Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Al Brooks not providing the proof you request is not evidence or proof of any wrongdoing on his part. He is not required to provide that information to the public. His choice to not provide that information to the public does not prove anything directly, but it can lead some people to form opinions one way or the other. Just keep in mind those opinions or conclusions drawn are being done so based on a lack of information. He may or may not trade live, we simply do not have enough objective information to know that answer with absolute certainty. Some folks may give him the benefit of the doubt, whereas others like yourself are not willing to.
Well, one can easily answer the questions dishonestly if they aren't required any proof. All vendors will claim to make money until you ask them for proof. So just asking really doesn't reveal anything.
It doesn't take much logic to understand that if Al Brooks had proof of his trading he's have produced it to avoid a negative review and certainly he'd produce it now after the amount of interest that this thread has generated, but he hasn't. You can do all the mental flip and flops you like to think of reasons why he hasn't produced evidence of his trading but that is a pretty illogical thing to do when the logical conclusion is staring you straight in the face.
You stated that although he didn't have all the facts Emmett tarnished Al Brook's reputation. What was Emmett supposed to do? Give Al Brooks a free pass because he refused to provide proof of his claims? Brooks was given every opportunity to support those claims but he refused. Emmett reported all of that in his review. You may not like what was written but it reflects the truth and if Brook's reputation has been tarnished it's because he has made claims that he refuses to prove.
He's a vendor making claims about the product he is selling and making claims about his own trading using that method. You are correct, he has no legal requirement to provide proof but refusing to provide it should be ringing common sense alarm bells and if he's given this venue (this safe space) to sell that product he should be providing proof or as I stated before he should be making it very clear that he is simply teaching what price action is. Providing proof may not be a standard that the law requires but I believe that it is a standard that this community should require.
Some older BMT/FIO members may remind that the idea of creating a trading room/web site was not Al's idea but some of his book reader's. As far as I remember Al Brooks was not very open to the idea. It would be interesting to find the guy(s) who pushed the idea, at least one of them was member on the forum.
There are a bunch of more obvious targets than him anyway.
The only two that I know of are https://www.b12trader.com/ and https://watchhimtrade.com/ However, the absence of other vendors providing proof doesn't mean that we shouldn't require Books and all vendors to provide proof. If we're going to set that as our standard then I guess "I was only following orders" and "everybody does it is" have to be accepted are legitimate excuses too.