Austinp, In 1987, when the contest was still underway, Robbins advertised about offering managed accounts by the "World Cup Trading Team." Ostensibly, this trading team was to be comprised of the top traders in the contest. Interestingly, Larry Williams was already identified as a member of this World Cup Trading Team even though the contest was not even half over! So it seems that there are indeed some people who can see into the future. Needless to say, the NFA did some toothless wrist-slapping. Austinp, I find your faith in the human nature and decency of vendors like Larry to be heartwarming if perhaps somewhat misguided. Don't ever lose that innocence. P.S. You rationale for the poor performance in the managed accounts does not quite hold. As I noted earlier, the managed accounts were hemorrhaging at the same time that Larry's personal account was flourishing. Did I mention time stamps?
these allegations are baseless. LW was investigated for "marketing issues" not trading/contest fraud. by the way, larry's book on the commodity report is excellent!! highly reccomend it to everyone. surf
I have not traded for as long as I have read about the markets. I have seen Larry's books in bookstores and leafed through them. That was more than enough. "Keys to the kingdom," "Money Tree," ad infinitum ad nauseam. Plus, I somehow got onto his mailing list several years ago via a previous broker, I suppose. I simply cannot believe the worthless bullshit that some people are buying into, particularly when he essentially talks down to his readers. And, finally, Gallacher's book put it all together for me into nice bite-sized portions. Thanks for asking.
these allegations are baseless, without merrit and bordering on malacious. LW was investigated for "marketing issues" not trading/contest fraud. by the way, larry's book on the commodity report is excellent!! highly reccomend it to everyone. surf
tdog gets all his information from a paragraph in gallacher's book. ask LW directly what occured between him and gallacher resulting in the smear comments. surf
Are you forgetting yet again? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1007920#post1007920 Findings and Conclusion: âThere is no question that Mr. Williams's personal trading accounts had a material effect upon his composite trading performance. The record reflects that for the first quarter of 1987, Mr. Williams's composite performance showed a loss of $6,122,281, while at the same time Mr. Williams's personal accounts experienced a gain of $902,599. The Panel finds that the fact Mr. Williams was making significant gains while managed customer accounts were suffering considerable losses would be a material fact which a potential customer would need to know in order to make a fully reasoned decision.â The enforcement attorney at the NFA confirmed that this finding is on record at the NFA. Read it slowly: "...at the same time..."
...Which has not been contested by Williams. Curious, isn't it, since if it were false then Gallacher and his publisher would have a legal liability on their hands. And yet, the book continues to be published, unmolested by Larry or his attorneys. Go figure.
No can do, bro. But feel free to call them, and they will send you the exact same findings. Alternatively, I was also advised that anyone could get the full text of the findings by going to a local library and looking at the annual NFA Manual published by Warren Gorham Lamont Publishing. Although annual publication of this manual ceased in 1993, you will be able to find the Conclusion in question by consulting the appropriate year. Remember, the incident in question occurred in 1987, but dragged on to 1990 with the appeals process. Therefore, you may wish to check the manuals for that entire period. You now know where you can independently verify every single word that I wrote. Please do so.
Marketsurfer, You should be ashamed of yourself. You lack integrity and intellectual honesty and it continues to show. We have already covered all of this before. You may choose to interpret the facts however you wish, but I find it appalling and repugnant that you would repeatedly try to misrepresent the facts themselves. Have you absolutely no honor? As "recommended" as your endorsement of Covel's book?