Day trading article on nytimes.com

Quote from konviction:

This thread is proof that everyone hates a winner. The guys makes 100K plus trading, plus fees from his site. He's at the point now where he could stop trading and mentor if he wanted too.

Only a handfull of guys here make 100K a year consistantly, much less have 100K in their account. These guys are the real 3 to 5% club that everyone wants to be in.
More...

As usual, easily impressed.
 
Quote from sprinter:

let's talk the truth about 100k year traders. Truth I'd they are taxxed at 36percent making the 100k 64k. Then there is data fees office etc. If you only make 100k year this biz is a waste. Not to mention you will not make 100k year for years on end. Markets and edges change all the time. One year your method works. The next year it doesn't. Not to even mention supporting a family or ex spouse. Hang it up. Get a job

100k a year is chump change folks. If you think it's anything diferent. You are in the wrong biz
More...

100k profit is not 100k income:cool: newbies easily fall for these claims. INCOME matters, not REVENUE

Problem is when you talk about attorneys making 50k a year in revenue. They mean 70k in REVENUE.

reason is that employers pay taxes not employees, unlike in trading. ANother hurdle for the newbie trader to overcome. So traders need to even make more money to even the odds.

if a garbageman says he makes 20k a year he makes 30k.. first his employer pays 10k tax and then the garbageman pays 10k tax so revenue is 30k and income 10k.. but revenue seems to be 20k but it is 30k.

nobody on other sites except elitetrader talk about taxes and expenses witht trading. Trading isn't that easy, like other self-employed jobs.
 
Quote from failed_trad3r:


nobody on other sites except elitetrader talk about taxes and expenses witht trading. Trading isn't that easy, like other self-employed jobs.
More...

Cold, this is an excellent reason why you should go to those other trading sites, rather than creating thousands of aliases here.
 
Quote from icarus618:



Unfortunately for you, that's about as far as you can go with the article. Your limited knowledge of daytrading prevents you from coming to a useful conclusion about such a performance relative to others who are successful.

Unlike you, there are people who read that article who are more interested in the portrayal of daytraders to the public than about the specific claims of the traders themselves. That's another issue entirely.
More...

And unfortunately your idea of success is tied to some preconceived dollar value in your head. Your smug attitude prevents you from seeing that 1) He's been trading sinse the 90's so he obviously has what it takes to last this long. 2) The average annual income is 50 to 70k, so even if he came out after expenses with this amount, he's keeping up with most Americans.
I'll bet anything you dont come close to this guy, so the funny part is that you probably never will.
 
Quote from l2tradr:

LOL, ok bigshot, you're right. Post your past 10 years of year-end results. If you're over $1 mil like this guy is (according to the article), great. If not, STFU. That's what I thought.
More...

+++++1
 
So the 2.0 version of THE DAYTRADER is a piker who is a hero to the struggling wannabes because he is portrayed as making 100K a year doing his 60 bucks in the morning while running his chatroom charging $200/mo.

I have no problem with that portrayal and effect at all.

However, personally I enjoyed the portrayal in version 1.0 much more.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SFvblyRNRRM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SFvblyRNRRM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Peace and good trading to you.
 
Quote from icarus618:

So the 2.0 version of THE DAYTRADER is a piker who is a hero to the struggling wannabes because he is portrayed as making 100K a year doing his 60 bucks in the morning while running his chatroom charging $200/mo.

I have no problem with that portrayal and effect at all.

However, personally I enjoyed the portrayal in version 1.0 much more.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SFvblyRNRRM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SFvblyRNRRM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Peace and good trading to you.
More...

I remember that. classic. it is the actor from the show Pete & Pete.

$8.00 a trade. no wonder so many fail at this game, I could not imagine trying to overcome $8.00 a trade.
 
Wish I could go back in time to those dot com days, man were they extreme, the commercials, the hype, the greed, the new technology. That commercial brings back memories of what it was like during the biggest tech bubble in history, then we had the housing bubble, then the commodity bubble, then the credit bubble, damn!!!! Since then all we have witnessed is fucking bubbles, bubbles, bubbles, bubbles here bubbles everywhere!!!!!!


:p :p :p :p :p
 
bubbles are great if you get the job as head manipulator,these houses have cleaned up,and the volume and volatility, will be sad to see it end
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top