|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Tom,
You have to ask yourself what you want out of the magazine. If you are after
'hot new indicators' that pre-coded and ready to punch into metastock, then
maybe the magazine is not for you. But if you are more interested in following
industry trends, interviews with other traders and maybe reading other people's
interpretation of different trading/risk management techniques then you will
find it to be a good publication. The magazine has a large following, so maybe
there is a thing or two to be gained from reading it.
I, too didn't know that Ginger had an interest in both publications but in my
many years of following the magazine I didn't get the impression that the
magazine had a bias one way or the other.
E.
Tom Strickland wrote:
> I'm writing to determine the views of other Metastock users about Futures
> magazine. Recently I wrote Ms. Ginger Szala, Editor in Chief of Futures to
> complain that their technical articles were difficult to read because 1)
> they were often incomplete (no references or symbol definitions), and 2)
> they used TradeStation code instead of ordinary mathematical symbols to
> describe systems and indicators.
>
> The response to my e-mail was less than satisfactory. I was told that I was
> "too picky" about the details of the articles and that the use of
> TradeStation was just an industry trend that they were following.
>
> I just came across a copy of Omega Research Magazine and it contains an ad
> for Futures magazine that states, "…Futures is prepared by the same
> editorial team that brings you Omega Research Magazine…" Closer examination
> showed that Ms. Szala is also the Editorial Director of Omega Research
> Magazine. This looks like a major conflict of interest, particularly since
> Futures does not, to the best of my knowledge, acknowledge their financial
> interest in the use of TradeStation code.
>
> Is this a problem to anyone else? Just curious!
>
> Tom Strickland
> tstrickland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|