Let me know when you want to grab that beer.
TopstepTrader and Patak Trading Partners- Any and all questions answered here
- Thread starter MichaelPatak
- Start date
- Status
Let me know when you want to grab that beer.
Quote from Maverick74:
Let me know when you want to grab that beer.
We are on the floor of the CBOT so anytime you make a visit here, email support@topsteptrader.com. They'll let me know you are coming down and I'll show you around. We can duck into Ceres for one after.
It's funny how that place has died out. There used to be guys drinking before they would start trading at about 7am. Funny how the business has changed.
mp
Looks like another funded trader. A 50k account trading crude oil. This guy made it by the skin of his teeth. Nice consistency for crude though.
http://www.topsteptrader.com/fundedtradereport
http://www.topsteptrader.com/fundedtradereport
Michael,
Here are some questions a few trading buddies of mine had when I told them about this program, which may not have been asked before.
1. Why do you require the IDT course to be taken PRIOR to the Combine to get the 70% vs. 60% payout?
There is NO incentive to pay for a course if the passing rate of the combine is low. The fee was also raised from $250 to $300. And having that extra cost just adds fire to gmst's case that TST is more about fees than actually backing profitable traders. The course is optional, however a trader has no access to gaining a check until they actually get a live account and prove themselves by building the cushion. Why not allow a new trader the option to take the course AFTER they make the live account, and then have the payout switched from 60 to 70%?
2. One trading collegue asked me how his live account would be protected if the 5k cushion is held by PTP?
In other words, since PTP is willing to shoulder the burden of risk for all of the unprofitable traders, what happens to the 5k cushion if PTP fails to meet its financial obligations? If the trader doesn't give it back to the markets and actually maintains it in order to collect distributions on amounts above the cushion, does the trader have to agree via contract that those funds are subject to the risk of not only the firm, but also of other traders who lose money in their live accounts? For example, a prop trader at an equity firm has to sign such an agreement, but there are oversights in place via regulations and net capital requirements. Does PTP have to maintain any net capital requirements if they offer sub-accounts?
3. Since a Series 3 license does not require sponsorship, is there any benefit to taking this exam before joining TST/PTP?
4. Maverick and I have exchanged posts regarding the profit cushion. Maverick has explained why he believes there should NOT be a cushion. PTP has explained why they require a cushion. I posted that PTP could lower the cushion to match the profit objective of the combine ($2,500 for the 10-day/30k account, $3,500 for the 10-day/50k account, etc). Since PTP claims that performance drops off when a trader goes live, why not lower the cushion to allow a trader to gain a check faster if they're profitable?
5. Does the platform have an "auto liquidate" feature to cap a trader's loss intraday which can be set BELOW their daily risk such that a trader can minimize their draws while improving their trading discipline?
I've spoken to traders who will at least give TST a fair trial of the platform and services, and then decide to take the combine. Given that this is fairly a new model within the prop industry, I hope these questions will be useful for traders evaluating the merits of the program. Thanks.
Here are some questions a few trading buddies of mine had when I told them about this program, which may not have been asked before.
1. Why do you require the IDT course to be taken PRIOR to the Combine to get the 70% vs. 60% payout?
There is NO incentive to pay for a course if the passing rate of the combine is low. The fee was also raised from $250 to $300. And having that extra cost just adds fire to gmst's case that TST is more about fees than actually backing profitable traders. The course is optional, however a trader has no access to gaining a check until they actually get a live account and prove themselves by building the cushion. Why not allow a new trader the option to take the course AFTER they make the live account, and then have the payout switched from 60 to 70%?
2. One trading collegue asked me how his live account would be protected if the 5k cushion is held by PTP?
In other words, since PTP is willing to shoulder the burden of risk for all of the unprofitable traders, what happens to the 5k cushion if PTP fails to meet its financial obligations? If the trader doesn't give it back to the markets and actually maintains it in order to collect distributions on amounts above the cushion, does the trader have to agree via contract that those funds are subject to the risk of not only the firm, but also of other traders who lose money in their live accounts? For example, a prop trader at an equity firm has to sign such an agreement, but there are oversights in place via regulations and net capital requirements. Does PTP have to maintain any net capital requirements if they offer sub-accounts?
3. Since a Series 3 license does not require sponsorship, is there any benefit to taking this exam before joining TST/PTP?
4. Maverick and I have exchanged posts regarding the profit cushion. Maverick has explained why he believes there should NOT be a cushion. PTP has explained why they require a cushion. I posted that PTP could lower the cushion to match the profit objective of the combine ($2,500 for the 10-day/30k account, $3,500 for the 10-day/50k account, etc). Since PTP claims that performance drops off when a trader goes live, why not lower the cushion to allow a trader to gain a check faster if they're profitable?
5. Does the platform have an "auto liquidate" feature to cap a trader's loss intraday which can be set BELOW their daily risk such that a trader can minimize their draws while improving their trading discipline?
I've spoken to traders who will at least give TST a fair trial of the platform and services, and then decide to take the combine. Given that this is fairly a new model within the prop industry, I hope these questions will be useful for traders evaluating the merits of the program. Thanks.
I would be interested in the $100k account, though I have a couple of questions regarding the Combine:
"Do not hold a position into the electronic close of the product trading (recruits may trade overnight but must be flat when their product's electronic market is closed)"
What does this mean exactly? Am I not allowed to hold a position over night?
"Trade all required days of the Combine (10 or 20 days, each to be completed within 30 or 60 calendar days, respectively) "
Do I have to put in a trade every day, or is it enough to hold a position from the previous day?
And a question regarding the Trading Plan:
"Prior to being taken live, new Funded Traders have the opportunity to request adjustments to the above listed requirements."
How much of a say would I have in changing the requirements in the Trading Plan?
"Do not hold a position into the electronic close of the product trading (recruits may trade overnight but must be flat when their product's electronic market is closed)"
What does this mean exactly? Am I not allowed to hold a position over night?
"Trade all required days of the Combine (10 or 20 days, each to be completed within 30 or 60 calendar days, respectively) "
Do I have to put in a trade every day, or is it enough to hold a position from the previous day?
And a question regarding the Trading Plan:
"Prior to being taken live, new Funded Traders have the opportunity to request adjustments to the above listed requirements."
How much of a say would I have in changing the requirements in the Trading Plan?
Michael, this question got buried in the rubble from earlier. I'll repost it here.
I have a suggestion for a change I think you guys should make that you should seriously consider. Right now as you have it, when traders go live you start them on a 60/40 split and you let them build up equity. You make them keep 5k to 10k in their accounts before withdrawals and you scale up their payouts with retained equity.
What I think you should do is pay out at the end of every month. You guys get paid and they get paid. Let me make my case for this. One, it's better for you because as you've stated many times, guys will build up 10k or 15k and give all of it back. This is very common in trading and gambling for that matter. The old "playing with the house's money" syndrome. Most if not all guys get complacent when sitting on equity. I've been trading for 15 years and I'm certainly guilty of that. The problem is you guys aren't getting paid when they sit on equity and neither are they. Just take your cut out at the end of the month. It's also good for them because I can speak first hand about what getting a check does to one's self confidence. Doesn't matter how small that check is. It's about rewarding good behavior. I think traders will trade much better with a fresh account at the beginning of a new month. I also think it's better for your investors because it means they are getting paid. It makes no sense to me to have a guy make 5k then lose 5k, make 5k then lose 5k.
Now if the concern is keeping a guy from going negative, I honestly believe that building up equity with the investor by paying the investor more often will alleviate those concerns. If I was a backer and I already had cash in hand from closed monthly p&l, I would be much less worried about a trader going negative then I would be if we never got any p&l yet and now the trader is negative. Maybe you could even create a formula that would determine how much negative rope you would give him/her based on how much p&l you already collected.
I use to trade at a notorious equity prop firm in NY. I was on a floor with 200 traders. And the first day of each month, this girl would walk up and down the aisle calling out names as she was handing out checks. Michael, getting a check was better then sex. It meant something. It was more then about the money because nobody knew how much was in those checks. But everyone saw that you got one. It was a status symbol. It made guys feel like a rock star. Guys busted their ass just so that the next month when that girl came out of the office with checks in hand, that their name would be called.
I really believe you should think about this. As far as the payout, do this. Start guys at 60/40 and then after they have been live for 6 full months, bump it up to 80/20. Just keep it simple. I don't think the retained equity thing works for you or the trader. The investor wants to get paid! The trader wants to get paid! You can scale a guy up in contracts and drawdown limits based on how much p&l you collected from him. I think guys will be far more consistent if they know that at the end of the month, some money is coming their way. They will strive for consistency vs hitting some number like 30k.
I'm curious what your thoughts are on this and what objections you would have for it. I'm still up for that beer. Let me know when.
I have a suggestion for a change I think you guys should make that you should seriously consider. Right now as you have it, when traders go live you start them on a 60/40 split and you let them build up equity. You make them keep 5k to 10k in their accounts before withdrawals and you scale up their payouts with retained equity.
What I think you should do is pay out at the end of every month. You guys get paid and they get paid. Let me make my case for this. One, it's better for you because as you've stated many times, guys will build up 10k or 15k and give all of it back. This is very common in trading and gambling for that matter. The old "playing with the house's money" syndrome. Most if not all guys get complacent when sitting on equity. I've been trading for 15 years and I'm certainly guilty of that. The problem is you guys aren't getting paid when they sit on equity and neither are they. Just take your cut out at the end of the month. It's also good for them because I can speak first hand about what getting a check does to one's self confidence. Doesn't matter how small that check is. It's about rewarding good behavior. I think traders will trade much better with a fresh account at the beginning of a new month. I also think it's better for your investors because it means they are getting paid. It makes no sense to me to have a guy make 5k then lose 5k, make 5k then lose 5k.
Now if the concern is keeping a guy from going negative, I honestly believe that building up equity with the investor by paying the investor more often will alleviate those concerns. If I was a backer and I already had cash in hand from closed monthly p&l, I would be much less worried about a trader going negative then I would be if we never got any p&l yet and now the trader is negative. Maybe you could even create a formula that would determine how much negative rope you would give him/her based on how much p&l you already collected.
I use to trade at a notorious equity prop firm in NY. I was on a floor with 200 traders. And the first day of each month, this girl would walk up and down the aisle calling out names as she was handing out checks. Michael, getting a check was better then sex. It meant something. It was more then about the money because nobody knew how much was in those checks. But everyone saw that you got one. It was a status symbol. It made guys feel like a rock star. Guys busted their ass just so that the next month when that girl came out of the office with checks in hand, that their name would be called.
I really believe you should think about this. As far as the payout, do this. Start guys at 60/40 and then after they have been live for 6 full months, bump it up to 80/20. Just keep it simple. I don't think the retained equity thing works for you or the trader. The investor wants to get paid! The trader wants to get paid! You can scale a guy up in contracts and drawdown limits based on how much p&l you collected from him. I think guys will be far more consistent if they know that at the end of the month, some money is coming their way. They will strive for consistency vs hitting some number like 30k.
I'm curious what your thoughts are on this and what objections you would have for it. I'm still up for that beer. Let me know when.
traderchi128
Guest
Man....I miss Ceres and the "liquor in one glass, ice/soda in the other". Used to start Thursdays at Cactus or Ceres for a few ...Then Rivers in the CME. Then it was up to Lincoln Park for most of the night......and then those who were still standing would hit that Strip Club on Weed Street at 1 a.m.. Crawl into work on Friday and trade. Then repeat again Friday............
I lived up there for 10 years. If I didn't move out probably wouldn't have seen year 11. My last year I lived in Presidential Towers. Don't remember too much that last year. Place was basically 50% full of traders living in there...two bars on the ground floor.....enough said..lol.
I lived in Presidential Towers back in 99! I actually didn't like the place that much. It was too nice. Felt like a hotel. When were you there?
traderchi128
Guest
2004. I agree. Felt EXACTLY like a hotel. But man....on weekends one could not leave the premises and still have a wild weekend. Mcdonald's for breakfast. Had that whole foods type food market to buy the important things (beer, frozen pizzas,beer,toilet paper,beer). Watch football in that sports bar. Then that nice mexican place (actually got a good crowd at that bar) for dinner. Then if someone you knew there was having a party.......like I said man...would never have seen year 11.
If you were single it was a great place to live...but if married....no bueno. Hell.....if you had a girlfriend too many bad elements.
I can't believe that all this energy has been spent on this deal, and not one elitetrader has ponied up the $200 or so to run a combine and journal it here at ET.
- Status