|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hello EdCReeve,
Eac> Mark, I think you should try to gain a little more understanding of the
Eac> issues you discuss before making this kind of accusation.
likewise you need to watch it when you defend slick scammers.
Eac> First, I don't believe that Futures Truth has ever advertised catscan or
Eac> aberration. These systems are advertised by the vendors who sell the systems.
what planet do you live on? reference futures truth top ten each
month!
Eac> Futures Truth does publish performance numbers for the systems in their
Eac> publication along with 116 other systems. It could even be that Futures Truth
Eac> has published paid advertising for these systems in their publication (I
Eac> don't know one way or another).
for which they are paid for by the VENDOR! they are a mouthpiece for
the VENDOR.
Eac> But if you feel that accepting paid
Eac> advertising from a vendor you review is unethical, you need to accuse Futures
Eac> and S&C of this also.
YEA WELL...IF IT QUACKS LIKE A DUCK
Eac> All of these publications survive based upon the income
Eac> of paid advertising, and all of these publications are common in that they
Eac> also publish evaluations of the products they accept paid advertising from.
YEA AND ITS A CROOKED BUSINESS - WAKE UP FOOL!
Eac> It could be what you say about aberration changing inputs to stay profitable
Eac> via curve fitting is true. I have not studied the advertising for these
Eac> systems. I have no idea one way or another.
OH so now you admit YOUR IGNORANT? RIGHT?
Eac> But I don't think it is relevant
Eac> to what you accuse Futures Truth of. Futures Truth cannot control the
Eac> advertising published by the aberration or catscan vendors.
Why? let me guess someone from Futures Truth said hi to once at a
convention or maybe John Hill himself talked to over the phone to
answer your questions and so he was such a nice guy and you were so
impressed that you come here to defend him? I'll take him and you
both on and bring the Cruz twins you'll need THEM!
Eac> It is my understanding that Futures Truth provides a paid service for testing
Eac> trading systems based upon the input and markets their customer provides.
Eac> Here, there is an ad on Page 2 of their publication for "Testing &
Eac> Consulting". What customers of this service do with those test results is not
Eac> under their control.
AGAIN i reference you to the top 10 trading systems which appears in THE
MAGS each month. They are publishing those claims not the vendor!
big ass snip of boring stuff>
Eac> You talk about the 30 commodities aberration trades. This clearly points out
Eac> that you are NOT talking about the results in their publication because that
Eac> publication only ranks aberration on 7 markets. You must be talking about
Eac> something the vendor published? If a vendor publishes lies, that is not the
Eac> fault of Futures Truth. I am not clear exactly what your accusation is??
and how old is your publication? i'm not talking about a publication
man - i'm talking about the manual that comes with the friggin system
dude! i know what i have and i have two of them which were purchased
years apart and they are totally re optimized on a basket of just
under 30 commodities. maybe your little trade show pamphlet has only 7
commodities - gee vunder why?
Eac> I think if you study their publication, it is quite clear what exactly they
Eac> are publishing, and what additional products and services they offer. It is
Eac> completely honest, completely disclosed.
BULLSHIT!
Eac> Your bashing above is a gross
Eac> misinterpretation. You misinterpretation sounds like you think they are
Eac> allowing vendors to change parameters to push systems into the Top 10 list.
YES EXACTLY!!! PROVE ME WRONG MAN. BRING IT ON....
Eac> That simply isn't true, unless what they say on page 1 of their publication
Eac> is outright fraud, which I find seriously hard to believe.
WELL THANK YOU EXPERIENCED AOL USER THAT YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE.. AND JUST
FOR YOUR INFO ALL THE BELOW STATEMENTS DIDN'T COME FROM ME THOUGH YOU
CREDITED ME WITH THEM. NOT THAT I DISSAGREE WITH THEM AT ALL.
>> tradewynne@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>> Other conflicts which concern me about Futures "Truth:"
>>
>> 1) Futures Truth principles are themselves system vendors under a
Eac> different
>> corporation and to my knowledge have not disclosed this fact to their
>> competitors whose systems they rate, nor at the Futures Truth site. OTOH,
>> their vendor site lets us know they've seen more systems than anyone else
>> and therefore are experts in system design.
Eac> Nope. Fully disclosed. Let me quote again from Page 1 of their publication:
Eac> "CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Futures Truth Magazine does track systems that are
Eac> created and sold by Futures Truth Company."
Eac> Isn't the real issue whether they rank their own systems by the same criteria
Eac> as outside systems? Is there any evidence that they rank their own systems
Eac> different? I doubt it.
>> 2) They apparently now accept advertising from the people they "rate."
>> Imagine if Consumer Reports accepted advertising from GM, but not Ford.
>> Would you believe their car ratings?
Eac> I'm not sure what your point is. You feel that they only accept advertising
Eac> from trading system vendors they rate? Or is it that you feel accepting
Eac> advertising from people you rate is in general unethical? If so, Futures and
Eac> S&C and all kinds of other trade publications are also unethical. There
Eac> wouldn't be any trade publication left.
>> This is not to say there is not value at their site, and who knows about
>> their book, but keep your eyes wide open. As X-files say: "The truth is
Eac> out
>> there," but you might not find it @ http://www.futurestruth.com
Eac> I have seen no evidence they have been untruthful about anything.
>> nchrisc@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>> Issue 1 -- look up an article the authors wrote in futures mag a few years
>> back entitled something to the effect of the "top 10 trading systems of all
>> time"
Eac> Yes, they have a chapter on this in the new book also. I don't know what your
Eac> objection to this is.
>> Issue 2 -- years back, seems like a lifetime ago, I approched Futures Truth
>> about evalutating a system I was marketing, so that they might include it
Eac> in
>> their publication. I provided them with the code, results, etc. I opted
>> not to advertise in their publication. A year and a half later they had
>> still "not gotten around to it." I am sure this was just a coincidence
>> though. I might add that the program was very profitable during this time
>> period. Just as well for me as I rapidly concluded that selling trading
>> software was more trouble than it was worth.
Eac> The fact that their publication rates 118 systems and I see only a handful of
Eac> ads for system, proves that there are about 113 systems they rate who do not
Eac> advertise. There must be more to this story.
>> Issue 3 --Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this will be the reaction
>> to the book from those who have confidentially provided Futures Truth their
>> trading systems over the years. Seems a difficult task for someone in
Eac> their
>> business to divide knowledge into that coming from confidential sources and
>> that from other sources. But I am sure they figured out a way to do it.
Eac> I have the book. The systems in the book are pretty general. I find it hard
Eac> to believe any vendor will contend these systems were stolen from them. By
Eac> the way, the systems are not presented as being holy grails. Only some
Eac> examples of system design.
>> prosys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>> Futures Truth should be rebranded: www.futures-lie.com
Eac> What have they lied about???
>> 1) no extensive performance reporting
Eac> From Page 2 of the publication:
Eac> "Detailed Reports: A complete trade-by-trade report, showing equity curves,
Eac> and all statistical information on any system that we track in our Master
Eac> Performance table. Includes over 10 years of data."
Eac> Maybe you object to having to pay extra, but I don't see what the lie is.
>> 2) no forms for submitting new systems
Eac> I am sure you could email or call them if you have a system to submit. No
Eac> forms on the web site is a lie?
>> 3) nasty responses to questions via e-mail
Eac> Can't comment on this. I have no idea.
>> All in all, appears to be a very secretive and clandestine operation.
Eac> I don't see any factual basis for this claim.
Eac> The new book, "The Ultimate Trading Guide" is actually quite good. Sad if
Eac> people decide not to read it because of these accusations.
--
Best regards,
Mark Brown mailto:markbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Y = Offset + Amplitude * sin(Frequency * X)
|