|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Rick,
OK...you want proof? Here's proof:
On Friday last you could have bought the AOL 160 February option call
contract for 1/16 during the first hour of trading. A couple three
hours later that same contract was trading at 1 9/16 (check it out if
you don't believe me). One hundred contracts would have cost you
$ 625 and returned you $ 15,000. One thousand contracts would have cost
you $ 6,250 and returned you $ 150,000. There's your 2400% for that
month in less than three hours.
The candlesticks and chart patterns on AOL were screaming at you to buy.
Had you known what I do and recognized those patterns, you would have
made 2400% on your money in a couple of hours and sold those contracts
at the absolute exact top of the pattern that gave the buy signal in the
first place. (I had two students here with me watching the trade and it
hit pattern measurement exactly to a 1/16 of a point).
Had you bought the December 120 Amazon calls on November 16th and sold
them on December 16th, you could have made approximately $ 1.6 Million
on $ 2,500 invested in 100 contracts at $ .25 each. Again, the pattern
that gave the buy signal screamed for you to jump in, IF you knew what
to look for.
Do the math Rick. It's real.
There are literally dozens of trades like those two listed every month.
You just have to know how to recognize them and how to trade them.
Charlatan? Hawker? Mathmatically impossible?
To all those of you like Rick who doubt me, your arrogance and utter
distrust of people stops you from earning huge returns because your
small mindedness keeps you, well, small.
I may be cocky but you don't have to like me to learn from me. Heck,
would you listen to me if I wasn't?
According to you Rick, this isn't a nice business. The truth is this is
a wonderful business with more opportunity than anything I have ever
seen. I have owned dozens of successful businesses and never in my
wildest dreams believed that something like this was possible until I
proved it in my own experience. But I, unlike you, was willing to at
least test it. See if maybe there was something there that could move
me beyond mediocre trading.
The difference between you and I Rick is I am open to possibilites and
trust what I hear until I am given a reason not to. What got me started
on this search was an article I read that talked about a trader who
earned more than a million dollars in one day on an option trade with
relatively little at risk. In that same month, he pocketed over five
million dollars, again with very little ar risk.
That was all I needed to start me searching for what worked. He used
candlesticks and elementary chart patterns to give him entry and exit
points and the power of options for leverage.
I have been trading for less than a year but to me the amount of time is
irrelevant if what you are using isn't optimum. Maybe my wetness behind
the ears and ignornance of all the "systems" out there is exactly what
saved me and precisely what led me to discover so quickly what was
optimum in this business. I wasn't trapped by a belief system nor did I
have a lot invested in years of trading.
Your mind is too full of what you think you know to allow what others
know to help you expand into a whole different level of trading. I
trust what comes into my world because I trust myself. Even when it
seems totally outrageous, I follow up. Because in my world, more times
than not, it's the real deal.
I applaud Claudia who has been trading for 40 years and still has the
courage and open mindedness to test other ideas and see if maybe there
isn't something out there that works better than what she is currently
using. I trust her implicitly because she, unlike you, trusts herself.
Contrary to what you believe, this really is a nice business full of
hope for people seeking freedom from the drudgery of meaningless work. I
have met lots of excellent, decent people over the last 11 months via
e-mail and will continue to do so because I EXPECT that in my life.
My objective is to share everything I know with those who want to
listen. (As opposed to being secretive. Why would you be secretive?
What is there to protect? The more you share with others, the more you
get! The more I teach the more I learn.)
If my style is offensive to you, push that delete button. But don't
attack me because I want to share my good fortune with people seeking
knowledge that is powerful enough to explode every trading myth out
there.
Heck, if someone came to me making what I considered to be outrageous
claims but was sincere, I would check out what they were saying. They
just might be telling the truth...
Doc
Rick Mortellra wrote:
>
> Glen,
>
> Nothing wrong with keeping an open mind on trading ideas. That's one of
> reasons I've stayed on this list despite my limited use of MetaStock. But
> the Doc's claims are mathematically ridiculous. Just a few quick punches on
> calculator will make it obvious that a few more months like that and the Doc
> wouldn't be able to hide behind his anonymity. He'd be on the cover of
> Forbes.
>
> Think about it. Every $1 he started with was worth $312 after only 2 months
> of trading! As one who's spent his professional trading life building
> trading and money management systems based on sound math I find his posts
> lacking integrity. If he wants to prove himself, then let him provide the
> security symbols, the number of times he traded each one, and his gearage. I
> can do the math from there, no broker statements required. If he is
> truthful, we'll have all the info we need to evaluate his claim and decide
> for ourselves. And if he's lies, it will be easy to expose him. I haven't
> wasted my time visiting his web site simply because if I had something as
> profitable as this to sell, I couldn't bill anyone's credit card because
> it's price would exceed their credit limit. At least it would mine :-(
>
> The trading biz is full of false prophets and outright charlatans. Most of
> their claims are based on bad math. As an example, I'm listening right now
> to Mr.. Manic-Depressive, aka Ralph Acampora, tout the Dow tripling in 12
> years. Sounds fantastic and incredibly bullish, but a quick calculation
> shows a yearly return of ONLY about 9.5%! That's less than the 11%+
> historical average!
>
> Trading is not for the mathematically impaired. If high school algebra was
> tough, you need to find another way to make money.
>
> cheers,
> Rick
>
> PS. Sorry for being harsh, but this is NOT a nice business.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Wallace <gcwallace@xxxxxxxx>
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thursday, February 25, 1999 6:34 AM
> Subject: Re: S&P 500 (was AOL, CSCO, & WMT)
>
> >Bravo, Lino. Let's not blast someone simply because they are proud of
> their
> >apparently high returns and achievements. Instead, let's see if we can
> >learn from them and improve our own work. If they are willing to share, I
> >will always listen and keep an open mind.
> >
> >On the other hand, if I may be so bold, bravado simply for the sake of
> >stoking one's own ego (and this is *not* directed at Doc) has no place
> here.
> >
> >Challenging a person's claims is valid, but let's leave the flaming to
> AOL's
> >chatrooms, OK? I wouldn't want people to hold back their ideas for fear of
> >being roasted.
|