So, under "bone's law" you can post numerous emails between you and stereo70? htf does that work? It looks like you owe him $300K and counting.
Last edited by a moderator:
SpreadProfessor Clients - Thanks !
- Thread starter bone
- Start date
So, under "bone's law" you can post numerous emails between you and stereo70? htf does that work? It looks like you owe him $300K and counting.
The point is that you needed to use a friend (Agate) to abet your $486K scam. Nobody legitimate would state that the debit = $486K in gains based upon that Advantage statement. It's why you colluded with this Agate clown to cover your tracks.
There is no "credible third party" who would state the $486K = gains based upon that run. It is impossible to make that determination from the run. Therefore you're running a scam.
Factually, stereo70 took the contract based partly upon the $486K figure which was misrepresented as gains in the account. I'd bet others have made the same mistake.
Last edited:
I don't think I have misrepresented myself at all. I was incredibly depressed several years ago. I have made that obvious. When someone is lied to professionally, as I was regarding Pete's fake profit statement, it causes a chain of events. I don't know if Pete is responsible for my trading losses, but it's clear he misrepresented himself which caused me to make many decisions that I now regret - quitting my job for instance in order to trade. What are you uncovering here? I thought I was f'ed up and that Pete was a BSD. Now I know better. Nothing in my contract said I had to do whatever homework Pete said I didn't do. The system is pretty simple, folks. Had I not been lured into all of this by false claims my life would be a bit different. I also know personal things about Pete, but would never post them in a public forum. And I certainly wouldn't diagnose someone with DSM disorders unless I was a psychiatrist.
And everything Pete just did feels like extortion. All those emails, skype convos, etc. were based upon an understanding that Pete really knew what was up. Maybe he blew up an account. How would I know? All I know is something didn't seem right, I was pot-committed and reeling from lots of shit. But after finding that email from Pat Agate I knew I found the smoking gun. I didn't come on ET looking for money. But it certainly helps my mental state to now know that Pete will do anything to keep what seems like a scam going.
At the very least, I was nothing if not polite. And neither of those last two emails received a response from Pete.
At the very least, I was nothing if not polite. And neither of those last two emails received a response from Pete.
Last edited:
I don't know if we're witnessing the irresistible force-immovable object paradox being played out or just two stubborn mules with big egos.
Absent greater detail about the $486K figure (begin bal, end bal, YTD P&L, etc) I don't think Bone can win. More disclosure also brings heightened privacy and professional liability risks (already discussed) so it's understandable why Bone doesn't want to put it out there. Faced with a tenacious adversary, around and around they go.
Absent greater detail about the $486K figure (begin bal, end bal, YTD P&L, etc) I don't think Bone can win. More disclosure also brings heightened privacy and professional liability risks (already discussed) so it's understandable why Bone doesn't want to put it out there. Faced with a tenacious adversary, around and around they go.
Of course we do not have verification as none can exist. Now we have Agate-gate and his response is extortion when you find out that the "independent verification" came from his client. bone's answer is to threaten public-dissemination of details related to your personal relationships. Pure class act.
I would vigorously defend anyone here in a similar scenario. I think I've communicated with stereo70 once in the time he's been here; obviously before he came to me with this. stereo70 told me that he relied on the "$486K debit as PNL" figure when approaching bone and signing the contract.
There is a saying in the FS that if you "can't get out; go deeper" and it applies here. He can't delete the run from his site without the obvious consequences. He provided "proof" from a friend who is either incompetent or outright lying. The obvious and instant end to this argument would be monthly PNL statements from his clearer, but we know that's not going to happen.
Baron asks for "third party verification" when none can occur. Nobody can verify (2006) profits from looking at that statement. Is that clear, yet?
Last edited:
I'm still waiting for the YTD P&L *total* so I can reverse engineer the trading strategies solely from that number.
Bring it, bitches!
Bring it, bitches!
Pls post the acknowledgement.