lol $9k/month is what is expected from a $150k account 15 lots at most brokerages have $500 -$1000 margins 15k+4.5k(drawdown) would enable you to trade this size this can be saved in a year or 2. TST doesnt lend itself to keeping good traders for long maybe they will start here if they didnt want to risk their own money but after about a year or so I would think they would start to look elsewhere to get better funding terms. I'd love to see the list of traders and how long they last with TST.
OneUp sent me a 25% off coupon(automated message) for them giving out $5,000,000 in funded accounts. I can't use it since I'm blocked though
It seems like the obvious fix to your problem is simply to sign up on their website under a new email. I would be highly surprised if they "banned" your entire person, especially considering that your "ban" was pretty unfair in my opinion [as you said in your earlier posts, you were simply asking questions, although maybe asking for peoples' personal account details is ban-worthy under their rules, I don't know]. I don't know why, but I honestly feel like you were censored for whatever reason. Anyways, I doubt that their systems are sophisticated enough to identify the same credit card used, ban your IP address, etc., and so registering under a new email would suffice.
One could say that OneUp is a scam from this dubious/shady censorship situation, but if you were to give them the benefit of the doubt, maybe they don't want their 'uneducated' new traders explicitly knowing that they're still on demo nor do they want this information revealed to the public [potential customers]. I'm sure a far fewer amount of people would be interested in OneUp if they advertised their service as the first evaluation plus yet another month+ secondary evaluation. Maybe if this information were revealed it would completely stop people from trusting them and participating in the evaluation in the first place, even though, like the contracts state, they still pay you compensation regardless if your results were obtained live or demo*.
Perhaps they only want traders smart enough to have actually read the contract and, like myself, discover the relevant clauses. Anyways, clearly having a new funded trader start on demo without being explicitly told that they're still on demo maximizes profit and reduces risk. This is basically OneUp's version of TsT's FTP: if the trader fails while on demo, no harm no foul, but also if the trader thinks it's live they'll take it more seriously. After a period, whether this be time or profit based, after you've proven yourself and established a track record, I'm sure OneUp will convert the account to truly live. There is no way OneUp is going to have you stay on demo if you're consistently withdrawing $1k+/week -- you're losing more money for them then if you were a bad trader, lol.
* I would find OneUp much more shady if their contracts had not specifically mentioned the aforementioned information that compensation is based on results obtained in demo or live environments. I would also find it more shady if I had requested a withdrawal and been sent around a loop without ever receiving it. Instead, I requested a withdrawal and received it the very same day. We'll see how this changes in the future but as of now OneUp's funding/withdrawal process is completely legitimate for me. In addition, according to my bank statement, the wire was received from the actual funding partner -- Mes Capital LTD, which is based in the United Kingdom (UK phone numbers, etc.) -- so it actually is the 'real' "business bank account" that is wiring funds.
If you think about it, they basically max risk $5k for every new trader on a truly 'live' account for the $150k/15 lot evaluation. This is reduced as the trader has a trailing drawdown. So, if a good trader on demo earns $5k without it being from a live environment, OneUp is straight-up losing $5k from their bottom line. I suppose OneUp's business model suggests that statistically not many traders have this kind of longevity and that OneUp would rather take the gamble that less than 3% perform to this degree and that 97% of people fail. It's like saying 97 out of 100 people pay $500 and ultimately fail -- OneUp earns $48.5k -- while only 3 people make it and earn $15k. Oneup is thus still making >$33k while basically completely reducing their actual risk. And, by virtue of their philosophy, they've now discovered the top 3% of traders who, after being converted to live, are now more likely to continue performing and earn them massive 20% commissions on tens of thousands of dollars of continued profit off of their suggested continued positive performance.
It's easy to see how: say you have an account size of 15 contracts, get ahead of yourself, and trade 5+. On good days, sure, you're making a lot -- every 50 ticks is $2500 profit. But you're probably desperate to withdraw and always keep your account near $5k [or less, if it's a new account that has yet to reach this amount]. But say you're in the Oil market and on a bad day you lose 50 ticks. You just lost $2500, half the drawdown. Say you lost 70 ticks. You just lost $3500, the entire daily loss limit. Say you traded more size and managed your account poorly -- say you traded TEN contracts recklessly and somehow lost 50 ticks -- that's your entire evaluation or funded account wiped out. This is observable even easier by the fact that you can trade reports with the evaluation but not the funded account -- it's laughably easy to blow up accounts on being wrong on a single EIA report; those people who can't management risk will ultimately blow up their accounts before making a single withdrawal.
How many people can truly operate and manage an account professionally on this level? Like I said, as of now, I believe that OneUp is completely legitimate and that they understand the brutal realities of trading -- that truly less than 3% of people will succeed, that even 'funded traders' blow up their accounts within a month or two.
