$20,000 Coaching Session with Jai Ramoutar?

Discussion in 'Educational Resources' started by SlickRick, Jun 12, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jem


    I do not know about the 300,000 in a hedged situation but I can state that in 1996, all tech did allow their traders to have a long account and set up a short account to get around the "uptick" rule. Then congress or the sec came out with a ruling or law and it was no longer allowed. Now, I would be a little surprised if this was still going on years later but who knows. By the way I started with all-tech in the San Diego office. One of those two managers/owners became the poster boy for the congressional investigation. I laughed my ass off when I saw Barry testifying in front of Congress. Because I remember him wanting me to allow someone else to have my money transferred over to someone else to avoid overnight margin calls. Barry was out for himself but if you asked him he did give you straight answers. I thought it was ridiculous that they advertised that it was easy but at the same time I thought it was a joke when many of his former customers sued him because they lost hundreds of thousands of dollars trading. At some point you can no longer blame the pusher.

    The all-tech training in San Diego (which I got see for free because I was already trading in the office when the trainer came out), was the biggest scam and crock of shit ever and I mean ever. They were teaching strategies that were worse than ineffective they were designed to lose. In fact when I learned more they were almost criminally stupid. Harvey should have been ashamed of himself. They taught people to wait for the market odometer to speed up, see green and press soes buy. This left you in the soes line for the market makers who waited for the spoos to reverse and they would then take every soes idiot they could and you were instantly down 3/8 on a thousand to start the trade. That is not to say you could not make money if you figured it out, but I had to go to a different firm to get trained and figure it out.

    That Harvey guy, I never trusted him after I saw his $3,000 training course.

    I have nothing against paying for training, because I did not start to make good money(during the momentum days) until I paid the guys who trained me an 1/8 a cent share for a year. Which turned out to be a good sum. (By the way that method taught to me in 1997, grafted on to a 20 period moving average (I was an LBR fan at the time), and then later filtered with a Stochastic {Dave like the stochs after he was shown one}, is the method Dave Floyd, mentioned earlier in this thread was/is now hawking on tradingmarkets.) I had no complaints about paying for it because for a while it enabled me and others in our office to make some good money for a few years.

    Consequently I agree the earlier posters, most good teachers would make more off splitting profits than training fees. And you save a ton of marketing time. But if a teacher can prove he is good at what he does (making profitable traders) even a somewhat jaded trader like myself would be happy to pay him or her.
    #81     Jun 15, 2003
  2. Hehe, very true...
    #82     Jun 15, 2003
  3. It was true back then as it is now, the biggest problem with most of these public "training" courses is that they are simply inherently outdated. Go back a couple years before the daytrading craze started, and you'd find many cases of SOES traders taking money out of the market on a weekly if not daily basis. And how did they make that money? By buying when they saw green and selling when they saw red. All-tech wasn't a scam, they were just teaching worn-out strategies. If you want another example, Dennis & co's Turtle trading strategy is free for anyone to download, and I'm sure you can find any number of people to train you in the details of that system that took millions out of the market -- yet you'll most likely find that system won't be anywhere near as successful as it once was. Does that make the turtle system a scam? Is someone who is selling that system for 3k a charlatan? Or are their customers just getting sold on whatever sounds like fast and easy money?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to defend all-tech or any kind of "teaching-you-how-to-trade" program, just saying that's about all you can expect with practically any training course open to the public.
    #83     Jun 15, 2003
  4. what most people KNOW on this board is that there are NO secrets to trading--- NONE. this info about getting a list of stocks, et al ( secrets) sounds very very outdated to me.


    #84     Jun 15, 2003


    It's truly a shame the way the San Diego office was run. Barry did not do a great job running that office, and it got worst when he and Rob split up. Barry was caught bringing in instructors other than the one's from All-Tech. While it is true that that some of the methodologies taught back then do not work today. Harvey was a HUGE opponent of TA back then, and still is today. The training material changed dramatically when I took over the training arm. I got into a lot of heated arguments with Harvey, but ultimately won by teaching TA and making it 90% of the training.

    As far as splitting costs, it's very difficult to do (especially here in NY), as you must be a RIA. Splitting profits was generally accepted, and then came under very tough scrutiny when firms were caught lending money to daytraders to help them meet margin calls. Since I have securities licenses, I have limited choices on how to split profits, if at all.

    I have given my webmaster a list of details to add in for the coaching program, with very explicit details, which will also include a "money back guarantee". Again, each coaching student must be meet specific criteria, and be very clear about what they're looking for. It is also not the only training I provide. As I've said before, my name has become what it is, because I do things the right way and help people. It's a shame that so many "CHARLATANS" and "SNAKE OIL" salesman have taken advantage.

    I have chosen to continue my activity on ET to help. You will see as you have already that those who know me on here, have had good experiences with me. If you ever need a hand, an answer just drop me a line.

    Be well
    #85     Jun 17, 2003
  6. Past results are irrelevant, if Jesse Livermore was alive today and offered a course, he'd get takers at $20k a pop, and his acct ended with a negative balance.
    #86     Jun 18, 2003

  7. past results are totally relevant. all results are past by definition. there is nothing else to judge by in this game.


    #87     Jun 18, 2003
  8. Yes there is.. AGE. The best trader is NOT the one with the most money, he/she is the one with the most money and has kept it the longest.

    Alot of these "young millionaires" made it on high risk gambles that paid off, it doesn't make them the best traders, since it's a matter of time until they lose it all.
    #88     Jun 18, 2003
  9. Let's not forget that one of the other All-Tech trainers in 1995 had a minor role in the soap opera Ryan's Hope. What a joke.
    #89     Jun 18, 2003
  10. I was at an All-Tech class in December '95. Harvey gave all of us Christmas presents at the end of our training. The present? A framed picture of Harvey himself!

    The best thing about the seminar? Some French guy from LA turned me on to Iomega. Still, direct access was a whole new world back then, and Harvey certainly deserves the credit. He was pretty cool.
    #90     Jun 18, 2003
    lawrence-lugar likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.