My guess is that it's much less than $875,000. Bone has been an ET sponsor for over 10 years and I assume back in 2002 his course was much cheaper. Spread that out over 13 years or so and the actual figure will be inline with most educational businesses.
Could be less than that, but the non-ET clients taken over the years would push it back up, maybe over a million even. for example 1 million divided over 12 yrs is roughly 83k a year.
what is your relationship to bone? at the very least you're an apologist, but i think an alias. the timing of your posts is telling.
when im at a computer tmrw i'll post emails from before i was a client that directly refute this. bone, you're a bad liar - that's become obvious.
stereo70, i am confused, is the course a tutorial on how to create customized spreads, program them into the autospreader? does it teach what is condor, fly, box spread or how to create different ratios to create a customized time series? if so, all that info can be found for free with hard work but there is nothing wrong if a person wants to use someone who knows all this stuff to make it easier.......overvalued or not. if you are saying that there is a technical system with exit and entry parameters, then that is a bit different....you are also paying for a methodology which would probably be worth well more than 7k if it is profitable. although learning why market dynamics exist is important, which is a practice i try to encourage in order to make a complete trader (product knowledge), sometimes the system/methodology itself is more important than know why bc all we need to do is buy/low sell high. all long as there is risk management in place.
once you have been in the game long enough you realise that most people will not make it as consistently profitable traders no matter what the methodology/style. I am convinced you could literally tell someone when to enter and exit and most people will find a way to mess up. disclosure - I don't have a position in this fracas.
Londonkid, I see your point. My experience with prop trading is limited but I have seen multiple traders execute mechanical strategies and arbitrages like machines. IMHO humans are risk averse but when they see an efficacious strategy, they essentially dogpile in. All this talk of "messing up" and deviating from trading plans seems to arise when the strategy itself is discretionary and has no edge. At some subconscious level, the trader knows it, emotions take over and account blow up ensues... If credulous traders want to buy bone's service, so be it. They have been adequately informed of the spreadprofessor's shortcomings. Just my $0.002. Caveat Emptor.
in the pursuit of objectivity, this is why bone needs to be given some slack by some of the posters on here about whether or not he is profitable. 9 guys could sit next to paul tudor jones and George soros, and still not be able to make it...it is a universal truth. as long as bone is transparent about what he is teaching and expectations are set accordingly, then the witch hunt should ease back a bit as he is a bit less aggressive with his marketing. I find that spread trading in futures, unless you are doing a simple relative value approach does not have the same type of scalability. So I do look at it and cusomtize spreads for trading but I have not yet found a fly or condor strategy that I can put 50mm USD + into..... so I tend to focus more on outright as they are scalable into a fund structure. the customized stuff are things that I do to add some icing to the top in regards to performance or stuff for PA, but in reality, the idea that spread trading is more profitable that outright trading is an illusion bc it is not necessarily less risk.
Ballsofgold, You mentioned ratios to create custom time series. Whats the point of this if you are the only one trading it? Wouldnt the trader be fooled by randomness in attempts to apply levels and other technicals that depend on traders behavioir in markets where you, or only a scant few,are atually trading the series? As you can tell, i struggle with the above issue and frequently assign importance to randomness. Thanks.