I'm 21 years old, couldn't enter University, planning to trade full-time.

[VPhantom]

Simply, the market and trading/investing will be much more stressful and require more study than had you gone to school. Thus, you must become a student of the market that will require learning, memorization and self-explanations...more than any school will require.

There's a motivation aspect that is very dependent on the subject at hand. My school system (Québec, Canada) has failed me as well, and I was out after one year of college for lack of interest in the mandatory subjects and the way they were handled. I can and do, however, gladly spend 80-hour weeks on subjects for which I am passionate (software engineering being one, trading being another).

I realize that's in essence what @d08 and @zenon12 already mentioned, so I guess this is more of a "me too".

whether one likes authority

That's a very good point. I've been an entrepreneur since 1996 and the handful of times where I tried truly working "under" someone weren't pleasant experiences for me, so I ended up earning less on my own to keep that freedom to choose and manage my own projects.

Markets are WAY different now. I don't follow Zanger, but from what others have said on here, he might have been a one hit wonder.

Ah but that's the age-old saying: "everything's completely different now". We hear that with every new generation, and I'm not even talking about trading per se. Politicians idealize the world as they saw it when they were 5 years old (and it's funny to hear the same argument from 40-year-olds and 80-year-olds), when they were protected by their parents and had no worries, right now traders from the 80's-90's say the algos screwed everything up... Fact is, there'll always be people with the right mindset at the right time to succeed, so just because we can't make heads or tails of a changing world doesn't mean nobody else (probably younger) will.

 

[wrbtrader]

There's a motivation aspect that is very dependent on the subject at hand. My school system (Québec, Canada) has failed me as well, and I was out after one year of college for lack of interest in the mandatory subjects and the way they were handled. I can and do, however, gladly spend 80-hour weeks on subjects for which I am passionate (software engineering being one, trading being another).

I realize that's in essence what @d08 and @zenon12 already mentioned, so I guess this is more of a "me too".

I completely understand the education issue in the story.

The problem (a red flag) is getting involved in the markets as a retail trader to become rich and a millionaire as the motivation.

The one thing he did say that impress me was that he was going to first work full-time at jobs to save and get a trading capital and read about the markets in his free time and then begin trading I believe he said when he's reached 100k.

I don't live in Singapore and I don't know what the typical wage is for someone without a degree. Thus, I don't know if its possible or how long it would take for someone in his situation to save 100k from working different jobs.

Note: Most young adults in that age group is going to spend (not save) their money...those without a degree. Hopefully his motivation is much better than the typical young adult.

The real question is this...does he know anyone in Singapore that has dropped out of school and then worked and able to save 100k. Next, does he know anyone that then use that money to become a full-time retail trader to become rich and a millionaire ?

Had he stated he was already a profitable retail trader and has now reached 100k with the goal of reaching 1 million dollars. All I would say is to keep doing what he's been doing that got him to 100k.

 

[Laissez Faire]

You might want to go back and look WHEN Zanger did that. Markets are WAY different now. I don't follow Zanger, but from what others have said on here, he might have been a one hit wonder.

Exactly how are markets WAY different?

Do you have data or charts to back that claim? Sure, we all know that HFT is more prevalent now, but how has that really changed the markets such that they are WAY different now?

This is a serious question.

EDIT: I asked @marketsurfer the same question when confronted with Marty Schwartz' success as a technical trader when he dodged it with that being 80s markets and supposedly different than today. I asked him how, but he ignored it as he always does when things get difficult.

 

[VPhantom]

The problem (a red flag) is getting involved in the markets as a retail trader to become rich and a millionaire as the motivation.

Oh, I didn't catch that. Red flag indeed. Good thing he's planning to start it out as a side project to confirm interest and ability.

 

[EPrado]

Exactly how are markets WAY different?

Do you have data or charts to back that claim? Sure, we all know that HFT is more prevalent now, but how has that really changed the markets such that they are WAY different now?

This is a serious question.

EDIT: I asked @marketsurfer the same question when confronted with Marty Schwartz' success as a technical trader when he dodged it with that being 80s markets and supposedly different than today. I asked him how, but he ignored it as he always does when things get difficult.

I believe Zanger crushed it when the Nasdaq was way way more volatile during the Nasdaq bubble. You had all those crazy tech stocks (QCOM moving 200 dollars in one session probably craziest example) going berserk. When you have crazy volatility day to day in a lot of stocks you can kill it and have insane returns. Hell.....INTC was trading 160 at one point. I remember the day the Nasdaq dropped 500 points intra day. I was trading before the dot.com days, right through them, so yes I believe I can back that claim. What Zanger did was impressive, no doubt. But from what I read he never came close to replicating those returns ever again.

Anyone who traded through the Nasdaq bubble knows the markets were very very different. If you can get access to daily charts in the late 90's to 2001 you will see exactly what I am talking about. Was insane.....the daily moves of some of these tech stocks.

As far as HFTs, I am probably in the minority on ET (unfortunately some people on here seem to use HFTs as a crutch to why they can't make money trading) as how they effect trading. Honestly, I don't think they have nearly the effect that people say. Trading is trading. I don't pay attention to them or really care what they do. Doesn't effect the way I trade. I think they have a huge effect on the micro scalpers (ex: guys who work the bid offer trying to scalp for a tick), so yes, those guys who manually traded that way got washed out. But out of all of the traders I knew of/worked with, very few were doing that strategy successfully. That's a tough way to trade if you get caught in a quick unexpected move. I guess because over the years I have heard a lot of excuses about why trading is impossible.......the specialists.......the floor brokers....the HFTs......I don't pay much attention to it. I just adapt in my trading and continue on.

As far as Schwartz.....the guy is a legend. Every trader can learn from a guy like him. Surf is an odd bird at times. He will question people like Schwartz but praises a blow up artist like Neiderhoffer. Surf is like the Barry Sanders of ET, he can duck and dodge around tacklers like no other.

 

[wrbtrader]

...I was trading before the dot.com days, right through them, so yes I believe I can back that claim...

Anyone who traded through the Nasdaq bubble knows the markets were very very different. If you can get access to daily charts in the late 90's to 2001 you will see exactly what I am talking about. Was insane.....the daily moves of some of these tech stocks...

Yeah, markets were very different back then in comparison to today.

1) Surprise FOMC rate announcements during trading hours

2) Crazy volatility surrounding IPOs

3) Enormous directional price movements due to the crazy volatility...moving 10 - 20 points in stocks and futures in minutes

4) Late afternoon trading session often had more volatility than the morning session

5) Huge commercial growth of the internet that had an enormous impact on price movement in the markets

6) Then the bubble burst and a wilder price action occurred...stocks like Amazon dropping from +100 to +7 range in a very small duration although they have fully recovered today.

7) Explosion in tech stocks and web stocks especially if you lived in cities that were considered to be a hot bed of such (e.g. San Francisco, Seattle).

It was also the day trading excitement, the investing excitement...it was like rock n roll almost every trading day. I remember several analyst on TV that said they had been at Woodstock and saying the markets of the late 90s was like the financial version of Woodstock. I also remember all those weird commercials by discount brokers, day trading, IPOs that was giving a clear message...if you want financial freedom...you gotta get involved in the markets before the historical times are no longer (burst). Then when it burst...it was more wild. Stocks dropping faster from those crazy inflated prices than they had gone up. Day traders that had easily and quickly made millions in the markets...lost it faster than they had made it.

If you traded in the 90s...it really was a very special time and today's markets do not even compare to the type of volatility (crazy price movements) back then.

 

[zenon12]

Quick update : I managed to find a job as a retail salesperson. I would like to know if anybody has experienced working in retail before and whether it is possible to get promoted to some higher positions if I work a few years in retail?

Just a brief description of how it's like in Singapore - from what I observe with my own eyes as well as from the news, the job market is saturated with degree holders; not just Singaporeans but foreigners as well. The pay for degree holders is pretty low(about $3000SGD a month) due to oversupply of workers . I feel that workers are at the mercy of employers who just set the lowest salaries possible. I think it is a waste of time to spend 4 years + invest a lot of effort and money for a degree only to come out and start at the bottom compete for scraps of food with everyone. I feel using that 4 years to work instead will give me much more valuable experience and knowledge as well as a sizable capital to either start trading or businesses( I have some ideas ). All in all, this market is an employer's market, not employee's market. Employers are maximizing their profits and get to choose from a wide range of desperate graduates who are willing to take a lower pay than expected. I think degrees are mostly for people who see themselves working for others in the future and I'm not a person who wants to be working for others in the future.

 

[lawrence-lugar]

If you traded in the 90s...it really was a very special time and today's markets do not even compare to the type of volatility (crazy price movements) back then.

I wish I was Trading back in the mid/late 90's (instead of playing computer games ) ...I would have built a nice little treasure chest for myself. It was indeed a magical, rare time back then. Everyone was drinking the same Kool-Aid...it's natural to think that all those tech companies would carry us into the new millennium.

I'm relatively new to this 'game'.

 

[newwurldmn]

Quick update : I managed to find a job as a retail salesperson. I would like to know if anybody has experienced working in retail before and whether it is possible to get promoted to some higher positions if I work a few years in retail?

Just a brief description of how it's like in Singapore - from what I observe with my own eyes as well as from the news, the job market is saturated with degree holders; not just Singaporeans but foreigners as well. The pay for degree holders is pretty low(about $3000SGD a month) due to oversupply of workers . I feel that workers are at the mercy of employers who just set the lowest salaries possible. I think it is a waste of time to spend 4 years + invest a lot of effort and money for a degree only to come out and start at the bottom compete for scraps of food with everyone. I feel using that 4 years to work instead will give me much more valuable experience and knowledge as well as a sizable capital to either start trading or businesses( I have some ideas ). All in all, this market is an employer's market, not employee's market. Employers are maximizing their profits and get to choose from a wide range of desperate graduates who are willing to take a lower pay than expected. I think degrees are mostly for people who see themselves working for others in the future and I'm not a person who wants to be working for others in the future.

As an employer of 130 people, you will have a tougher time getting promoted to managerial positions because of your lack of a degree. It's possible but you have to work extra hard to show your lack of a degree isn't a reflection on your intelligence or work ethic. In 15 years your lack of a degree won't matter but your postion 14 years from now will. And that will be determined by your position 10 years from now and that will be determined by your position 5 years from now which is determined by your starting position now. So you are a step behind right now.

You are young and naive. Look at the guys around you who have done well. Not the outliers but the guys who are doing realistically well. See what they did and do that.

 

[Laissez Faire]

I believe Zanger crushed it when the Nasdaq was way way more volatile during the Nasdaq bubble. You had all those crazy tech stocks (QCOM moving 200 dollars in one session probably craziest example) going berserk. When you have crazy volatility day to day in a lot of stocks you can kill it and have insane returns. Hell.....INTC was trading 160 at one point. I remember the day the Nasdaq dropped 500 points intra day. I was trading before the dot.com days, right through them, so yes I believe I can back that claim. What Zanger did was impressive, no doubt. But from what I read he never came close to replicating those returns ever again.

Anyone who traded through the Nasdaq bubble knows the markets were very very different. If you can get access to daily charts in the late 90's to 2001 you will see exactly what I am talking about. Was insane.....the daily moves of some of these tech stocks.

Thanks for clarifying. I suppose what you're really saying then is that markets were way more volatile. I didn't trade back then, so I don't know how it was. Further, my experience with intraday trading is really limited to index futures and crude oil. That's pretty much all I know.

When you said markets were way different, I thought you were perhaps impyling that they were predictable in the past , but not now, which is what I believe Marketsurfer seemed to imply when I gave him the following quote:

“I always laugh at people who say “I’ve never met a rich technician” I love that! Its such an arrogant, nonsensical response. I used fundamentals for 9 years and got rich as a technician” – Marty Schwartz.

As for Zanger, it may very well be that there were quite an amount of luck involved or that he simply mastered CURRENT conditions at the time being. The toughest thing with trading is being able to adapt to ever changing conditions. That's why a lot of traders can do great during one period, but blow up when volatility dries up or markets become more range bound than directional, a bull becomes a bear, etc.

As far as HFTs, I am probably in the minority on ET (unfortunately some people on here seem to use HFTs as a crutch to why they can't make money trading) as how they effect trading. Honestly, I don't think they have nearly the effect that people say. Trading is trading. I don't pay attention to them or really care what they do. Doesn't effect the way I trade. I think they have a huge effect on the micro scalpers (ex: guys who work the bid offer trying to scalp for a tick), so yes, those guys who manually traded that way got washed out. But out of all of the traders I knew of/worked with, very few were doing that strategy successfully. That's a tough way to trade if you get caught in a quick unexpected move. I guess because over the years I have heard a lot of excuses about why trading is impossible.......the specialists.......the floor brokers....the HFTs......I don't pay much attention to it. I just adapt in my trading and continue on.

Got it. I tend to think the same way.

As far as Schwartz.....the guy is a legend. Every trader can learn from a guy like him. Surf is an odd bird at times. He will question people like Schwartz but praises a blow up artist like Neiderhoffer. Surf is like the Barry Sanders of ET, he can duck and dodge around tacklers like no other.

I don't think Marketsurfer is to be taken seriously. I'm pretty sure he has some other agenda he's pushing, i.e., trying to get publicity and attention.