You are more likely to become a top Hollywood actor or popstar than profitable trader

[crgarcia]

Quote from Bolimomo:

You are changing your assertion now.

From your thread title:

You are more likely to become a top Hollywood actor or popstar than profitable trader


Now you are changing it to:

You are more likely to see a top Hollywood actor or popstar than profitable trader



I have no problem with you warning newbies that it is not easy to become profitable trading or day-trading. And it is true. But you kept accusing those who disagreed with you being a shill. You are the same as an ostrich who buried his head in the sand.

You have a very little probability of becoming a Hollywood star.
You have absoulutely NO probability (0%) of becoming a profitable daytrader.

Little beats nothing.

So as a logical conclusion:
You are more likely to become a top Hollywood actor or popstar than profitable trader.

Quote from Billy Thunder:

Threads like this show just how worthless this forum is. It's become 99.9 percent worthless, the owners of this site don't care about traders or this shit wouldn't go on. Stop wasting time on this forum and spend more time watching the DOM.

They DO care and they know I've posted profitable trades, that the newbies can follow to be profitable too.

Quote from Fireplace:

Jalee, you're overthinking it, Garcia is just a troublemaker plain and simple.

Maybe I might be a problem for churning shills, but I'm a profit-maker that newbies can follow to profit too.

Quote from failed_trad3r:

Newbies, take heed of this guys words. cgarcia is telling the truth. Don't become a mindless screen monkey. You'll waste your life away searching for the holy grail.

Amen!

Quote from Fireplace:

Some will, maybe even most. You can say the same thing about aspiring actors, athletes, musicians, inventors, entrepreneurs etc.

Life is short, take calculated risks and follow what makes you happy and challenges you.

But at least they can have a daytime job to make a living, in case they never hit it big (most don't).
Daytraders can't.

Quote from failed_trad3r:

some guy on a message board tells me to watch the screen of a cimputer 10 years 8 hours a day. then ill become a millionaire. what the heck, this is about crazy as it gets!

He meant: you sit all day so HIM can become a millionaire
Because he's a broker profiting from trading-commissions.

Quote from logic_man:

Your failure rates are overstated, at least according to the paper I linked above. Yes, the paper is a snapshot in time, but at least according to that snapshot, almost half of daytraders were profitable.

As long as people aren't even clear on the facts, there's no point in stating whether daytrading has an edge or not because any statement of that nature requires factual back-up and, as of now, there is nothing but anecdotal or selective evidence.

These "facts" were stated BY BROKERS. Of course they inflate the "winners" %.
The fact is that there has never ever being a single documented case of a profitable daytrader in the long run.

Quote from David70:

I have been day trading since 1996 and still paying my bill, so the edge is there for some.

Actually you're a broker shill (using one of the many nicknames they use on discussion boards).

 

[logic_man]

Quote from crgarcia:



These "facts" were stated BY BROKERS. Of course they inflate the "winners" %.
The fact is that there has never ever being a single documented case of a profitable daytrader in the long run.

[/B]

The authors are both professors, not brokers.

Anyway, clearly you've decided what is and isn't a fact based on how well is suits your predefined conclusion. Which is fine. One cannot expect everyone to look at the world with an open mind and reason. In fact, your closed-minded perspective is the historical norm for the human race, so it's completely unsurprising.

However, if you had read the paper, you'd see that the authors essentially conclude that profitable day traders make their profits from losing day traders (and probably some losing mutual fund managers, since the profits of the profitable day traders are larger than the losses of unprofitable day traders) in a zero sum game. Yes, the broker gets a cut, but even after that cut, profitable day traders are still profitable. Seems to me like a classic zero-sum game outcome, where some are winners and some are losers, i.e. just like the rest of life.

Thus, the more fruitful avenue of analysis is "How do I transition from being a losing day trader to being a winning one?" There, again, the paper offers clues, i.e. the most profitable day traders were those who traded the least and those who traded the most. So, if you are a day trader who trades an amount of times which is neither in the lowest-frequency segment (1 to 49 trades) nor the highest-frequency segment (750+ trades per day), you should probably figure out how to get in to one of those segments by either scaling back the number of trades you make (and focus) or by scaling up your method to make more trades and take advantage of economies of scale, relatively speaking. I highly doubt that anyone who is making more than 750 trades/day is the kind of person who will fail at trading. The level of organizational skill it takes to get to that level is significant, especially for a single individual, and clearly shows that the person has gone beyond the stage of just being lucky on a trade or two a day and making lunch money.

Anyway, again, I am sure that none of this I've stated will matter to you because your mind is made up.

 

[Now is Now]

Amazing how Baron's queens turn up on the weekend to gemmie up hits....


NiN

 

[Bob111]

Quote from Now is Now:

Amazing how Baron's queens turn up on the weekend to gemmie up hits....


NiN

just curious,how much additional income garcia is receiving from Baron on the top of his 5 days a week job at mcdonalds?

 

[Bolimomo]

Quote from Bob111:

just curious,how much additional income garcia is receiving from Baron on the top of his 5 days a week job at mcdonalds?

I think the bonus pay is $1.00 for every time the term "broker shill" is used"

 

[killthesunshine]

fact: you are more likely to become a male porn star than hit by lightening ! :eek:

 

[Ciatronic]

Maybe I will also start a career in acting, because I'm very skilled, indeed, if I became a profitable trader, then, becoming an actor it will be piece of cake, isn't?
Really, I'm very proud of me.

regards.

 

[ProfLogic]

Quote from logic_man:

However, if you had read the paper,

You're assuming cgarcia can COMPREHEND what he does read . . . he can't.

 

[Visaria]

logic man, you should start a thread to discuss the paper you posted a link to. Would be far more productive than this thread.

 

[crgarcia]

Quote from logic_man:

The authors are both professors, not brokers.

Anyway, clearly you've decided what is and isn't a fact based on how well is suits your predefined conclusion. Which is fine. One cannot expect everyone to look at the world with an open mind and reason. In fact, your closed-minded perspective is the historical norm for the human race, so it's completely unsurprising.

However, if you had read the paper, you'd see that the authors essentially conclude that profitable day traders make their profits from losing day traders (and probably some losing mutual fund managers, since the profits of the profitable day traders are larger than the losses of unprofitable day traders) in a zero sum game. Yes, the broker gets a cut, but even after that cut, profitable day traders are still profitable. Seems to me like a classic zero-sum game outcome, where some are winners and some are losers, i.e. just like the rest of life.

Thus, the more fruitful avenue of analysis is "How do I transition from being a losing day trader to being a winning one?" There, again, the paper offers clues, i.e. the most profitable day traders were those who traded the least and those who traded the most. So, if you are a day trader who trades an amount of times which is neither in the lowest-frequency segment (1 to 49 trades) nor the highest-frequency segment (750+ trades per day), you should probably figure out how to get in to one of those segments by either scaling back the number of trades you make (and focus) or by scaling up your method to make more trades and take advantage of economies of scale, relatively speaking. I highly doubt that anyone who is making more than 750 trades/day is the kind of person who will fail at trading. The level of organizational skill it takes to get to that level is significant, especially for a single individual, and clearly shows that the person has gone beyond the stage of just being lucky on a trade or two a day and making lunch money.

Anyway, again, I am sure that none of this I've stated will matter to you because your mind is made up.

Actually they DO profit from churning naive investors accounts.
They receive a chunk of the trading commissions, so they make 750+ trades per day.

Frequent trading is a scam.
Newbies: Follow the money, brokers love to churn accounts.