|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Isn't that just the point. Most CTAs would never sell their systems - they
are too busy trading them. So what is the point of making systems sellers
CTAs? There is a conflict between the two which no one seems to have
picked up. Believe it or not there are people out there who do not want to
create their own systems (or can not) and simply want something that takes
their own responsibility away or at least makes an objective consistent
decision..
There simply needs to be a separate category for Systems Developers and
Sellers that does not have the same capitalization and audit requirements
etc of a CTA who actually handles peoples money. Wouldn't that be a
smarter idea than putting someone into the wrong box?
David Hunt
http://adest.com.au
----------
| From: CIR <ResearchDepartment@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| To: Omega-List <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
| Subject: Re: Justice
| Date: Sunday, July 12, 1998 2:08 AM
|
| Charles Wright wrote:
|
| > none of my biz, but I don't think the label "CTA" ensures ethics,
| > integrity, or ability. It's a protection racket like most trade
| > unions, if I may be so crude.
| >
| > fwiw. CW.
|
| QUESTION: How many NFA member CTA's do you see selling systems? Name one
if you can! I rest my case!
|
| --
| TC
|
|