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)
No point that I can see, but the validity argument clearly doesn't work equally in each direction: as with so many other things, it's easy to find people with great "doing" skills and little-to-no "teaching" skills, but awfully difficult - if possible at all - to find many people with great "teaching" skills applicable to a specific activity of which they never had the "doing" skills in the first place.
Because of the "desperate buyers" syndrome to which @mariafp rightly refers, above, with trading that's a huge issue.
There's a difference in the situations of many new would-be traders seeking the way to instant riches from a trading vendor, compared to the relationships of athletes and coaches, or academic students and teachers. An actual coach, including a trading coach, is not trying to fleece the people he/she is coaching or teaching. But with trading, it is obviously very easy to make a good living doing exactly that. Also, trading is hard and has risk, while fleecing people who are basically begging to be fleeced is easier.
I think there are vendors who provide value, and also who don't promise (or charge) too much, and there are also vendors who simply know that they can sell anything to people who are unrealistic and who are willing to pay to be shown how to become a millionaire. I think it would be overstating the case a little to say that no one who knows anything about trading is going to teach it to others, but it is also true that it is easy for scammers to sell worthless nonsense to people who are filled with dreams of infinite riches.
I was totally surprised by the example given by @mariafp of people pitching a service for passing a prop-firm evaluation. I had no idea there was a market for scams that far down the chain. I guess they will flush out the suckers wherever they can be found.
On this forum, anyone making any kind of offer for a paid product or service is simply banned. It keeps the environment cleaner and safer. There are a number of registered vendors here, and they know the rules. Also, since they often have worthwhile knowledge of trading and the industry, they can add something. But not if they promote something. (There are site sponsors, but they have their rules too about what they can do.)
With all that said, I do think it is easy to be too cynical about the business of providing trading advice or assistance, but some cynicism, and certainly skepticism, is healthy.
Bob.
When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
I've been trading on and off since the 1980s. During those decades, I've seen exactly one, yes, ONE, teacher/trader who has published his broker statements, and, YES, he was a wildly successful trader (and appears to have become a very successful teacher, in terms of both teaching others how to trade successfully and in making money from his teaching --- he charges $thousands). Ziad Masri: opentrader.com
I conclude that the great majority of teacher/traders are, if at all, much better teachers than traders.
This is absurd. Playing a sport that is physically demanding is not the same as coaching. Being a great coder is not the same as someone with a vision. You’re conflating these things and your analogy is bunk.
There are zero great traders who would teach some random person how to trade. If you know someone personally, perhaps a childhood friend or someone connected to your family then maybe. But some random person on a message board with $10K to burn? GTFO with that nonsense. $10K is nothing.
There is no 1 “system” that you can be taught that will make you money trading. There is no magic bullet, there is no magic black box buy/sell indicator. There is no one who is making a lot of money trading who is going to teach you how to do it.
Your best bet is to find out what a real prop firm is looking for in a new trader in terms of education and experience. Find out and then go do that, then try to get a job there.
Trading is mostly fools gold. II's like trying to play tennis against Rafael Nadal, you may win a few points here and there but you will never win the match.
I think it's about flattening out your income stream, and for some, an altruistic desire to help others or give back. For others, it's to make money by scamming and pretending. See @kevinkdog 's podcast interview about how to spot trading scams to help with knowing the difference.
I went full-size trading this one account in June, and my monthly PnL is, in multiples of $N
So, while long-term profitable, there have been rough patches. Having other sources of stable income, like a side business or a job provides peace of mind that one can always pay the bills every month and prevents one from trading under pressure that if they don't have a green month they are going to go hungry or will need to max out the credit cards (again).
I don't know if I am on the same wave length, but wanted to add (imho I do) do others think many Vendors not do well financially by trading and thus, by selling indicators or selling rooms, they supplement their ability to keep on trading?
One of my biggest edges came from me reaching out to a well known trader who ended up spending ~40 hours over the course of a year teaching me how to trade the technique I asked him about.
You can't go wrong with the following criteria when selecting a course or mentor:
1. Teacher was/is a professional trader. That means he traded in the pits or traded at a firm. Nevertheless, he should be (or was) registered as a professional …
In addition to these criteria, I would add another: The person had to have distinguished himself in a competition with real money. For example, earning 11,000 percent on his money over 12 months, or placing in the top 5 more than once.
I read the argument that teaching trading is analogous to coaching athletics. I don't buy this analogy.
The argument is that since several great coaches either never competed or were mediocre competitors, trading coaches don't need to have a successful background in trading. The underlying assumption is that acquisition of knowledge for those who coach athletics and those who teach trading ARE THE SIMILAR. Clearly, they aren't (I'll explain why, later). If the underlying assumption doesn't hold up, then the position that rests on it collapses.
WHY?: One who coaches athletes have demonstrated some level of competence in COACHING. He's either coached teams or individual athletes to a high level (e.g. playoffs, semi-finals, finals). Many of these trading coaches don't have a similar track record. Most don't have any deep knowledge, gained from experience, to impart to their pupils. They just regurgitate and repackage the same stuff that has been public for decades. For them, it's simply a money grab. This is where the underlying assumption falls apart.
I'm sure there are other underlying assumptions that can be attacked. But I don't feel like thinking that deeply, presently.
