Pure tradetertainment. Far better than snookie on a cloudy day!
Niederhoffer In Trouble..... Again !!
- Thread starter cosmokramer
- Start date
Let's try to keep this thread salubrious and educative. Since Vic likes to post the origin and meaning of certain words, maybe I should start to explain to him what HUMBLE means:
Humble: [noun] opposite of pompous ass
Vic, my friend, you are anything but humble. But that is alright, everyone has his own fault. What is not alright when we ask you a legitime question about trading and you simply ignore it. If you try to clear your record, stop worrying about certain posters and address the issues.
1. So was hedging involved with Matador and if there was, what went wrong? How come that Matador's performance chart shows no hedging whatsoever? Anytime when the market went down 8-10% Matador fumbled 30-40%. That is no hedging in my book.
2. A year before the the blow up, in an article Mr. Smart (I think that was his name) your 2nd hand man was mentioned who was supposed to act as safety valve and prevent you from another blow up. What did he do wrong and why couldn't he help you?
3. If you had so many experienced and sapient traders in your stable how come you didn't use their talents and again, Matador's chart show pure put selling performance?
4. Atticus' question about a large unhedged long ES position at the time of the blow up. Did you have that position?
Here, I am giving you an opportunity to clear up a few things and not to engage in small time figth that SHOULD BE beneath a man of your stature.
As long as you don't explain these issues, I have to agree with Pabst:
P.S.: You don't OWN us an explanation, but YOU decided to come here and deffend yourself, and what is a better defence then to come clean? Of course if you decide not to explain these questions, we understand...(wink,wink)
Humble: [noun] opposite of pompous ass
Vic, my friend, you are anything but humble. But that is alright, everyone has his own fault. What is not alright when we ask you a legitime question about trading and you simply ignore it. If you try to clear your record, stop worrying about certain posters and address the issues.
1. So was hedging involved with Matador and if there was, what went wrong? How come that Matador's performance chart shows no hedging whatsoever? Anytime when the market went down 8-10% Matador fumbled 30-40%. That is no hedging in my book.
2. A year before the the blow up, in an article Mr. Smart (I think that was his name) your 2nd hand man was mentioned who was supposed to act as safety valve and prevent you from another blow up. What did he do wrong and why couldn't he help you?
3. If you had so many experienced and sapient traders in your stable how come you didn't use their talents and again, Matador's chart show pure put selling performance?
4. Atticus' question about a large unhedged long ES position at the time of the blow up. Did you have that position?
Here, I am giving you an opportunity to clear up a few things and not to engage in small time figth that SHOULD BE beneath a man of your stature.
As long as you don't explain these issues, I have to agree with Pabst:
P.S.: You don't OWN us an explanation, but YOU decided to come here and deffend yourself, and what is a better defence then to come clean? Of course if you decide not to explain these questions, we understand...(wink,wink)
Whatever happened to pabst?
The only silence worth noting is due to my utter amazement at the sheer idiocacy of that supposition. At no point did Matador lose any amount even close to 97% in the NAV. If someone reads something absurd in the Internet, they somehow quote the source as "The Internet" as if that is a legitimate source, and link the URL in kind, as if on par with the Encyclopedia Britannica. I can only respond with a "sigh".
Pekelo, there were many hedges in place in the incident in 1997. But you continue to ignore the fact that there was illegal market manipulation that led to Matador having a difficult trading day. I have noted this many times now, and you continue to ignore this. Going into the math that backed the trading is proprietary information. The trading models indicated that there was a certain guarantee that profitability would be maintained. (And the following trading day vindicated Matador's positions). However, the high tech lynching that occurred could not have been hedged against. You can own a bank that has as insurance various security guards, but if a group of militants storm in with AK-47s in an armed Humvee, then you cannot be labeled as irresponsible.
Damn, my previous post was posted a little bit too early in the day...
Of course humble is an adjective. To explain away my mistake, I always think of Vic as "The Humble" thus making it a noun. (how is that for spin?)
Since I am having a long weekend, I say good weekend to all with this quote from Victor's first book:
"I still have some costumers - people who are not happy with feeding all their money to the stock market.They are affraid that it will crash as it did in 1929 and 1987. They look to me to land a big return, but without the risk and drawdown. I can do it, but they don't want me to gamble, and I cannot do it without gambling."
P.S.: By the way Vic, if you stop responding this thread will go away much faster instead of the continuos roasting. Just an advice....
Of course humble is an adjective. To explain away my mistake, I always think of Vic as "The Humble" thus making it a noun. (how is that for spin?)
Since I am having a long weekend, I say good weekend to all with this quote from Victor's first book:
"I still have some costumers - people who are not happy with feeding all their money to the stock market.They are affraid that it will crash as it did in 1929 and 1987. They look to me to land a big return, but without the risk and drawdown. I can do it, but they don't want me to gamble, and I cannot do it without gambling."
P.S.: By the way Vic, if you stop responding this thread will go away much faster instead of the continuos roasting. Just an advice....
Your pattern recognition skills are sadly lacking if you believe this 777 character is VN.
It is clearly an impostor.
Oh. Mr. Pekelo. It is Dr. Wisdom aKA The Wiz- who was/is VNs right hand man with matador. Not mr. Smart-- Maxwell works in the back office tracking down impostors and with other treacherous assignments.
It is clearly an impostor.
Oh. Mr. Pekelo. It is Dr. Wisdom aKA The Wiz- who was/is VNs right hand man with matador. Not mr. Smart-- Maxwell works in the back office tracking down impostors and with other treacherous assignments.
I was just refering to Matador's positions, not the earlier troubles. I do agree though, had you been able to stay in the position (more margin I guess) Matador would have closed the year in the green...
Have a fun weekend!
Edit: I have just noticed that you didn't explicitly state there was hedging with Matador. You did say about 1997, but my question was about Matador. So was there a hedge with the Matador position or not?
2 reasons why I disagree:
1. He is doing a wonderful job iin case he is not Vic, because that is exactly how I imagine him responding. So if he is not him, he might as well be.
2. I am sure Vic is aware of this thread, and if he doesn't like to be impersonated/represented/deffended by someone like Thoreau, he could complain to Baron. Since this hasn't happened....
Just one more day Mr pekelo. One more day Not a whole year.