Stats on Bright Trading

Quote from Don Bright:

Boy, couldn't keep up with the posts as I was trying to answer the basic question.

As far as "qualifications" goes, we provide services to the independent trader, not "jobs" for people who want jobs. We cannot discriminate, although I will admit there have been many time when I "suggested" that certain people consider another line of work.

And, if someone can give me a detailed list of what qualifications successful traders have, please email it to me. In our 25 years in the business we have been surprised (very surprised) on both sides of that discussion. Some who I never thought should make it are doing extremely well, and some who "should" do great go broke because of poor work ethics.

Those who are looking for guarantees in any business are clearly not the same group looking to become successful, independent traders.

All the best, still waiting for the other Firm's to respond.

Don
More...


I should have said the stats that I have seen you produce are always filtered numbers. I was not intending to imply your traders need to be quality traders.

I was saying I have never seen you produce stats about new recruits making money or even how many stick around for six months or a year.

The numbers I have seen have always been filtered to exclude at least some of the money losers.
 
I'm confused by this thread and how so many say just use the search and see for yourself.

Wouldn't it be much more valid to search for the users here who are now successful traders who are former students of Bright trading? Where are those students from Bright posting on this or other threads?

Out of the thousands of members I see here at Elite, how many of them are Bright students or former students who are now traders??
 
The best anyone can do is asking Bright traders in expo. Most likely the success ratio is low, so the true number most likely will not be revealed here.

From whatever I have heard in the expo the new traders joined because they thought from the free sale lecture that they will be trained/supported to be sucessful in no time. After joined they had to trade with real money, pay desk fee & more trainings. Support was promised & not given. Then they were told to take more tainings & may take years to make money..........Only a few people in the office make money.

One trader I talked to last time could not stand the continous bleeding from the account & the expenses, pulled the plug after about a year since there is no hope insight.

Let's face it not many can be good in trading & most trainings are not good enough (so they can keep on making money in trainings). It is up to us to check out all the fact before we invest out time & money. Meanwhile we have to learn to say no to lots of trainings!

It is just my opinion.
 
Review previous posts for stats as reported. Show me something (anything) from the other 3 firms. Trading is an individual sport, and I think the many posts pointing that out speak to the issue correctly. Trained traders do better than non-trained traders. Mentored traders do better than those not mentored. Some business ventures do extremely well, some people simply will never make it, not matter what is done. Some are just middle of the road, and don't put the effort in. We provide capital and training, traders have to take the ball from there.

BTW, I may drop in the Expo, but won't bother with a booth. I haven't seen any trading firms there for a while, but anyone who is in town, feel free to call and come by. (Many have already called, and you're all welcome).

(Hold? Assent? Echo? Come on guys, LOL).

Don
 
you simply don't want to come out with the numbers. what you do instead is provide narratives which seem to be trying to explain why you don't want to show us these numbers. by now, we can imagine what they look like.

the answers are, therefore, clear.

yeah, sure, other trading firms are no better. one should avoid them too, if it makes you feel any better.
 
Bright's Training might be the best in the world but if you are an idiot with no discipline or skills you are not going to be a successful trader. So the statistics seem meaningless since they can change randomly depending on the type of students. Why are you so hung up on thes statistics.

If the training is good, then those with the right skills and mental disposition will run with it and be successful. People think that anyone can be taught to trade. Can anyone be taught to play golf? Tiger Woods can spend all day with me if he wanted to and I would still suck at golf.

I think people are looking for crutches. They want some guarantee that if they do the training they will be a success and forget about applying your own skills and personality to the endeavor. If Bright says the successes are 2% of the class or 99% of the class it means nothing to me personally or to any of you. The only relevance is if he teaches an exact method that people have to copy exactly without any thought or individual input- in that case it is just a human automated strategy where the person is irrelevant.

So instead of focusing on the stats, why not focus on what is taught and talk to other Bright traders who succeeded and failed to find out why. that is so much more useful than a useless statistic like how many of the traders failed.
 
Quote from rufus_4000:

As for the amount of profits that a trader makes, please keep in mind that the traders at firms like Bright are "indendent traders" who are serviced by Bright, which provides technology, leverage, etc, while charging a per share fee (I think, not sure). Hence, in a way, other than risk manage the traders (position limits, and loss limits, at least), the amount of money that a trader makes (as versus losing) is really none of Bright's concern.

More...

Hi Don,
What rufus says makes sense, but if you do know, can you tell us the number of traders at your firm (either as a percentage or a raw number) who make more than $250k per year?
Thanks.
-kk70

Also, a success rate of 35% is VERY good IMHO, considering that most surveys state that approx. 5% of retail accounts are profitable. So your firm's training and support increase the chances of a trader being profitable by 7 times; that is commendable.
 
Again I have to ask why are you focused on arbitrary numbers. $250K a year is not dependant on Bright. My prop takes no credit for my wins or losses. What if someone has $5,000,000 and makes $250k a year? Would that impress you as much as someon with $500,000 making $250k a year? Forget random numbers and focus on making money. I doubt Bright holds every traders hand in his firm, the idea of prop is trade on your own. even if you get some training, they can only do so much for you. If you have no trading skills it cannot be taught.

Quote from KK70:

Hi Don,
What rufus says makes sense, but if you do know, can you tell us the number of traders at your firm (either as a percentage or a raw number) who make more than $250k per year?
Thanks.
-kk70

Also, a success rate of 35% is VERY good IMHO, considering that most surveys state that approx. 5% of retail accounts are profitable. So your firm's training and support increase the chances of a trader being profitable by 7 times.
More...
 
Quote from optioncoach:

So the statistics seem meaningless since they can change randomly depending on the type of students.
More...

ROTFL. statistics, by definition, show the general tendency accross the relevant population (in our case, traders). so they don't change randomly depending on the type of students, because they are made ACROSS the student population.

if you say "it's up to the trader", then you can say the same about retail trading or any other trading firm, and therefore, you in fact claim that Bright doesn't offer an edge over any other method of trading, since "it's up to the trader".

you only proved my point further. thanks!
 
If you fail to see my point then you really missed it. assume it is 90% are successful. Assume it is 30% successful. Whatever edge is being taught may fall flat on those being taught. even Ed Seykota said he could show 100 people how he trades and most would not make money because they lack the skill and discipline to trade his way. Does Ed not have any edge in his trading style because if he taught 100 people maybe only 20 would "get" it?

Quote from 50 cent:

ROTFL. statistics, by definition, show the general tendency accross the relevant population (in our case, traders). so they don't change randomly depending on the type of students, because they are made ACROSS the student population.

if you say "it's up to the trader", then you can say the same about retail trading or any other trading firm, and therefore, you in fact claim that Bright doesn't offer an edge over any other method of trading, since "it's up to the trader".

you only proved my point further. thanks!
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top