Why do you care what I care about? But in short*, I like facts. They are stubborn things. So here they are, short and sweet:
Karen is a proven fraud, Tom didn't make his millions by trading.
There, we can close this thread.....
*In length, it is called misrepresentation. A newbie goes to Tastytrade because he heard that a multimillionaire is teaching option trading there. The obvious assumption is that the millions were made by option trading, but as we know....
Anyhow, I can't explain this any clearer, so I am done with the thread unless new FACTS come up.
Well, here are a few facts for you.
If you're older than me (
I'm 48, staring at 49 here shortly), then I know you're not one of these kids. Which means you should have an attention span to read it. So here you go.
1)
But in short*, I like facts. They are stubborn things. So here they are, short and sweet:
Ok ... but you understand Observer-expectancy bias right? (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer-expectancy_effect ). So if you like facts? You have to admit, that you ... me ... everyone and their brother? Has a "skew" towards observer-expectancy bias.
So you have to admit, that if you're going to be honest with yourself ... you could have an innate expectancy that you WANT what you see ... to fit your pre-existing thoughts.
2)
There is no challenge there. We all agree on that. With the exception of the OP ... no one is saying she isn't. However, if you ever associate with someone that has committed a crime? I'm not going to automatically determine, that because you chose to associate with someone that committed a crime, that
YOU are evil, and then make the leap to a logical fallacy that
YOUR whole life is a lie.
As a few of us have said, since this is a business move, is this a SERIOUS lapse in judgement for Tom? Yes. As a few of us have already said:
I have great respect to what he has accomplished and has been doing for the past 30 years in the Option Trading arena, from TOS, to Dough, to TastyWork to TastyTrade to SmallExchange...etc. He has popularized this niche and made it accessible (think education..) to the ordinary Moms and Pops. I am sure that on the way he has collected some nice 'rewards' for his successes (TD etc....) as he has collected some hefty 'slaps' for his failures. I count the reemergence of Karen in the TT playing grounds as a likely failure (of his good judgment), but I surely believe that his overall success rate is still very high albeit that failure-- (and I don't mean his P/L, which I really don't care about)
and myself:
it does not take away the fact that his previous gains, were that. Gains.
Probably a better way, that I could have phrased it would be something along the lines of: "If he gets anywhere near someone that has been involved in fraud? Eeesh, that is one steep, steep "Draw-down" from said previous gains ..."
By the way? I would apply that same 'giving the benefit of the doubt', to you or anyone. I've given people, in my own life ... the benefit of the doubt, and gave them another chance. Some of them, had served time. Does that make my
entire life and everything about me ... a lie? I mean ... seriously?
3)
Tom didn't make his millions by trading.
That is what we call in the science of Textual and Observational Criticism, as a partial truth.
Of course, he made the majority of his wealth, probably by selling ToS to TDA. $600 M if memory serves.
But that he makes money trading, is almost beyond dispute.
Let's just set aside the
math of what he's doing, and as I stated here ... those concepts are without question sound. That, I would almost call a fact, that cannot be disputed.
Let's just set that aside.
Look up any of the names that were anywhere near the OEX pit back in the day, where Tom made markets. Anyone of them will tell you he made money constantly as a Market Maker in the OEX pit. God, how could you not. I remember trading back then, and if you were in a home office, spreads were so wide you could fit Moses and the Israelites through them.
But if I had to leave facts, and go into mere speculation of the folks I know, and what I know of Tom from afar?
I'd guess he probably made 1.6% of his current wealth, from Trading.
That just a supposition ... and not a fact? But I
do know he made money for years in the OEX pit. You don't even have to have the contacts I do in Chicago, that have been around for a while ... to sort of figure that out.
So is your statement true? I'd say yes.
Is your statement also false? Again, I'd say yes.
You learn in the Observational Sciences, that such an outcome is possible. Criminology experts will tell you the same thing when it comes to reconciling Witness statements.
And 1.6% of his current wealth? Is still a sizeable sum.
4) As we outlined before? Since the
mathematical concepts of what he is discussing is sound? It really doesn't matter what his current P/L is.
