|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Ed:
My experience in life is that if someone will lie to you about one important
thing they will lie to you about other important stuff too.
I guess you do not agree. I guess you are saying FT can tell the truth here,
but they don't need to tell the truth over there, or on another topic, or in
another media, and it's OK with you.
Sorry, I don't agree. As far as the "dredging up something bad," all I talk
about is right there on the two sites, clear as broken glass, for all to
see.
It's a case of the "fox watching the chicken coop" and the fox is telling
us: "I'm not a fox! Well, OK, my son's a fox (aka vendor), but I'm just
another honest chicken! Really!"
BW
>From: EdCReeve@xxxxxxx
>To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Re[2]: Futures Truth Bashing
>Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:27:01 EST
>
> > tradewynne@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> >
> > Has ANYONE that ever sent them a system been informed that the
>principles
>of
> > FT are also system vendors? Do you really believe these omissions are
> > accidental?
>
>Let me try one more time. The following is copy and paste from my first
>email
>on the subject:
>
> > >Fully disclosed. Let me quote again from Page 1 of their publication:
> > >
> > >"CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Futures Truth Magazine does track systems that
>are
> > >created and sold by Futures Truth Company."
>
>It sounds like the Futures Truth web site could be expanded to include more
>of the disclaimer text in the printed publication. I have been quoting from
>their printed publication (as I have said before). I have never looked much
>at their web site myself.
>
>I would think that before someone actually sent them a system, they would
>at
>some point take a look at their main product, which is the printed
>publication, and this is clearly stated on Page 1 of the printed
>publication.
>
> > "Mr. Hill is currently involved with Futures Truth. Futures Truth is a
> > bi-monthly publication dedicated to bringing out the truth of publicly
> > offered trading systems. Futures Truth is the authority on systems and
> > system trading. Through this endeavor, Mr. Hill has seen literally
>thousands
> > of trading systems. Past and Present. Good and Bad. Public and Private.
> > If anybody knows trading systems, I think its a good bet that John R.
>Hill
> > does. He used this same knowledge as well as knowledge from practically
>45
> > years experience successfully trading to design these systems.
> >
> > This knowledge is available to you now."
> >
> > From the ST web site.
> >
> > Here is something specific. He just about comes out and says that he
>uses
> > info gleaned from systems he rates to create his own systems.
>
>My challenge to find something specific was evidence of Mark Brown's claim
>that "the models have been tampered with to keep their ranking" (Mark's
>words).
>
>Your quote above is a different subject. A subject I was not aware of, and
>have not given much thought to. I do see your point.
>
>John Hill was a trader before he started Futures Truth. He started Futures
>Truth because he viewed it as his good deed in life to "provide hard cold
>facts on the many trading systems that were available to the public." (the
>quote is from the preface of John Hill's new book). I am sure he never
>thought when he started this "good deed" that it would lead to someday
>people
>saying he should have ended his involvement with all other aspects of the
>trading world because of conflict of interest. That would be a very high
>price to pay for a good deed, for someone whose passion in life is trading.
>So, instead he stayed involved with the industry, and fully discloses
>conflicts of interest on page 1 in the printed magazine.
>
>But I do see your point that the above quote is using John Hills
>involvement
>with Futures Truth not as an unavoidable conflict of interest, but as a
>selling point for a product. You say this comes from the "ST" web site,
>which
>I assume means "Stafford Trading", which is his son's company. That means
>this was probably written by his son.
>
> > I never said FT lied, and I for one have found some value there, but
>you
> > must be blind to think they have been completly honest. If the truth is
>not
> > black and white, but rather shades of grey, then color FT dark grey.
>
>I can agree to some shade of grey. But I still don't think he is being
>dishonest because all of this is fully disclosed (in the printed
>publication
>if not on the web site). While I do see your point, I also think judgment
>should be made in light of some of the goods things John Hill has
>accomplished in his career. Futures Truth was a force in exposing some very
>dishonest trading system vendors in the earlier years, withstanding
>constant
>legal threats from vendors who didn't like them publishing the real facts
>about their trading systems. Finally a vendor did actually take them to
>court. Hill did prevail in the case, but they still had to pay the legal
>expenses of defending themselves not to mention the aggravation of being
>sued. That experience seemed to take some wind out of their sails as far as
>Futures Truth being an aggressive watchdog company.
>
>John Hill has also written some very informative articles, and the new book
>which started this discussion is quite good.
>
>It is similar to bashing of politicians. Whenever someone exposes
>themselves
>to the public eye, they become exposed to someone dredging up something
>which
>makes them look bad.
>
|