to share that much risk and doesn't have the confidence in his training, model or team to try.

Don is lucky to have an advisor with your reach and understanding but I think you are talking over his head and beyond his or his team's abilities, brains, ethics or guts.

Mav - Please don't forget my invitation to tequila and tapas next time you are in Vegas - cheers
Jack

+1

 

[billyjoerob]

Reading about all these poker players and their cash flow problems, I don't get the sense that very many of them are good business people. Lindgren is a "degen," that much is clear. But the rest of them seem to owe each other tons of money. Why?

 

[londonkid]

Quote from JackDogII:



For me I think he is too greedy and gutless to share that much risk and doesn't have the confidence in his training, model or team to try.

Don is lucky to have an advisor with your reach and understanding but I think you are talking over his head and beyond his or his team's abilities, brains, ethics or guts.

Mav - Please don't forget my invitation to tequila and tapas next time you are in Vegas - cheers

Jack

Hey Jack

Knock it off mate, you are coming across as a bad loser. If you don't like a firm just walk away, why spread negative energy there is no upside it will only return to you someday.

Of course most people fail to become a profitable trader on ANY training course. There are a number of reasons for this but a few are:

(i) people cannot follow simple instructions - human nature
(ii) people have no discipline
(iii) people have no idea of the true meaning of ZSG they expect to win putting no work in sitting in their trailer in their pants against phd's at banks.
(iv) people dont take personal responsibility
(v) people get trading ideas from the internet etc.

obv most retail trades lose
and most prop traders lose also - get over it

find out why and move on.

FWIW I dont know Don or his firm.

 

[oldtime]

Quote from londonkid:

Hey Jack

Knock it off mate, you are coming across as a bad loser. If you don't like a firm just walk away, why spread negative energy there is no upside it will only return to you someday.

Of course most people fail to become a profitable trader on ANY training course. There are a number of reasons for this but a few are:

(i) people cannot follow simple instructions - human nature
(ii) people have no discipline
(iii) people have no idea of the true meaning of ZSG they expect to win putting no work in sitting in their trailer in their pants against phd's at banks.
(iv) people dont take personal responsibility
(v) people get trading ideas from the internet etc.

obv most retail trades lose
and most prop traders lose also - get over it

find out why and move on.

FWIW I dont know Don or his firm.

you sure about that? I've questioned this "most traders lose" myth. If you count out the gullible, and those with unrealistic expectations, and those with no concept or understanding of risk, I'm not so sure most lose.

I think any thinking person can make money trading if they just pay attention. Many drop out because they just can't take the lifestyle. But if you are cut out for it, it is slighly better than working for somebody else. Maybe not more profitable, but more satisfying for a certain individual.

And some of us just don't have any choice, because nobody in their right mind would hire us.

 

[lwlee]

It's the nature of the beast. The smart ones, like Negreanu, treat their poker as a business. The others, well, you got the same ones in trading, guys hoping to get rich quick. In the poker world, staking other players and lending money based just on your word to pay back, is big. That's how Lindgren was able to rip off Voulgaris for millions. 2+2 forum is littered with threads about how one guy ripped off another. One pitiful slob, Brad Booth, even made a pathetic Youtube to "apologize" to the poker community. Dude was crying and everything. This was a guy that had some fame as a poker TV celeb, used it to dupe people.

Quote from billyjoerob:

Reading about all these poker players and their cash flow problems, I don't get the sense that very many of them are good business people. Lindgren is a "degen," that much is clear. But the rest of them seem to owe each other tons of money. Why?

 

[shopster]

Successful people do what failures won't.

 

[londonkid]

Quote from oldtime:

you sure about that? I've questioned this "most traders lose" myth. If you count out the gullible, and those with unrealistic expectations, and those with no concept or understanding of risk, I'm not so sure most lose.

I think any thinking person can make money trading if they just pay attention. Many drop out because they just can't take the lifestyle. But if you are cut out for it, it is slighly better than working for somebody else. Maybe not more profitable, but more satisfying for a certain individual.

And some of us just don't have any choice, because nobody in their right mind would hire us.

well I certainly never said 'most traders lose' that kind of doesn't make sense considering for the most part trading is a ZSG. if you are talking about retail trade from home traders then I am certain the majority lose, from speaking to prop staff they have also confirmed to me that most prop traders lose (note - this is not the same as saying the majority of their current traders lose). Just anecdotal I know but if you look at all the big banks and the profits they generate, the size they trade in from a ZSG perspective the money has got to come from somewhere.

Retail traders can certainly win as long as they focus their strategy where the odds are on their side, after all the biggest advantage is they can trade when they want the institutions must trade.

A path to profitability can be forged by working out who all the participants are in your chosen market, finding out who is winning and who is losing. You then either do what the winners are doing or find your own strategy by building blocks up based on making sure you do not do what the losers do. The former is much harder as a lot of the institutions will rely on technology, retail order flow, information flow that you will not have access to. Therefore I suggest the easiest route is to focus on not doing what the losers do and making small adjustments until you work it out.

those that have no concept or understanding of risk will certainly fail but I believe there is a yet bigger subset of people who understand risk but cannot apply it correctly and consistently in a pressured trading environment. It took me years to be able to cut losers tight without hesitation, fear of negative emotion, so easy but yet so hard to do. Of course it is not necessary to have your losers less than your winners however if you are not a natural trader and/or struggling this is the way to go imo.

I listened into a recent webinar where Jack Schwager was asked can everyone learn to trade profitably? His answer was superb, it went something like 'nearly everyone can train and successfully complete a marathon but not everyone will be able to run sub 2hr10m no matter how much training they do'. genius.