Why do "profitable" traders take the time to train people remotely and for a fee?

austinp · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

Teaching is fine... but what about the fee? My former boss taught for free.

No he didn't... he taught them with hope = expectations some would be successful in his prop business for profit, whereupon he'd profit exponentially from "free time" invested with them.

Unless I'm wrong and the payout was 100% to traders from day one and hobby was run totally non-profit by design.

monty21 · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from austinp:

I assume your former boss started the prop firm as a hobby even though he didn't need the money. So, he gave 100% payout to the traders? He ran it as 100% charity operation with no personal desire to profit one dime from the venture at all?

50% payout if you make < 100,000
55% payout if you make from 100,000 -150,000
60% payout
''
''
''
''
80% payout if you make over 1,000,000

These payouts are pretty low in the industry. That was the tradeoff for no initial contribution, no commission, etc. His interest was to make us profitable though. Better than those firms that give 99% payout, but are in business for your commission dollars.

Unfortunately the desk failed.

Banff01 · Apr 23, 2009

Learn to see the truth: If an operation fails it's because there were no profits. Stop deluding yourself. I don't mean to say that there are no profits to be made from the markets but you most likely wouldn't find that knowledge in the office where you worked and which had to close down.

B

Spectra · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

I'm interested why so called professional traders are willing to train other individuals, especially if it is remotely and for a fee.

My thought..

To make more money of course! Greed or diversity! Tons of good traders do it. Tons of bad traders do it.

I was reading a 500 page poker book this week from Daniel Negreanu and I had the same thought. He has millions, his own video game, and still plays high limit cash poker for a living every day. People get bored of doing the same thing. The extra money is nice too.

I happen to work with Alex from PureTick. He enjoys teaching and hearing himself speak. Maybe just trading all day alone was boring as hell.

Every business I have been involved in had multiple income streams.

So if your a professional and you teach does that make the axiom 'those who cant, teach' true? Well tell that to Tiger Woods who teaches little kids how to golf on his off days. I'm sure their parents pay a nice chunk of changel
Geoff
=====
aka Cajun Sniper
Trader/Administrator http://PureTick.com

austinp · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

One reason he doesn't swing like his buddies in the city is that he is older than them and has like four kids = more responsibilites. <i>He is in his late 30s so the risk-taking is not there anymore.</i> Also, I've seen him make and loss $30,000 on sometimes. He co-wrote a book back in the 1990s "Electronic Day Trader" or something and he apparently lost half a million in one day. He used to trade size back then.

I read the book myself, ten years ago.

I've had big days and huge months, black and red. Pretty much experienced the whole gamut in this profession. After that, I'm settled into a pretty comfortable niche. I watch two or three symbols intraday, the same ones every day. There is no nightly research involved. There is no time needed to load fifty stock symbols into xcel sheet and make sure bot orders are staged correctly for the open.

I watch two timeframe charts and make trade decisions from one. Average number of turns per day is somewhere between two and eight. Not exactly a frenetic pace. There is plenty of time in between for boredom... or constructive application. It's the same time ticking away on a clock. Do I opt to post ten times per day, every day in a public message board dealing with rcanfield & ilk, or do I direct my time & attention elsewhere more constructively?

ddaytrader · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

Teaching is fine... but what about the fee? My former boss taught for free.

"Why do "profitable" traders take the time to train people remotely and for a fee?"

How is your former boss's firm doing? You said that the firm failed. Would the firm have failed if you boss had done as other prop firm's do, e.g. require a risk deposit, charge at least minimal fees, commissions, etc.

And you yourself note that setting up a website is work. The principle of capitalism is that a human being sells his labor for a fee - whether wages, trading profits, commissions, etc.

To me, as a business owner, it is not at all puzzling that enterprising folks set up a business to sell information that others are willing to pay to receive. I would teach my children and friends what I know about trading without even the thought of any compensation. But why not charge members of the public at large a fee for the same information (for the record, I am not and have no plans to be such a vendor of information, trading or otherwise).

monty21 · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from austinp:

No he didn't... he taught them with hope = expectations some would be successful in his prop business for profit, whereupon he'd profit exponentially from "free time" invested with them.

Unless I'm wrong and the payout was 100% to traders from day one and hobby was run totally non-profit by design.

I'm not trying to argue with you... you have some valid points.

And yea, my former boss's hope was future profit. The trader gurus that teach remotely for a fee can have no interest if their trainees makes or loses money. They are getting their subscription pay either way for the time being... its a conflict of interest.

I'm sure good training services exist out there. That's why in my initial post I ask people to list some. I know that some of the T3 guys are very profitable and they have a service... any others?

austinp · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

50% payout if you make < 100,000
55% payout if you make from 100,000 -150,000
60% payout
''
''
''
''
80% payout if you make over 1,000,000

These payouts are pretty low in the industry. That was the tradeoff for no initial contribution, no commission, etc. His interest was to make us profitable though. Better than those firms that give 99% payout, but are in business for your commission dollars. Unfortunately the desk failed.

I'm not sure what your final answer is here. Does that describe an attempt at business for profit, or does it describe 100% charitable hobby? The difference would mean whether time spent training for "free" had backend profit potential or not.

austinp · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from monty21:

I'm not trying to argue with you... you have some valid points.
And yea, my former boss's hope was future profit. The trader gurus that teach remotely for a fee can have no interest if their trainees makes or loses money. They are getting their subscription pay either way for the time being... its a conflict of interest.
I'm sure good training services exist out there. That's why in my initial post I ask people to list some. I know that some of the T3 guys are very profitable and they have a service... any others?

Let's say someone here decides to start a live room operation next month. They've traded the ES for x-number of years. First two years were unprofitable. Next couple of years were mildly profitable. Last complete year was very profitable, with nine out of twelve months green and three remaining months red.

They put that track record out there to the public: seven excellent months, two miniscule profit months, two miniscule loss months and one terrible month equal in loss to one of the excellent months.

How would that record be perceived by potential clientele`?

monty21 · Apr 23, 2009

Quote from ddaytrader:

How is your former boss's firm doing? You said that the firm failed. Would the firm have failed if you boss had done as other prop firm's do, e.g. require a risk deposit, charge at least minimal fees, commissions, etc.

And you yourself note that setting up a website is work. The principle of capitalism is that a human being sells his labor for a fee - whether wages, trading profits, commissions, etc.

To me, as a business owner, it is not at all puzzling that enterprising folks set up a business to sell information that others are willing to pay to receive. I would teach my children and friends what I know about trading without even the thought of any compensation. But why not charge members of the public at large a fee for the same information (for the record, I am not and have no plans to be such a vendor of information, trading or otherwise).

It's tough to say in hindsight if the firm would have been better off if there was a initial deposit, commission charges, etc. Maybe, but I think there would just been a higher turnover rate. The firm did not close because of financial problems, but rather that us trader's did not show enough potential. It had to do a lot with our parent company that help capitalize our boss... they weren't on the same page and didn't understand our style of day trading. They expected that recent college grads would consistently be making money on a daily basis after 3 - 6 months.

I understand your argument about the business model... my opinion is that consistently profitable traders would have enough financial freedom to not need extra income of ~$2000 a month.