|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
MBurton875 wrote:
> I agree totally. I am a commodity trader as well, thanks to Ken Roberts.
> Five years ago I took his course. It is a very straightforward, honest
> course. The techniques aren't necessarily new, but hey are very important
> techniques that do make money. They might be simple, and some study beyond
> that is required, but I think Ken Roberts has done a huge favor to many
> people. Like you said, there will always be the people that wine and
> complain. The reason they do, is because they need a reason for their own
> lack of success. If nothing else, his course inspires people to trade.
>
> Mike,
Couldn't you get the same inspiration for free by calling the CBOT toll
free line and askingfor their beginner pack? For those who have not yet paid
Ken $199, free info on futures can be had
by either e-mailing the CME or CBOT or the toll free number for the CBOT is
800-THECBOT.
Ken Roberts charges $199 for information that is readily available for
free. Maybe that's not as much of an indictment of the Ken Roberts as it is the
uniformed suckers who didn't do any investigation before jumping into the world
of futures info. Once they have paid the $199 to Ken Roberts, the KR students
have a vested interest in protecting their egos. Its not easy for most people
to admit that they paid $199 for information they could have gotten for free
just because they didn't make a few phone calls. On the other hand, those few
that can stare themselves straight in the eye and publicly admit they have
made a mistake stand the best chance of becoming successful traders. It takes
brutal honesty to become successful at trading. When I was on the CBOE, Winski
axiom #23 was "when you come to the trading floor, bring your wallet and leave
your ego at home".
As for William Green, there is no question that his article a hatchet
job. One example where Mr. Green didn't check his facts straight was that he
said that Jake Bernstein was based in Montreal.
I have known Jake B. for about 20 years. To my knowledge, he has always been
based in the Chicago
area. Another shocking point was where he dismissed seasonal and cycles out of
hand without any evidence or investigation. Bernstein's track record could
reflect the fact that he has done good research but he doesn't have the
temperament to successfully trade. Green's writing does nothing to shed any
light on these obvious possibilities. Ken Roberts or Jake Bernstein are no
angels. But, William Green's article left much to be desired as a journalistic
endeavor. I find it appalling that Forbes Magazine with a supposed
indisputable lofty reputation would allow such shoddy material to be published
and tarnish their name.
The final score:
Ken Roberts - 1
For exercising less than the best ethics - he could point
folks to the free basic info and then charge them if they want to continue with
him on a more advance level.
Jake Bernstein - 1
For questiionable ethics in that he used inflamatory
language in his TV ads and went after the most unsophisticated inexerperienced
segment of the public. After 25 years in the futues biz,
Jake obvoiusly knows better but decided to take the low road.
Ken Robert's Students - 1
For lack of investigation before sending Ken Roberts
$199. You could have gotten it for free.
Ken Robert's Students who think he is a saint or that they
made no mistake. -2
You have a real problem
William Green - 1
For almost total lack of journalistic ethics or
standards in writing what should have been an informative article but turned
out to be merely your own unresearched personal editorial.
Forbes Magazine -2
You have editorial control over the articles you
publish and a supposed impeachable
reputation. You failed on both counts.
Cheers,
Norman
|