|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I'm sorry if I offended your sensibilities - traders don't normally have
any. I've been trading for 12 years and I've found an ego is definitely a
bad thing to be wearing when I turn on my screen each morning.
As I'm sure you know, you *are* indeed the tail on the distribution if
you're still alive (metaphorically speaking) after more than a few years
trading professionally. That wasn't really my point - as Michael Harris
points out, magazine editors know which side their bread is buttered, and
typically it ain't with a group of individuals each of whom has only $50 per
year of purchasing power with him.
Rus
-----Original Message-----
From: felixty@xxxxxxxxxxx <felixty@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Omega <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 03 March 1999 16:20
Subject: Re: Futures Mag, TASC Etc
>So, in other words, those of you trading for so many years are freaks of
nature.
>You
>guys someway/somehow manage to live/trade/survived beyond standard
>expectation,no wonder you got so much trouble with Omega. The deviation in
the
>table something like the insurance industry.
>
>Your existence is not the reality of importance to the industry's vendors
of any
>product
>or are you guys part of their grand design. So,sorry!!
>
>Ouch!!!
>
>
>
>
>Rus Newton wrote:
>
>> Chaps
>>
>> Let's be realistic here. You all seem surprised/upset/indignant that
>> magazines should publish more favourable articles than unfavourable
ones -
>> as several people have stated, this is hardly a shock given that a large
>> chunk of any magazine's revenue derives from advertising; in a small
market,
>> like technical trading systems, it would hardly be prudent for a magazine
to
>> alienate a significant proportion of their clients.
>>
>> Compare this situation with magazine subscribers; if, as many people have
>> claimed, most subscribers & system buyers are newbies who give up after a
>> year, then the best strategy for a magazine editor is to suck up to
>> advertisers and not worry about subscribers too much.
>>
>
>
|