Mentoring From Main Street
- Thread starter Zulu
- Start date
with a discretionary trader charging for training it would be even more important to know they were profitable before paying them for training. Otherwise it could be a big very large bunch of b.s.
How many times have I said on this cite does anyone have any records that show LBR to be profitable in her room. No one has ever p.m. ed me confirmation.
How many times have I said on this cite does anyone have any records that show LBR to be profitable in her room. No one has ever p.m. ed me confirmation.
The one thing that is rarely addressed is just what the hell it is that the "mentee" wants the mentor for. If he expects the mentor to teach him "how to trade", he is likely to be disappointed because there is no definition whatsoever.
If one wants to learn a particular guru's system or approach or method or whatever, at least there's hope because both parties have some idea what's expected.
On the other hand, if the mentor is expected to help the mentee develop, test, and trade his own strategy, that's a whole different ball of wax, involving as it does all sorts of issues which need not have any direct bearing on trading per se, e.g., fear of pulling the trigger (in other words, it's not the fault of the setup that you're afraid to play it).
I suspect that most mentees, when they say "teach me how to trade" mean "teach me how to do what you do", and I propose that that is nearly impossible.
Therefore, it is important that the mentee know exactly what it is he wants so that he can communicate that to the mentor. Whether or not the mentor has the character to say "no way in hell" if the mentee declares that he wants to imitate the mentor's every move is a separate issue.
If one wants to learn a particular guru's system or approach or method or whatever, at least there's hope because both parties have some idea what's expected.
On the other hand, if the mentor is expected to help the mentee develop, test, and trade his own strategy, that's a whole different ball of wax, involving as it does all sorts of issues which need not have any direct bearing on trading per se, e.g., fear of pulling the trigger (in other words, it's not the fault of the setup that you're afraid to play it).
I suspect that most mentees, when they say "teach me how to trade" mean "teach me how to do what you do", and I propose that that is nearly impossible.
Therefore, it is important that the mentee know exactly what it is he wants so that he can communicate that to the mentor. Whether or not the mentor has the character to say "no way in hell" if the mentee declares that he wants to imitate the mentor's every move is a separate issue.
ummm....LBR does show her records - just not to everyone who asks. She just started up a new fund, so, to qualified investors (high networth individuals) her record on a go forward basis will be available. The prospectus and marketing docs for the new fund would include at least a portion of her historical track record - available to anyone who qualifies as a high net worth individual and passes the normal screening process for hedge funds.
I believe that LBR is registered as a CTA (and probably has a bunch of other registrations with god knows how many govermental agencies that regulates US securities and exchanges). I imagine that there are rules governing how historical performance information is released, to whom it is released to etc. This is probably why you don't find the info you seek in the public domain.
I don't think that there is any upside for her to go to the trouble to navigate the legal terrain needed to release her records to the public at large. Why open up her record for criticism from folks that aren't going to be paying her a substantial fee to manage monies? If I had her abilities, I wouldn't do that either (unless I develop a major case of the egos that need to be stroked by public adulation <grin>). She hasn't had to do it to gain clients in her chat room either. She does do some marketing but not a lot - most people seem to stumble into her room from word of mouth or from interviews in magazine articles or google searches. Besides, there's a lot of minute, detailed work involved in running a room - too many clients can get in the way of real trading. If she really needed the clients, she'd do more marketing Larry Williams style.
On another topic - someone else mentioned that her style is discretionary. That is probably accurate but with an asterisk - most of her trades are rooted in hard numbers that she's done hardcore research on. I really believe that she can take any *short term* system with a slight edge and turn that small edge into a LARGE edge because of her discretionary style. She's able to do this because she has confidence that the probabilities of a successful trade are in her favor.
Disclosure:
1. I have been a member of her chat rooms for over 1 year.
2. I have assisted with certain research in the past and will probably continue to do so in the future.
-eLindy
I believe that LBR is registered as a CTA (and probably has a bunch of other registrations with god knows how many govermental agencies that regulates US securities and exchanges). I imagine that there are rules governing how historical performance information is released, to whom it is released to etc. This is probably why you don't find the info you seek in the public domain.
I don't think that there is any upside for her to go to the trouble to navigate the legal terrain needed to release her records to the public at large. Why open up her record for criticism from folks that aren't going to be paying her a substantial fee to manage monies? If I had her abilities, I wouldn't do that either (unless I develop a major case of the egos that need to be stroked by public adulation <grin>). She hasn't had to do it to gain clients in her chat room either. She does do some marketing but not a lot - most people seem to stumble into her room from word of mouth or from interviews in magazine articles or google searches. Besides, there's a lot of minute, detailed work involved in running a room - too many clients can get in the way of real trading. If she really needed the clients, she'd do more marketing Larry Williams style.
On another topic - someone else mentioned that her style is discretionary. That is probably accurate but with an asterisk - most of her trades are rooted in hard numbers that she's done hardcore research on. I really believe that she can take any *short term* system with a slight edge and turn that small edge into a LARGE edge because of her discretionary style. She's able to do this because she has confidence that the probabilities of a successful trade are in her favor.
Disclosure:
1. I have been a member of her chat rooms for over 1 year.
2. I have assisted with certain research in the past and will probably continue to do so in the future.
-eLindy
Not to put too fine a point on it, this is a load of crap. She has a record all wrapped up and ready to go, but she won't show to anybody who isn't willing to pay her the big bucks? Everybody else has to go on faith?
For all practical purposes, she has no record if it's "classified". Nor does any other guru, with the possible exception -- as has been noted -- of Vad Graifer.
Don't play games. Either the trading record is available or it isn't. If it isn't, who cares?
Of course, if she's willing to allow prospective clients free admission to her room for three months or so in order to see for themselves, that's another matter . . .
For all practical purposes, she has no record if it's "classified". Nor does any other guru, with the possible exception -- as has been noted -- of Vad Graifer.
Don't play games. Either the trading record is available or it isn't. If it isn't, who cares?
Of course, if she's willing to allow prospective clients free admission to her room for three months or so in order to see for themselves, that's another matter . . .
elindy,
LBR doesn't do a lot of marketing? There's not a trader or investor conference in the country that she isn't a featured speaker at. Maybe she just likes taking time off and traveling to convention hotels, but I doubt it.
I'm not knocking her. I've read some of her stuff and it's not bad. I've also backtested some of her setups and couldn't get them to work.
I have no idea what her returns are. If she is managing the large sums she claims to be, someone must be satisfied with them.
LBR doesn't do a lot of marketing? There's not a trader or investor conference in the country that she isn't a featured speaker at. Maybe she just likes taking time off and traveling to convention hotels, but I doubt it.
I'm not knocking her. I've read some of her stuff and it's not bad. I've also backtested some of her setups and couldn't get them to work.
I have no idea what her returns are. If she is managing the large sums she claims to be, someone must be satisfied with them.
AAAintheBeltway:
I guess when I made that statement it was made relative to the amount of marketing other folks do. A few days a year at seminars that are organized by others, plus 3 days for the one that she organizes - in the grand scheme of things, it's not a lot of time and it probably does break up the year and gets her out of the office. Compare that level to the level that other folks do and that's where I was coming from - that's all. I guess it's all relative and I was using the amount of material I see in my in-box, mail and ads in magazines as a basis for that off-the-cuff statement.
On another note, I don't know where she's ever made a claim to manage large amounts of money (I'm assuming you're talking billions). I've got imagine it's tough to do billions with her style - short term discretionary.
-eLindy
I guess when I made that statement it was made relative to the amount of marketing other folks do. A few days a year at seminars that are organized by others, plus 3 days for the one that she organizes - in the grand scheme of things, it's not a lot of time and it probably does break up the year and gets her out of the office. Compare that level to the level that other folks do and that's where I was coming from - that's all. I guess it's all relative and I was using the amount of material I see in my in-box, mail and ads in magazines as a basis for that off-the-cuff statement.
On another note, I don't know where she's ever made a claim to manage large amounts of money (I'm assuming you're talking billions). I've got imagine it's tough to do billions with her style - short term discretionary.
-eLindy
Ummmm...I'm not quite sure how to respond to your comments. I guess the best thing to say is this - if you need a track record, pick up the phone, call her and ask for a prospectus. She (or a staff member) will probably ask you some info about your qualifications, investing background, amount you're interested in investing in the fund etc. If you're a "qualified investor" according to securities regulations, I'm sure she'll be happy to get a prospectus out to you. Any historical info should be in there.
-eLindy
-eLindy
Quote from dbphoenix:
Not to put too fine a point on it, this is a load of crap. She has a record all wrapped up and ready to go, but she won't show to anybody who isn't willing to pay her the big bucks? Everybody else has to go on faith?
For all practical purposes, she has no record if it's "classified". Nor does any other guru, with the possible exception -- as has been noted -- of Vad Graifer.
Don't play games. Either the trading record is available or it isn't. If it isn't, who cares?
Of course, if she's willing to allow prospective clients free admission to her room for three months or so in order to see for themselves, that's another matter . . .
My "qualifications", or those of any other party interested in availing themselves of her services, would be that I am willing to give her money. Though the amount of money may seem trivial to her, it is unlikely to be trivial to the payor, though one might also wonder why, if the money paid by subscribers is too trivial to warrant showing a track record, any fees are levied at all.
Of course, if I'm dumb enough to pay the money based solely on chatter, that may be my problem. But the government doesn't feel that way in all cases. Eventually, the guru industry will be regulated just like any other pay-me-for-what-may-wind-up-being-nothing interaction.
Of course, if I'm dumb enough to pay the money based solely on chatter, that may be my problem. But the government doesn't feel that way in all cases. Eventually, the guru industry will be regulated just like any other pay-me-for-what-may-wind-up-being-nothing interaction.
elindy
One she does give good information about nice setups. but as aaainthebeltway said they do not seem to test out the way she says.
(THis may be because she qualifies her numbers by frequently speaking about trades where the losers are bigger than the winners.)
I have found one of her trades to have a bit of an edge on a longer time frame.
But this is where I quibble with the marketing. If her discretionary trading takes these marginal setups and makes them profitable. How come I did not see it in the room when I paid for it. She called out losing trades (on the whole) but mentioned that she was killing it scalping. Is that any fun?
So I put it to you. In the year you have been in the room. On the trades she set up--- were they profitable for you. Were they profitable for her? and do you have the stats to show it.
As far as her perspectus. I would be a qualified investor, and if she had a record of real time past trades, I would be interested. But, I believe that she has had an iffy record with managed money in the past. I think by her own admission.
If she makes money that is the bottom line. No arguments from me. If she does not I would like it to be well known.
One she does give good information about nice setups. but as aaainthebeltway said they do not seem to test out the way she says.
(THis may be because she qualifies her numbers by frequently speaking about trades where the losers are bigger than the winners.)
I have found one of her trades to have a bit of an edge on a longer time frame.
But this is where I quibble with the marketing. If her discretionary trading takes these marginal setups and makes them profitable. How come I did not see it in the room when I paid for it. She called out losing trades (on the whole) but mentioned that she was killing it scalping. Is that any fun?
So I put it to you. In the year you have been in the room. On the trades she set up--- were they profitable for you. Were they profitable for her? and do you have the stats to show it.
As far as her perspectus. I would be a qualified investor, and if she had a record of real time past trades, I would be interested. But, I believe that she has had an iffy record with managed money in the past. I think by her own admission.
If she makes money that is the bottom line. No arguments from me. If she does not I would like it to be well known.