Quoting Razvan.IDislikedAlso, positive equity, not negative. Why should I not be paid on positive equity and miss out on profit ? What difference does it make if I have negative equity also ? It always evens out between pay cycles.Ignored
2
Macro & Market Developments, Discussion & Analysis 37 replies
ECN && STP && Scalping && Hedging - Broker Review - Oct 2009 24 replies
XTrade - Trade Journal & FX discussion 8 replies
Risk Reward +Probability [Poll & discussion] 2 replies
S&P 500 Analysis and Discussion Thread 3 replies
Quoting Razvan.IDislikedAlso, positive equity, not negative. Why should I not be paid on positive equity and miss out on profit ? What difference does it make if I have negative equity also ? It always evens out between pay cycles.Ignored
Disliked{quote} Oh my god, just omfg, nothing else. And to think I even laid out the calculations and there are traders that cannot sum it up, LOL . Also, positive equity, not negative. Why should I not be paid on positive equity and miss out on profit ? What difference does it make if I have negative equity also ? It always evens out between pay cycles. Moreover, ever read the rules ? This is hilarious, how you came up with the broke consistency rule ? Tell us, pleaseIgnored
Disliked{quote} It's right up there in the excel image. The minimum of the average for the first week amounted to 2.5 trades... You took 2 trades on the first day and 1 on the second. The violates the consistency rule. Stupid rule i know, but that's the rule you agreed to. Either ways, why are you going on and on about it for nothing? they clearly told you that it was not the reason for your delayed payment, so forget about that issue for now. The main problem now is the closing of trades before requesting for pay outs. Every firm i've worked with has this...Ignored
Disliked{quote} -No professional firm is going to allow this. Respectfully, you are delusional if you expect that it should work this way.Ignored
Quoting Razvan.IDislikedWith all consideration, than you never worked for one and have no clue how the desk traders or open outcry traders are paid. Always someone trying to be the wiseguy in the room.Ignored
Disliked{quote} -Honestly not trying to be a wiseguy, but what you are asking is unreasonable. If a prop firm allowed traders to make withdrawals based on their open positions, then they could potentially take on massive amounts of risk. No professional prop firm should be willing to do that; their investors would drop them in a heartbeat. Also, remember that we are talking about remote prop firms here.Ignored
Disliked{quote} To some extent it makes sense, but just in the context you described. In the trading/investor business, the most profitable ones are those who build massive positions in time and are paid monthly based on closed balance. Imagine how bad it is for business for both investor and trader to close positions that run well into profit, just to get paid. Also, the firms offset the risk by paying the trader balance as long as equity, if in minus, is no more than a certain percent, i.e. 5 or 10%. Also, if equity positive, the balance is paid without...Ignored
Quoting Razvan.IDislikedGuess most of you do not know this. In true prop industry, positions are opened almost always on traders accounts ! They have special employees just for calculating risk scenarios in relation to upcoming events and manage portofolio, the top traders have "assistants" . Your welcomeIgnored
Disliked{quote} Hi Koop, Thank you for your reply. Indeed I am not implying they are swindling me for 200 bucks. The rule about closing or not the positions on rapid and live accounts as well should really be clearly stated, as it make a ton of difference for a medium-long term trader like me and others as well, so the better laid out the rules, the better. Also, again, you misunderstood the CEA rule, please read the rule, than calculate the excel or my uploaded log, I am within those parameters, 100%. The CEA states, average of trades, average of lots,...Ignored
Disliked{quote} -Now who is being the wiseguy? Remember, we are talking about remote, non-traditional prop firms here.Ignored
Disliked{quote} To some extent it makes sense, but just in the context you described. In the trading/investor business, the most profitable ones are those who build massive positions in time and are paid monthly based on closed balance. Imagine how bad it is for business for both investor and trader to close positions that run well into profit, just to get paid. Also, the firms offset the risk by paying the trader balance as long as equity, if in minus, is no more than a certain percent, i.e. 5 or 10%. Also, if equity positive, the balance is paid without...Ignored
Quoting Razvan.IDislikedI am tired and run out of patience with so many people jumping in to reply without even going thru what I wrote, just replying blindly.Ignored
DislikedKoop, man, seriously, what's the point in doing what I already did ? Isn't it easier to assume I know what I am talking about and go thru my already posted calculations to find out that I calculated the average of each, for both weeks, and I am in the above mention standard deviation of 2.0 ? It's so easy to see I did not broke anything ! Damn.Ignored
QuoteDislikedthe CEA states, average of trades, average of lots, from a week to another, not a day to another.
Disliked{quote} Yeh man.. pro prop firms are great... I have worked in one, and no one who has ever entered a pro prop firm would have thought it was a smart idea to buy a rapid CEA account without knowing what the rules are. Also no employee of a pro prop firm would ask for a payout when they are in negative equity... The jig is up, you came here to try to get $200 from them... But you had two unreasonable requests, one to ignore you breaking the rules and two for them to ignore your floating equity. I guess it makes sense why you chose the demo account...Ignored
DislikedKoop, man, seriously, what's the point in doing what I already did ? Isn't it easier to assume I know what I am talking about and go thru my already posted calculations to find out that I calculated the average of each, for both weeks, and I am in the above mention standard deviation of 2.0 ? It's so easy to see I did not broke anything ! Damn. Also, after reading what you wrote (my appreciation for the effort) it really doesn't translate into the deviation applied on a daily basis as well, that would be crazyyy ! No one can ask such a thing, if...Ignored
Disliked{quote} Lol Man, stop being hard headed and read what i just posted again so you can understand. You are totally missing the point of my last post. {quote} This is partly wrong.... You are still talking about Week to week and i am telling you that asides the week to week averages..... There is also a daily average requirement for the first week. I just wasted my time explaining it with that picture. Forget about the part you highlighted and look above.... The first paragraph in the picture is solely focused on the first week.Ignored
DislikedOh, finally some quiet ... Evidently , Razvan is suffering from verbal diarrhea. We hope he keeps his promise as above post " I am off, won't reply further ". Moreover , I don't understand why Razvan is still a normal member , he should be a Commercial member, since he has a Financial Service in Bucharest. https://www.facebook.com/ForexTradingHakunaMatata https://www.linkedin.com/in/razvan-ionescu-843342b9/ I'll report to Twee.Ignored