|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
On 16 Mar 99, at 19:39, T-Bondtrader wrote:
> I am sorry, but there are a lot of people out there who would dearly like
> to become good at day trading. They would like to earn their living out
> of it. Most have a small amount of capital. Most have been caught by
> purveyors of other fax lists, hot lines, seminars and the rest and here,
> now, on RT we have someone unleashing yet another - and not even based on
> his own work.
I have been caught by many of these purveyors. I'm tired of it!
The reason I get caught by them is that for some reason I never
require a money-back guarantee or proof that the techniques
actually do work, before sending my check.
People who teach trading techniques rarely, if ever, offer money-
back guarantees or proof that their techniques are valid. I asked Bill
for these and he refused to give me either. I wonder why? A
prospective student willing to fork over several hundred or even
several thousand dollars deserves this!! Why wouldn't a teacher of
profitable trading techniques want to show proof that his methods
work? Can you imagine the business that could be generated by
the teacher that could show profitable brokerage statements?
WOW!! I guess the answer is, why would he want the business?
He can make his money in the markets.
> Well, as someone who has been through mill, I am just not prepared to let
> it go without pleading for readers on this list to be highly suspicious
> about the relevance of indicators and a 'service' based on them (even if
> they are lifted from someone else's book, so it is someone else's fault,
> if they don't work).
I agree!! I have been through the mill, also. Over twelve years of it!!
I think this subject should be discussed here on Realtraders. It is
very relevant to the person that is trying to succeed in this business.
If Bill, based on his experience, knows that Bob's techniques do not
work and explains why, then this is providing a good service to all of
us who are striving to be traders. By the way, it's very easy for Bob
to prove otherwise.
If Bob makes money using techniques described in someone elses
book then he has the right to teach the techniques. The fact that
something is published means that it is in the public domain.
Throughout engineering school I have had many good teachers who
taught valid techniques described in books authored by others.
> I have had excellent private mail over this, now let's have some public
> stuff. We cannot afford to let a subject like this just die, so that the
> names of all those garnered off this list will be subjected to a service
> that will not actually be any service to them at all.
I agree! Let's continue the thread.
> The whole idea of RT, surely, is to thrash out subjects, so that value can
> come through and members benefit. There is hardly a more important
> subject to a day trader than the reliability or otherwise of indicators -
> let alone a fax service based on them.
If Bob can show us how reliable his indicators are then there is no
question here. It's not something that needs to be argued. The
proof is in the pudding. Bob, do your indicators make money or
don't they?
It's like if Watson said to Bell, "That won't work." Bell says, "Pick up
the phone and listen."
That's the way people learn!!!
> If I am wrong, tell me. It is not a private grievance "best left
> undiscussed in a serious public forum". It should be a vital topic to a
> lot traders - certainly to all those who are about to sign up. Or has
> the whole thing just been flying a kite - if so, I hope it has been torn
> to shreds?!
You are correct, Bill.
Glenn Pederson
gpeder@xxxxxxxxx
|