| |
Yeah, it's sad there are so many scammers out there preying on traders.
I figure the connection with Cyber is simply that she plugs Cyber, and so brings Cyber more customers. Meanwhile, Cyber pays back by promoting her etc. - so it's a mutually advantageous deal.
So happens, as I understand it from your report, that not only is she utterly uninformed about trading, but actually pretty ignorant about CyberTrader software. As you said, she actually gives out wrong info about Cyber software.
No matter - it's a commercial arrangement. As far as I'm concerned, I'd prefer that Cyber deal with reputable people... but I suppose one can rationalize it that if Cyber gets more customers, they will be more profitable and so have the resources to provide better service. Too bad it is at the cost of *some* traders. The traders who are *educated* by Dayne are simply food for Cyber - they will lose all their money, because if they have to rely on her "teachings", they are doomed. So, some traders are devoured, so that other traders may get better service. A ruthless world.
Whatever Cyber's morals, at least they are providing a legitimate service, even if *statistically* it amounts to running a lottery... where a few customers make money, but many, many lose. Ruthless as it is, well, it's free enterprise. If someone goes in with open eyes, knows the odds, and still wants it - I can't blame Cyber for giving them what they want. We are not children. BTW, I don't buy the argument that is advanced by some disgruntled traders who sue their brokerages (we weren't informed of the odds, blah, blah) - it is up to YOU to do your due diligence, up to YOU to research the odds, up to YOU to take responsibility for YOUR actions.
Robin Dayne is a different kettle of fish - purely parasitic organism. Offers *nothing*, but takes your money. I suppose one could say "buyer beware", but on the other hand, we do have to have some standards for preventing outright fraud - if you make claims for your product which are false (drugs - FDA, products FTC, etc.), you should be held responsible.
Of course, with seminars which claim to better your skills it's harder to prove fraud, which is why this scum can legally prey on their victims. However, I have no doubt, that ONE day there will be regulation of this too (after all, FDA arose after a long time of selling snakeoil). It is fully feasible to keep statistics on success ratios - and force the outfit to publish them. If it is shown that 99.99% are no better off after her seminars, then future customers can judge what the worth of such a course is.
However, we are not at that stage. At this point, it is still legal to prey on people the way she does, just as snakeoil scams were legal once upon a time. All one can do is say "buyer beware", and reserve the deepest contempt for these human parasites. |
|
