I heard a professor at Harvard could make about 150k a year. Some could get 200K. Not bad. I think they could live well
IMHO: The problem is EGO. They had been using the same formula for many years and earning big money. They thought they were invincible. I heard that one year before the collapse, LTCM was so flooded with money that they had to selectively kick out some of the investors(politely, of course). There was rumor that their risk management was a joke. When the crisis occurred, most of the senior staff were on vacation. I think the most important lesson from this case study is that everyone should respect the market: stock market, bond market, FX market, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from bone: No. Teach a street kid good quant skills, and he becomes an excellent trader. Teach a quant to trade, and he becomes a gambler. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I like that quote, I'm a street kid who is learning to trade and I just started looking around at what academics are doing and saying.... Man, I'm feeling like a hockey player with the goalie missing for sure!! Max
Max, as you know there is a goalie, and that's our EGO. Give it time, it will show up when you least expect, usually after a long running streak of winners. Good luck trading
Yes. A few do. However most of these folks are already doing well exclusive of their relationship with Harvard or other university. Essentially these folks are running a business within the university - although they wont call it that. Its simple: if you bring money into the university then you are compensated: if not then the money is not very good. The problem is 150 or 200K is not a good cut of the profits if you are bringing in millions of dollars in grants or other funds: you are better off keeping control of your work within your own company or venture and teaching for fun or community service. Also, 150 or 200 is OK but you can do better in private industry.
If it is so, why so many 'stupid' guys still want to teach at the colleges? They could start their own business and bring the money into it and doing research there. Just like the guy from Stanford who create the company called MIPS. I think he is now the president of Stanford. But MIPS is losing $$$$$. Many companys in SV were created by college professors but not all of them can make money or even survive.
Links, you're probably right in a lot of cases. I am extremely methodical, been researching trading while doing very little trading for 6 or 7 years. I wrestled with the ego problem for a long time and I concluded that research is the only answer to ego, fear, greed, etc. Ego would be tied in with defending a belief system, my only belief system regarding trading is that I'm going with what works and I won't know for sure what works without a lot of my own research. I can find somebody that will contradict my opinion on any and all things that I have found that work and I in turn have egotistically contradicted others when they were right. Not properly researching an idea is the most egotistical thing I can do. Academics are raised to sit in a classroom, not question things very much and spit out what they were taught to spit out at the right time. They get rewarded for that with grades and a career. Their ego is very much involved in what they conclude in any area. If they go against the prevailing ideas their career is very likely to suffer. I have found that doing my own research has brought me to conclusions that contradict my own beliefs and generally held beliefs quite a few times, I'm really glad when that happens because I don't have to answer to anybody really, I just want to make $ and get on with life. Max
It is life's true irony. You become brave after you commit a brave act. You are always scared before you've done it. Fear it. Do it anyway. And only then will you have the guts to do it again. Runningbear