-Absolutely. Having consistency rules is necessary. As mentioned, higher barrier-to-entry and stricter requirements is probably needed in order to achieve what he has described.

-I have mentioned some things in the past, but my memory is failing with age. I think, with an everyone-wins approach, that education should serve as a foundational cornerstone. Education materials, courses, training/consulting and VIP memberships ...

-I suspect that if you are going for an 'everyone-wins' solution, then you will likely have to go more traditional, with a higher barrier-to-entry and stricter requirements etc.. Probably, trading data can be more useful if you have more of it, but ...

-I think, we cannot compare everyday products with prop firm offerings. Certainly, there are not many honest (reliable) prop firm offerings to choose from, and as traders, we do not make a living from soda and donuts. But who knows, maybe some of us ...

-I suspect that they are hoping for change, and believe that if enough people voice their concerns, that they might actually be heard. Probably, some people also have a preference in terms of which prop(s) they are willing to do business with. The ...

-Stay safe down there.

-I'm not sure. As I understand it, the offerings are different in many ways, including how they are regulated. That being said, regulators will likely slam these firms for operating without the proper registration/licenses etc., regardless of the ...

-Likely so. I am kind of torn on this, though. Because there are two types of traders that will likely make a fuss about things... 1. The cheater that deserves to be denied. 2. The honest trader that has accumulated a lot of profit (and should ...

-Yes. I imagine that they likely were just giving attention to those things in an effort to artificially add more weight to their case, even though they knew that it was not part of their jurisdictional scope.

-For the same reason that Kmart failed but Walmart didn't... because more people shopped at Walmart.

-A different owner?

-Changing the rules without notice is one thing, but enforcing them without prior notice is unethical and would likely void any contractual agreements as it would render them unconscionable, especially if the rules are constantly changing. The ...

-There is a difference between failing to self-regulate and refusing to self-regulate. Some of these firms have no intention on doing the right thing and should not be grouped with other companies. Meanwhile, some companies that are not regulated ...

-I have tried inquiring with Apex about their live offering, thresholds and statistics etc., but they will not disclose any details. I suspect that you are correct about it.

-Yes, but it does not fully-limit their risk in the way that a profit pool would, since they could theoretically have 1 million traders make it to live in a single month, which could bankrupt them. Obviously, that would probably never happen, but it ...

-Nope. As long as other firms offer something better, then it will be difficult for firms to apply various risk mitigation parameters. The exception to this would be if you are an already-established and trusted firm that is making big payouts ...

-Some have profit caps, but none fully-limit their risk exposure as far as I am aware.

-That may be difficult. Since you have funding involved that exceeds the buy-in, people will always find ways to exploit and abuse it. Perhaps one way to ensure success would be to structure it like a lottery with profit caps. The firm could ...

-I hear that scamming is pretty lucrative.

-I hope that you are right and I really wish you the best with it.