|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Well, MG, I guess I should be a little more detailed in my statements
regarding the guru's, so there is less of a possibility of
misunderstanding.
Your story about the money chain is exactly right. Job, trader,
information seller, seminars.
To get people to go to the seminars and spend what usually turns out
to be outrageous money, most of the seminar promoters lead people to
believe.
1. Trading is easy.
2. Anyone can be successful.
3. You're going to make a lot of money.
4. My system works all the time.
5. You don't have to know anything about TA or the markets. The system
does it for you.
6. I have made millions trading with this.
7. You can learn this to do this in only a few short hours.
I have several friends who write trading books and sell trading
products for a living. A few of them are good friends. I correspond or
talk to many of them on a regular basis. The ones that I'm friends
with I find to be very likable, trustable, amiable people. They're
like all my other friends except they're in the trading business.
Most of them trade, but only a little. They have the overwhelming
majority of their money in an asset allocation model like the one I'we
written about.
If you ask them why they don't trade more, they will tell you it's
because it's too risky, too time consuming, they don't make enough
money at it or their trading accounts are too small to live off of.
However, they don't put any of that in their books because their books
wouldn't sell.
As a trading information seller moves up the marketing chain into
seminars, etc. a lot of the promotion gets more and more suspect. I
just got another promo piece for Wize Trade. If I gave them money for
postage, muchless anything else, how wise would I be?
I've found I get my best advice from the full time traders that I know
who do make a living from trading. I'm almost always on the same page
with them about most things. We use different approaches, but on the
basics, it similar. All of us laugh when we hear the expectations some
new traders have been given about how much money they're going to
make. It's sad. Why? Because they're going to lose a lot of HARD
earned savings chasing what they see as a sure way to get rich.
Most of the professional traders I know tell people to stay out of the
trading business. They see themselves as lucky to be around. Many of
these guys have been involved in trading for ten to twenty years.
Sometimes they wonder how they got through the first 5 or 6 years
without losing their butts. (Some of them did, but kept coming back.)
One of the areas which I really, really disagree with the book writers
on is the size of the capital account it takes to rationally expect to
make a living from full time. I recommend that someone wanting to
trade full time have between $500,000 and $1,000,000 in money they can
afford to lose. Most books put that number around $50,000. If someone
only needs $50,000 to generate enough to live on and carry them
through the learning curve, trading must be fairly easy. Many people
can put together 50 G's from a variety of sources so what's the problem!
If the trading books said newbie's need $1,000,000 to get into this
business full time and have a chance of succeeding, they wouldn't sell
any books, there would be far fewer traders and the industry wouldn't
have a new want-to-be at the door every five minutes. Yes, some of my
friends have made it on less than a million in capital, but they had
secondary sources of income. Their spouse's worked and paid all the
bills, as an example.
Some guru's are very good. I've mentioned William Bernstein as one of
the most knowledgeable guys on asset allocation. He uses exactly the
methods he writes about to manage his money which is substantial.
John Clayburg trades with his systems and tools. John Ehlers is very
good. Chande is excellent. Price Headley trades regularly.
Steve Nison has built a substantial businesses selling trading tools
and he doesn't trade. At least he's honest about it when asked.
Japanese Candlestick Charting, The Candlestick Course, Candlesticks
Unleashed---well, at least it isn't Candlestick's made easy. If an
expert on using Candlesticks won't use them to trade his own money,
then why should anyone else want to use them? Sure there are many
traders who love candlesticks. However, what's the message from Nison
and how many people ignore the message?
Something around 90% or more of the traders are part time traders.
It's more of a hobby than a business. It's a very expensive hobby for
some of them; however, most got into trading out of frustration with
what they were making using buy and hold. They were doing buy and hold
investing the wrong way and rather than learn how to do it the right
way, they decided they were going to pick stocks themselves so they
got into TA.
In this case, a person doesn't need to have a large capital account,
as long as they can easily replace the money they lose. This is hobby
investing. That being said, I still get annoyed when I see misleading
stuff being sold to hobby traders. I'm not going to mention some of
the products that anyone can see on late night television, but to me
it's like being sold a bowling ball that's not round with the
expectation that if you roll the ball wrong it will self correct.
Roy doesn't promise anyone anything in regard to his newsletter. I
make most of the statements about it being the best MS tool, the value
for your money, the best trading advice you're going to get, etc.
Based on my experience at testing many, many trading tools these
statement summarize how I feel.
In my opinion, will Roy's newsletter help people make more money. For
some it will and for some it won't. There is nothing, absolutely
nothing that works for everyone or even the majority. I wish it were
that simple.
There are some trading insights in Roy's newsletter that should change
many reader's perspectives on trading. That's good, but if they don't,
can't, won't or whatever put the info into application then it's
interesting reading and that's about it.
Other readers may have their own bias's and opinions which are in
opposition to some of the articles and techniques discussed. For them,
the information won't be of value.
Fortunately every issue is a combination of many, many things so
everyone regardless of the markets they trade, their coding skills or
their knowledge of MS should have a chance to benefit. This is good.
My post are often controversial. Some people agree with some of the
stuff in them and some people don't. Some feel the need to rip my head
off for whatever they didn't like. Some compliment what I've said. I
don't mind either way as long as it doesn't get personal.
I don't put a lot of lace on what I write so it's going to get under
the skin of some people sometimes. Sorry!
I appreciate your diffence in opinion. I also appreciate the time you
spend writing these posts because I know exactly how much time it
takes and how little you get for it.
--- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mgf_za_1999 <no_reply@xxxx> wrote:
> Preston and Super
>
> With big apologies to Roy, who I do not wish to draw into this. My
> point is not really Roy's track record, nor do I wish to for him to
> justify himself. My point really refers to supers comments in post
> 18139 and his general tone that so many of the gurus out there
> actually do not know what they are talking about since they are not
> trading or would not make it if they were. I actually agree with this
> to some extent, but I think even they can contribute. I think we can
> learn from a person who knows how to present a good seminar, even if
> he never touched the markets. It seems super thinks we should 'wake
> up' and run away from the so-called experts. I also quote from one of
> his most recent posts:
>
> ..................
> Over the years I've met a lot of people involved in this business and
> the overwhelming majority of those who make a living from the trading
> business don't trade, including the gurus. To me that's somewhat of a
> problem if they're going to be giving trading advice and selling
> trading products
> ..................
>
> Yet super makes no secret of promoting Roy's work. What I am saying
> is that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
>
> Personally I really can see the value that Roy can add, but, using
> super's own yardstick, I'd have to wonder about it unless he is making
> a gazillion bucks.
>
> I think what I am actually saying to super specifically is, don't be
> so hard on honest people out there trying to contribute. If there is
> say some lady working in back-office that is excellent at settling
> deals with bank ABC, then she contributes to the whole trading
> business, even though she does not trade. If there is guy in IT,
> writing option calculators - even selling these for a living - and he
> does not trade, he still is contributing. If there is an operator
> making sure servers are running all night, and maybe sells these
> services to traders to make their life better, he contributes though
> he knows not the difference between a CFD and a share. I don't think
> it should be a requirement that somebody selling trading products
> should be a successful trader.
>
> Long ago I worked in a dealing room and we obtained Advanced Get. The
> guy who developed it was an engineer, then started trading part time
> and started writing AGet. Then he quit his job and just traded, then,
> it seems, he just sold AGet and then, when we looked at AGet, he was
> just going around presenting training courses on AGet. Our conlusion
> - it pays to be an engineer, it pays more to be a trader, even more to
> sell software but it pays best to present training seminars!
>
> Regards
> MG Ferreira
> TsaTsa EOD Programmer and trading model builder
> http://www.ferra4models.com
> http://fun.ferra4models.com
>
> --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pumrysh <no_reply@xxxx> wrote:
> > MG,
> >
> > I don't normally do this but in this case I will.
> >
> > I can't tell you about Roy's performance or track record. I can tell
> > you that I have seen a system that he developed with a greater than
> > 80% successful track record. Roy's work is not about finding a
> > successful system though. It is about finding ways to work within the
> > Metastock formula language to successfully code indicators and
> > formulas. He has written a group of indicators called Trade Equity
> > that work within the explorer and perform as a system tester. Little
> > is said about this work but from my perspective I was personnally
> > floored to see its performance. Equis claimed it could not be done.
> > The same holds true for indicators/formulas that he writes.
> >
> > Roy's publication is more about working around those wonderful
> > nuances that drive you stark raving bananas. If you write code then
> > his publication is a must! I am a subscriber and for my money its the
> > best buck I spend.
> >
> > On the other hand there are those who write about trading, in this
> > case its a horse of a different color. Most of the work is
> > interesting but in reality I as well doubt their capability to
> > survive in the real world of trading.
> >
> > Trading is not an easy road to follow. Learning how to do it takes a
> > lot of time and hard work. Success does not fall into your lap
> > overnight.
> >
> >
> > Preston
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mgf_za_1999 <no_reply@xxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > I feel bad about this post already, and wish I could take it back.
> > I
> > > really do not want an answer nor am I asking for Roy's track record.
> > >
> > > But....to be far.....
> > >
> > > What I really mean is this: you mention all the guys that write
> > books
> > > or magazines but won't survive trading. You also actively promote
> > > Roy's work.....
> > >
> > >
> > > Again, simply to be fair.....
> > >
> > > The same yardstick should apply don't you think.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > MG Ferreira
> > > TsaTsa EOD Programmer and trading model builder
> > > http://www.ferra4models.com
> > > http://fun.ferra4models.com
> > >
> > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mgf_za_1999 <no_reply@xxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > > To be fair, I should ask, hesitatingly so, if Roy trades the
> > markets
> > > > and what his track record is like.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > MG Ferreira
> > > > TsaTsa EOD Programmer and trading model builder
> > > > http://www.ferra4models.com
> > > > http://fun.ferra4models.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, superfragalist
> > <no_reply@xxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I use the system tester, but I don't consider the results from
> > it or
> > > > > any tester to match what I'm going to get in live trading. The
> > results
> > > > > from the tester are relative. You can compare one systems test
> > to
> > > > > another systems test if you've used similar settings. This
> > gives you
> > > > > basic information as to the number of trades, duration of
> > trades, etc.
> > > > > That information can be used to rank systems, define conditions
> > under
> > > > > which one system works better than another system. However, if
> > the
> > > > > systems tester tells you you're going to get a 28.5% annual
> > rate of
> > > > > return and you believe that, oh well.
> > > > >
> > > > > After you've traded live for awhile, you should be able to
> > calculate
> > > > > the real rate of return for those market conditions. Each set of
> > > > > market conditions will have a different rate of return
> > regardless of
> > > > > the system design.
> > > > >
> > > > > I test almost all systems with buy or sell on open with a 1 bar
> > delay,
> > > > > even though I don't trade that way. It's all about keeping the
> > > > > comparisons relative. Once the system test is done, I go back
> > to my
> > > > > history files, pick periods corresponding to specific market
> > > > > conditions, and paper trade the system historically. That gives
> > me a
> > > > > feel for what's going to really happen in each of those market
> > > > > conditions. I keep those stats and compare them to the live
> > trading
> > > > > stats.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, it labor intensive but so is earning back the money you
> > lose if
> > > > > you believe anybody's system tests results are really right.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know Nora or JD.
> > > > >
> > > > > I use version 9 but it has a lot of bugs in it as all previous
> > > > > versions of MS have had, and Equis doesn't intend to fix any of
> > the
> > > > > bugs because there is no money in fixing bugs as long as the
> > basic
> > > > > functions work as described.
> > > > >
> > > > > Roy's newsletter is the best source of indicators and MS trading
> > > > > methods out there. He covers everything you will ever want to
> > know
> > > > > about the tester and explorer.
> > > > >
> > > > > I like some John Ehlers code. Most of it doesn't test out any
> > better
> > > > > than anyone else's. The IFT of the RSI is pretty good as is the
> > DCF.
> > > > > Both of them are fully explain in the newsletter.
> > > > >
> > > > > I like David's stuff.
> > http://www.alticom.com/indicators/overview.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of it is coded in Roy's newsletter. Equis has some of it
> > on their
> > > > > site but the code is wrong. The code in TASC is wrong also. The
> > B&Q is
> > > > > in the newsletter. I've coded several of his indicators, and
> > they work
> > > > > better than most of Ehlers except for the IFT and DCF. All of
> > David's
> > > > > stuff is hard to code. Oh, well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Have fun!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "jim" <jimk_30045@xxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > dear superfragilistic...how are you..i appreciate your
> > outrageous
> > > > > > unselfish and huge notes on anything you respomd too..i still
> > think
> > > > > > your JD...how's nora doing....and i hope your doing
> > > > > > well....anyway...here is my note...after reading all the
> > > > ^^(^^(*^*(^*^*
> > > > > > (^(*^(*^(*^(*^*(^ crap on the ST...do you use it...and the
> > delay
> > > is a
> > > > > > bunch of crap so do you do your alerts at 3:30pm as suggested
> > by
> > > the
> > > > > > classic Sprunger note to get an O H L C and do an order based
> > > on the
> > > > > > close....and place your trade by 4...i hope thiu is not
> > > > > > nonsense.......did you upgrade to 9.0.... the mesa note...do
> > you
> > > use
> > > > > > any on his code....or s. karnsisch code..thanks...
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/equismetastock/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
equismetastock-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|