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)
So maybe its time to close this loop?
Does not look like anything will change re Brook's credential and vetting presenters here. (Wonder, does a presenter pay for the exposure in anyway? or just use the site to gain new subscribers to his site? or both?)
No need for more computer bytes to be used...
Mike will unban you tomorrow I suppose but that's enough trolling for now.
I did resist, resist, but I can't anymore.
So let's close this loop for now!
Geez, it seems I cannot even go workout for an hour without returning to my office with some new drama in this thread.
I do agree with your ban. This kind of user is better off elsewhere, so as to not pollute our community with their constant negativity. All attempts to reason with him failed, so in the end it seems his goal is not aligned with the community. It seemed that even though he did not understand what others would say, it was not enough - he had to continue to repeat his message. An infinite loop, like you said...
I haven't had time yet to research his account, perhaps he is another duplicate of the same user that has been banned three times in this very thread.
According to the NFA, which was very helpful specifying exactly what they do and don't do , there are no rules or regulations prohibiting non-members from disclosing their statements, nor do they audit or regulate a non-member.
Be aware, though, that many countries have their own, different, separate laws relating to vendors' implicit claims in the area of "income potential".
These are often interpreted, somewhat vaguely, through "case-law"/precedent, and are often a legal minefield (and a very profitable one for lawyers).
To mention just one example (not trading-related, but the same principle): if someone's promoting an MLM distributorship opportunity, it doesn't say anywhere in the law that they're not allowed to show a prospective associate their own recent income (e.g. copies of cheques), but very few sensible ones will take a chance on doing it, just in case they're later deemed to have made a representation which implies that new prospects would/might/can earn the same, which could easily get them into trouble when the new recruits don't. Some people promoting trading-related services feel the same; some have been advised by lawyers that there's considerable potential future downside involved in proving their own incomes in public. It's pretty easy, in an arguably over-regulated environment, for that to come across as an "implicit representation" that "you can do it, too".
It seems to me that those who have had great success to tend to use that in their marketing for their training courses / chat rooms. Examples are Dan Zanger, Larry Williams & Mark Minervini. Judging by the way they disclose their performance you are also allowed some liberties in how it's disclosed, i.e. disclose it in such a way to make it more attractive for your trading course / chat room.
While I get what you're saying and while I am very aware of a lot of the regulatory issues surrounding marketing (all of which are aimed at raising / managing OPM), I still believe that if someone truly had an exceptional track record, they could market it and use the typical boiler-plate disclosures, i.e. "you are responsible for your own trading, etc."
Citing potential NFA difficulties seems to be an easy way to avoid answering a hard question...
I can't argue with you there: I didn't much care for his reply, either.
(Personally, I'd have preferred to see him say "I have nothing to prove on that front and am not selling a 'trading system' with any guaranteed returns at all, so that would be misleading, and anyway mind your own damn business").
My perspective, though (and doubtless the perspective of many forum-posters, both here and elsewhere, who are making some money steadily by using what we've learned from Al Brooks - and there are a lot of us, now) is obviously a very different one from that of some posters in this thread, who seem almost to believe that Dr Brooks is somehow "deceiving" people simply by not being willing to discuss this. Which is utter nonsense, in my opinion, but there you go.
i bash vendors a lot. most of the ones i bash i have looked at there stuff. they had it coming. most vendors are no honest. however there is no way Mike could vet theses people. for one the time it would take to do so, just a good brokerage statement would not mean anything. it may come from a managed futures account. also it would be unfair to Mike to stick his neck out for any vendor , and it would be a huge conflict of interest. reviews from real traders that payed for there stuff is the only way. the way i vet vendors has changed. the vendors that have a 2000 to 5000 trading software with no trail ,just trust us...i do not even bother to look... trading rooms ...do not even bother to look... secret set-ups..do not even bother to look..