|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Wow,
Norman that was a long one!!! You must have been fired up. This debate
proves what makes a market. Yes, we have found:
1. There are people looking to lose their money in more ways than just
trading.
2. There are people who know how to generate trading ideas and not make
money from them.
3. There are people who make money from trading without having any
'method' what so ever.
4. Some people make money using two moving averages over a long time!!
They just get lucky and
avoid non trending markets.
5. Some people lose heaps of money using moving averages on non-trending
markets.
6. There are people who could not make any money selling anything
7. There are people who would still lose money no matter whether you gave
them a way of trading that
was profitable 100% of the time.
8. There are people who makes lot of money selling crap to other people
for high prices.
9. There are people who make money selling crap they honestly believe is
good crap.
10. There are people who give freely good trading ideas and die penniless
because no one believes them
because they do not charge for it. Therefore, no pays for the ideas
because they think it is crap as
it doesn't cost enough.
11. There are people who make money trading ideas they have bought for very
high prices. The same
ideas may be roundly regarded as crap by the whole world - yet they
make still money.
12. Some people believe a trading system will help stop them being crapped
on in the market -
Until they trade it
BTW ONE MAN'S CRAP IS ANOTHER MAN'S INCENSE.
SO WHAT IS CRAP ANYWAY??? CRAP IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER!!!
A trader has to find what suits him in terms of his capital, lifestyle,
personality and psychological disposition. Who is anyone to judge what is
right or wrong for trading for the whole world? Traders have all such
different approaches and beliefs. This is what makes a market.
PS is it OK to say C_R_A_P?? I know the US has some strange laws!!!
David Hunt
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~adest
----------
| From: nwinski <nwinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| To: MBurton875@xxxxxxx
| Cc: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| Subject: Re: Forbes / William Green and Ken Roberts
| Date: Sunday, March 01, 1998 8:03 AM
|
|
|
| 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
|
|
|
|