Prop Firm Hub | Page 1002 | Metals Mine

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 31 replies

So I accepted a Prop Trading job in South Beach Miami 44 replies

prop firm new model - my trading journey 871 replies

Attachments: Prop Firm Hub
Exit Attachments

Prop Firm Hub

  • #20,021
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:24am Sep 2, 2023 11:24am
This judge will decide on 9/11 about MFF case in the US. Are there any information about how this judge is ticking ?
Here is the Wiki I found about his CV.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahid_Quraishi

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 2023-09-02_182515.jpg Size: 645 KB

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 2023-09-02_182531.jpg Size: 413 KB
  • #20,022
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:28am Sep 2, 2023 11:28am
It means this judge was a captain in army and previously also a prosecutor, so maybe on the right side of political spectrum and be strict.

See also here:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...en-judges.html

The Curious Case of Cory Booker’s Judicial Appointments
Why isn’t he nominating public interest lawyers who would counterbalance the courts’ rightward shift?

"Judges who come from a corporate law background, or were previously prosecutors, aren’t necessarily bad judges. But as my colleague Mark Joseph Stern put it in 2020, “corporate lawyers spend their careers helping powerful people make more money, gain more power, and fend off challenges from the less fortunate.” Prosecutors, meanwhile, “crank the wheels of our racist and draconian criminal justice system, crushing the lives and liberty of countless defendants, most of them indigent.

That experience influences how these judges rule on critical issues, as research from think tanks including the People’s Policy Project shows. (For example, judges who worked as prosecutors are more likely to give lengthy sentences to defendants, and corporate lawyers are much more likely to rule against workers in labor disputes.) What’s more, these kinds of judges are completely overrepresented at all levels of the federal judiciary."

-----

As a result, the Biden administration has made a point of prioritizing the elevation of public interest judges—lawyers who were previously public defenders, for example—as part of its broader attempt to rebalance the federal judiciary. This counterbalancing effort is particularly important after years of profound rightward drift in the courts. It’s not just the Supreme Court that has lurched—hard—to the right.

Booker is basically the only Democratic senator to not get in line. Over the past two-plus years, he has nominated prospective judges who hail from corporate law or prosecutorial backgrounds 100 percent of the time.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


So basically he will have more the view of CFTC and be more strict AGAINST MFF in that case on court at 9/11 I guess, or ?
  • #20,023
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:29am Sep 2, 2023 11:29am
Quoting TrAndy1
SCIENTIST DISCOVERED WHY MOST TRADERS LOSE MONEY – 24 SURPRISING STATISTICS 80% of all day traders quit within the first two years. 1 Among all day traders, nearly 40% day trade for only one month. Within three years, only 13% continue to day trade. After five years, only 7% remain. 1 Traders sell winners at a 50% higher rate than losers. 60% of sales are winners, while 40% of sales are losers.2 The average individual investor underperforms a market index by 1.5% per year. Active traders underperform by 6.5% annually. 3 Day traders with strong past...
Hi mate, would you mind posting this in my thread. dont want to steal it
  • #20,024
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:30am Sep 2, 2023 11:30am
Quoting MuniFX
{quote} so are you implying they are a ponzi scheme? if not they can use their 15% of the profitsplit they earn from their funded traders to pay for operation...
Not implying that needs to be a ponzi for this to happen. If you sell challenges of 100K, have payouts of 80K and 10K monthly operations costs, this is not a ponzi but you have money to cover operational costs only during 2 months operation.

As in any other company they need to keep revenues. If a restaurante stop receiving customers today they may have reserves for some time but they will eventually have to close doors. Props are not different (not implying that needs to be a ponzi for this to happen).
  • #20,025
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:31am Sep 2, 2023 11:31am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Tradersway, FX Choice, EagleFX, LQDFX, Coinexx.....several others, those are the 5 I used........way better conditions than the bullshit regulated by the CFTC, never an issue, always paid. Beofre you start the debate, as it already sounds like you are a fan of regulation, it is NOT ILLEGAL to trade with an unregulated broker as long as you pay your taxes on the income.
There is more time available to us in prop firm industry.

It will not die so quickly.

The firms and owners know how to get away from regulatory issues.

THey are more brainy than us.

Infact, the I have more faith in firms and firm owners than regulators who say they protect us.

If one needs growth.. get out of rules.. which restricts you.

Sometimes , even governments take this step when the situation is in danger.

It reminds me of my trading style for challenges. ( I am comparing my styles the last year to the current year )

When I see accuracy,,.... I go heavy and make as much possible.

When i see an accuracy, why should I be conservative ??
Intraday only.
  • #20,026
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:34am Sep 2, 2023 11:34am
Quoting Nsak3y
One thing that I find odd, is that Josh is never named in the CFTC document. Only did I see 'Advisor' mentioned. Anyone that is familiar with MFF knows that Josh was the mastermind behind all of the technical stuff. I would assume that he must be implicated some how.
As far as I could find in google Josh was Head of Risk and trading
  • #20,027
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:37am Sep 2, 2023 11:37am
Quoting nebby
{quote} Was wondering my self who the whistleblowers could be - some random thoughts: - oil traders who got banned, denied their large payouts and received the 'threatening' email that Josh mentioned and extracted their revenge - angry Vietnamese/Pakistan traders who got banned - a trader who got denied a large payout - an internal employee - another prop firm
It had to be someone with access to the communication between the adviser and CEO. And also from some employees emails.
So either an hacker (weren't they hacked some time ago ?) or internal people trying not to have troubles themselves.
  • #20,028
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:38am Sep 2, 2023 11:38am
Quoting T721
{quote} Hi mate, would you mind posting this in my thread. dont want to steal it
You are allowed to copy and post elsewhere, no biggie. I have this from a public website too. So there cannot be any issue if you repost it elsewhere.
  • #20,029
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:40am Sep 2, 2023 11:40am
Quoting Capablanca
As far as I could find in google Josh was Head of Risk and trading
-If you watch the earlier videos that they posted when the company first formed, the scope of Josh's involvement can be better understood.
  • #20,030
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:40am Sep 2, 2023 11:40am
Quoting Nsak3y
More from the CFTC document, for anyone that hasn't read through it yet: 95. On May 12, 2022, Traders Global Employee A complained about a “suspicious” customer with “0 losses.” The Advisor explained that the customer’s trading was “valid,” and that “after taking a review of some of their other trades it looks more like they’re timing the market very well . . . .” “[O]k,” replied Traders Global Employee A, “i will get their scaled account (it will be 100k) and we can stp it or start on aggressive and go from there but i dont know if that will stop...
That is going to be tough to defend in front of a judge.
Trade with confidence, trade without fear.
  • #20,031
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:41am Sep 2, 2023 11:41am
Quoting TrAndy1
{quote} You are allowed to copy and post elsewhere, no biggie. I have this from a public website too. So there cannot be any issue if you repost it elsewhere.
Cheers mate, just wanted to check with you
  • #20,032
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:42am Sep 2, 2023 11:42am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} It had to be someone with access to the communication between the adviser and CEO. And also from some employees emails. So either an hacker (weren't they hacked some time ago ?) or internal people trying not to have troubles themselves.
Yes, said group/individual with a grudge against MFF (or something to gain) hires a hacker to get the evidence to bring them down. Sounds like a movie plot but who knows -> may not even be so far off from the truth....

Note: they did in discord mention they were getting black mail emails (but no specific info)
Your worst drawdown is yet to come
  • #20,033
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:43am Sep 2, 2023 11:43am
Quoting Capablanca
It had to be someone with access to the communication between the adviser and CEO. And also from some employees emails. So either an hacker (weren't they hacked some time ago ?) or internal people trying not to have troubles themselves.
-In terms of company texts and emails etc., these things can all be legally acquired and would not necessarily need to be leaked or known about beforehand.
  • #20,034
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:45am Sep 2, 2023 11:45am
Quoting Cryptosurf
That is going to be tough to defend in front of a judge.
-Undoubtedly.
  • #20,035
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:45am Sep 2, 2023 11:45am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} But the consumer has much better odds trading then they do playing slots or roulette. Trading is a skill, slots are 100% a game of chance. Why are they not regulated out of existence? Simply because the governments hand is in the pot, that is it, the only answer. They don't give two shits if someone loses THEIR LIFE SAVINGS on a roulette wheel, but how dare you develop a skillset they may have tken years to develop and make money from something the government doesn't have it's hands in. For the naive among you, talking about they are there...
In Canada pot was of course illegal and everyone involved was prosecuted. Trudeau campaigned on making it legal, got elected, made it legal and the gov makes so much in taxes and other revenues. Something so taboo before and with money going into the pockets of gov, it became un-taboo overnight.
  • #20,036
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:48am Sep 2, 2023 11:48am
Quoting Nsak3y
More from the CFTC document, for anyone that hasn't read through it yet: 95. On May 12, 2022, Traders Global Employee A complained about a “suspicious” customer with “0 losses.” The Advisor explained that the customer’s trading was “valid,” and that “after taking a review of some of their other trades it looks more like they’re timing the market very well . . . .” “[O]k,” replied Traders Global Employee A, “i will get their scaled account (it will be 100k) and we can stp it or start on aggressive and go from there but i dont know if that will stop...
What I read there is that they found what seems a legitim winning trader and the dilema is to put him on STP (real market) or moving him to the aggressive classification (which, as far as I understand, are the customers with high volume or such that are hit with bigger slippage).
If the customer was a zero loss, legitim but high volume (probably was high volume because ts raised attention), I don't see anything wrong in going to agressive classifications like the other ones also high volume.

What you mention about hitting STP with additional spread is this:
Quote
70. For customers on STP, Traders Global uses its specialized software to impose an additional “spread” on the price feed visible to STP’d customers. This spread results in a customer seeing—and believing himself or herself to be executed at—a worse price than what Traders Global got from the Dealer. It allows Traders Global to give less money to a winning customer and, for a losing customer, terminate the account before the losses reach the drawdown limit. (Though it will appear to the customer that he or she exceeded the drawdown limit.)

Is this hitting with additional slippage/spread or just having him with real market spreads ? It's difficult to judge just by what is written.
  • #20,037
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:52am Sep 2, 2023 11:52am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} But the consumer has much better odds trading then they do playing slots or roulette. Trading is a skill, slots are 100% a game of chance. Why are they not regulated out of existence? Simply because the governments hand is in the pot, that is it, the only answer. They don't give two shits if someone loses THEIR LIFE SAVINGS on a roulette wheel, but how dare you develop a skillset they may have tken years to develop and make money from something the government doesn't have it's hands in. For the naive among you, talking about they are there...
Governments have a huge hand in Slots... they make a shitload in taxes. Slots used to be my business back in the day. I had 8 Amusements arcades with roughly 60 - 70 slots in each site. The small payout slots had no required licence fee but each of the bigger payouts were taxed at about £165 per yr and i had a total of 40 per arcade.

Then when the bigger payout slots came out they had a payout rate of 94% that could not be adjusted, guess who made money -- dumbass here getting a regular 6% or the punter getting 94%

On top of the gaming duty i had to pay vat which is normal but the licence fee was a killer
  • #20,038
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:54am Sep 2, 2023 11:54am
Quoting Cryptosurf
{quote} That is going to be tough to defend in front of a judge.
I agree. Very difficult, specially the way it is pictured. My previous comments / explanation is on my view, with all I learned about prop firms, specially in this topic. I'm not a least bit surprised or shocked by what is there, honnestly.

If I was a judge, though. I would look into this with other eyes and saying that they are evil in classifying different customers with different classifications.

A judge is not worried if market conditions are different depending if you trade 1 lot or 100 lots, if you trade during the night or during NFC release, if you use a "computer program" to trade or is you do i mannually.

It's going to seem horrible.
  • #20,039
  • Sep 2, 2023 11:59am Sep 2, 2023 11:59am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-In terms of company texts and emails etc., these things can all be legally acquired and would not necessarily need to be leaked or known about beforehand.
True, and if that's the case it's even more strange that they have not taken any measures to move to another country if they were subpoenaed to deliver all that correspondence, knowing what was there. This doesn't seem a case built in one week.

Probably over confidence.
  • #20,040
  • Sep 2, 2023 12:04pm Sep 2, 2023 12:04pm
Quoting Capablanca
What I read there is that they found what seems a legitim winning trader and the dilema is to put him on STP (real market) or moving him to the aggressive classification (which, as far as I understand, are the customers with high volume or such that are hit with bigger slippage). If the customer was a zero loss, legitim but high volume (probably was high volume because ts raised attention), I don't see anything wrong in going to agressive classifications like the other ones also high volume.
-There was nothing mentioned about high volume in this case. The trader was flagged due to having zero losses. That's it. The trader was deemed as being legitimate and was still placed on the aggressive profile. The decision was made to move the trader to aggressive or STP as a result of his success, in hopes that it would prevent him from winning, presumably, based on the what was said about it.

The aggressive profile had nothing to do with volume. The account profiles were used to apply varying levels of delay and slippage to accounts. The aggressive profile was used for all types of accounts that generated profits quickly.


Quoting Capablanca
What you mention about hitting STP with additional spread is this: Is this hitting with additional slippage/spread or just having him with real market spreads ? It's difficult to judge just by what is written.
-The document states that the accounts that were designate as STP were rerouted to 3rd-party dealer, where they would be exposed to real market conditions. TG applied additional, artificial slippage to those accounts (on top of the real market conditions that the traders were already experiencing).
64 traders viewing now