Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockDung who wrote (90400)	1/28/2005 1:22:21 PM
From: scion	Respond to of 122087

Message 14584703

To: StockDung who wrote (90400)	1/28/2005 1:26:21 PM
From: olivier asser	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

Excellent question! When I briefly issued recommendations at Trading Places, between March 16 and June 27, 2000, I made on average 2-3 recommendations per day, which relative to Rea's rapid-fire recommendations, in and out all day long, was "long-term trading," I used to make jokes about that, which Rea likely did not appreciate. I advised once-in, once-out, no double-dipping re-entries in the same "play.". You'll note at my own site some days I made no calls, period, some days there just was nothing good and unwise to not be patient and wait for the good trade to come along, which takes discipline. If the calls I made at TP (and later) turned against quickly then I would recommend a clear, immediate exit and no more trades in that stock. Otherwise, I'd encourage everyone to hold on for the largest possible gain, not take some profits after a small gain. Rea would berate me constantly for not issuing enough securities recommendations. During lunch he would say, "Are you asleep?" I'd say, "No, but the market is." He'd then demand I make recommendations and I refused, saying I wasn't go to make recommendations just for the sake of recommendations, it was my duty to do my best to provide high quality, profitable calls to TP members. I wondered why he demanded a larger volume of recs. Only later did I learn just why: the kickback arrangements. How many calls did skibum make?

To: StockDung who wrote (90400)	1/28/2005 1:49:59 PM
From: olivier asser	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

To follow up on that post, it begs the question: why pay an investment adviser to give you securities recommendations? Here is the answer, and why Berber, Moor, Rea and Trading Places' fraud was pernicious. Any experienced trader will affirm that emotion plays a huge role in trading your own account. It has to be checked, which takes nerves of steel, great discipline. Take a loss, very hard not to try to immediately make it back, which can lead to further losses, because you're not judging the market objectively, you're starting with the premise that you just MUST make that money back come Hell or high water. So, if you have an analyst viewing the market "battlefield" say as a general directing the troops, objective, looking at the big picture, no incentive but to do his job making sure the soldiers get the best quality instructions they can, that's a tremendous edge for a trader. An analyst who is not trading his own securities recommendations, and has no interest in commissions, or any other blatant conflicts of interest that would tilt the recommendations in one way or the other, who is making his best good-faith judgment on trades, much easier to do than a trader watching account capital fluctuate all day long and getting anxious, which leads to rapid-fire in-and-out buying and selling, that's a major advantage and worth the money. That's what TP promised its traders. But, when TP accepted the kickbacks from Berber and Moor, leading to extremely high volumes of calls, the betrayal was a profound, clear one. One question that's going to come up sooner or later is why, if I was a "loser" who had no clue how to trade, was ruined by Rea and Trading Places' calls, I would ever be hired as a lead analyst at one of the most prominent IA sites on the Internet, with over 500 members at any given time? That makes no sense at all - unless TP et al knew very well that there was no chance to succeed, and knew that I had the makings of a very good trader and analyst. In fact, I accepted the position as an analyst because I was very interested in seeing how I would do when my own capital was not at risk, only my reputation was. When I began to make the recommendations, I was astounded that they were of far higher quality than anything I trade on Rea's and the former skibums John Jordan and Omar Salah's calls ever were. "skibum" was a TP-registered analyst name. Both Jordan and Salah traded their own calls. I never did. I had no similar hidden interest or conflict. During trading days, I could watch Rea and Chris Curran or "C2" constantly making incomprehensible calls, calls that had no relation to market realities, no good reason for being made, which as an analyst I had the time and lack of emotion to see clearly and objectively. Almost from day one I knew something was very wrong at TP, but I stayed in hopes of learning exactly what happened. In time, I did. So I'm looking forward to Berber, Moor, Rea and Trading Places calling me and all the other traders they destroyed all losers, when the loser bringing this racketeering action in federal court was hired as a lead analyst by Rea and Trading Places. How does that work? For them, the answer is a damning indictment of their widespread illegal activities: they knew traders, even good ones, would be wiped out.