Somebody in a previous post took my quote of Rates aren't everything out of context--if you were to read back.
If a guy is paying lower than everybody in the business but isn't making a dime? What do rates matter to him? If he isn't gross positive than it won't matter what he has net as it will be negative also.
Unforunately one of the posters isn't comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.
He's mentioned Bright and other firms in comparision to Lynx comparing, commissions, bullet costs and so forth.
What about yearly exchange fee's, monthly desk fee's, % payout, and so forth. The firms have to make money
otherwise they become just like ICAP direct. Which is now defunct. Yep they are no longer around.
Who cares if you are paying .0005 per share but 4 months later lose your $50,000 you deposited to the firm? Being able to get your money out I'd say is a lot more important than commissions.
The arguements have been over higher cost and so forth. You can't have both worlds. If you want some type of training and people are going to take the time to explain they need to be compensated in some way for it. Maybe commissions/overrides might be an answer for it..........
but what if the strategies are low volume? The firm has to pay it's bills and if they teach low volume strategies than they need to find another way to make sure they can keep the lights on. This isn't rocket science here.
Some of the posters are stating opinions while I'm just stating facts.
ICAP is now defunct They had less than 20 traders
who have lost all their money to the defunct firm (and some were rather good traders--The NY Lynx office has backed some due to their sheets)
Lynx was then compared to some retail firms.......again that' s not apples to apples but apples to oranges. Retail firms have higher capital requirements, most don't have access to bullets and so forth.
Than there was Bright--Lynx was compared to which is a very different business model. A lot of their strategies are high volume with PAIRS/OPENS and so forth. They make money off the commissions, charge a desk fee and so forth.
The facts are this. Lynx trains their traders. They have only been around for a year and now have waiting lists for both the San Diego and New York offices.
You can attack Andover for having a minimum for bullets of 500 shares. Yet Andover has over 1200 traders
Compare this to most of the other prop firms....
( #'s below not guaranteed)
Bright with 600
ECHO with around 180-270 or so
Liber and Weissman with about 100
World CO with about 800 (haven't verifed this in awhile)
and so forth.
When the firm is this large maybe they are doing something right.
Robert
If a guy is paying lower than everybody in the business but isn't making a dime? What do rates matter to him? If he isn't gross positive than it won't matter what he has net as it will be negative also.
Unforunately one of the posters isn't comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges.
He's mentioned Bright and other firms in comparision to Lynx comparing, commissions, bullet costs and so forth.
What about yearly exchange fee's, monthly desk fee's, % payout, and so forth. The firms have to make money
otherwise they become just like ICAP direct. Which is now defunct. Yep they are no longer around.
Who cares if you are paying .0005 per share but 4 months later lose your $50,000 you deposited to the firm? Being able to get your money out I'd say is a lot more important than commissions.
The arguements have been over higher cost and so forth. You can't have both worlds. If you want some type of training and people are going to take the time to explain they need to be compensated in some way for it. Maybe commissions/overrides might be an answer for it..........
but what if the strategies are low volume? The firm has to pay it's bills and if they teach low volume strategies than they need to find another way to make sure they can keep the lights on. This isn't rocket science here.
Some of the posters are stating opinions while I'm just stating facts.
ICAP is now defunct They had less than 20 traders
who have lost all their money to the defunct firm (and some were rather good traders--The NY Lynx office has backed some due to their sheets)
Lynx was then compared to some retail firms.......again that' s not apples to apples but apples to oranges. Retail firms have higher capital requirements, most don't have access to bullets and so forth.
Than there was Bright--Lynx was compared to which is a very different business model. A lot of their strategies are high volume with PAIRS/OPENS and so forth. They make money off the commissions, charge a desk fee and so forth.
The facts are this. Lynx trains their traders. They have only been around for a year and now have waiting lists for both the San Diego and New York offices.
You can attack Andover for having a minimum for bullets of 500 shares. Yet Andover has over 1200 traders
Compare this to most of the other prop firms....
( #'s below not guaranteed)
Bright with 600
ECHO with around 180-270 or so
Liber and Weissman with about 100
World CO with about 800 (haven't verifed this in awhile)
and so forth.
When the firm is this large maybe they are doing something right.
Robert