Quote from makosgu:
Understood. I am sure both of you are indeed noteworthy traders. I will make a general ET comment and I am certain that many are exceptions to this generality including yourself. For some odd reason, people join ET for one reason or another. Everyone will take something for free. However, when something is not freely given and especially when it appears enticing, flaming quickly ensues and snowballs. Even stranger yet is when people ask others to show their cards, they themselves won't show their own cards. Reason being is that people regarding their trading activity as sacred and thus the bias is towards obtaining something for free without having to give something in return. Assume prof has given nothing, then people should not expect anything. Yes, prof has a site which at the very least seams to be heavily skewed to the tail. You may be surprised to know that there are a number of individuals here in ET that are doing better than what prof posts as ridiculous as that may seam and on every single day.
Samson77, I sincerely respect your orientation. As for a few others, they fall into the "looking for something for free without having to give something in return". I mean damn, I buy the spread anticipating to get back the spread + premium at some time later. That which is spread out all over ET for free, take the time and effort to assimilate. A trading approach cannot be spoon fed simply because everyone has different appetites. If his results are ridiculous, then so be it and leave it at that. Why should he have to prove to anyone that the results are not ridiculous and in fact attainable. The real question to be asked should be who is beating those results and how can you learn from such individuals. Those in ET know who they are and leave tell tale signs.
If Q's were just approached respectfully, things would be so much more productive around here. Respect goes an awful long way, but certainly, it CANNOT be expected in return if it is not being extended...
Still, Kindest Regards to ALL (detractors and non-detractors alike)
Makogsu,
You seem like a sincere individual. I will address some of your comments, hopefully with equal respect.
I don't think ET members take issue with someone charging for information, per se. I have stated here on this thread that I felt the insight gained from the membership has been worth more than $300 to me (if not the methodology) -- it changed the way I looked at trading.
Vendors such as Brandon post freely here -- he's upfront about his charges and welcomes questions and criticism.
Bill Schamp ('the Logicmaster'), IMHO, continues to be disingenuous about his charges. While he continues to insist he has closed membership to his website, what he has in fact done (it seems) is closed membership to any new $300 comers, and will only let you in if you pony up $3,000 for a "seminar". I have not been quoted the $3,000 seminar price by Bill, and have only seen it here on this thread. I assume it is accurate.
In a picture he emailed to his website members, he claims to have done 2 seminars last week or two in Singapore. He sent out a picture of one, and, from memory, I'd say there were about 12-15 students. At $3,000 a pop -- that's about $45,000. If his second seminar was of equal size... you get the point.
I don't have a problem with him making money, but why does he continue to dodge the issue instead of being up-front about it? Insisting he's no longer a vendor, when in fact he's only upped the ante? If I'm wrong, and the seminars are for free, let him come here and say so. But otherwise, he continues, and in fact has increased, his vendorship.
You claim a number of people on his site do better than his posted results. Really? He, so far this year, has had 2 losing trades, one for 1 point, the other for 2. Have the traders who are bettering him not lost any points at all, on any trade this year?
He tends to bash those who claim his mechanical results aren't replicable -- claiming they are loser traders. From the PM's I've gotten, I have consolation that at least I'm not the only loser.
A sample PM: "Good post. I am a member of the prof's room. I have had some good days using the system, also had some crappy ones.
I agree with your comments about the system. I do think there seems to be something there, but when I talk to Bill he makes it seem so easy, but when I ask specific questions on when to enter a trade I can never get a reason that makes sense to me.
He makes it seem like anyone can see price failure, but when you ask for specific points of price failure in real time, I have never seen an example. Maybe I am missing something?"
Another: "He referred me to one of the participants in the room who lives in my neighbor hood and he makes still no money after been in his room for 9 months. If it is that simple then this person "would have got it" by now."
You claim that if questions were approached respectfully, things would be more productive... I challenge you to find a post in which I've have asked "disrespectful" questions to Bill. Now look at his responses. My opinion: He likes to keep things vague, because he is a theorist, without a mechanical system that works. That too would be fine -- in fact that is exactly what I got from him -- if he didn't continue to claim that his results were in fact based on completely mechanical entries and exits. When he is pushed to the wall on the mechanics, he lashes out.
I eagerly await your response, or his.
