I was hoping to have a discussion on the topic of education. Why is it that in every other profession, one expects to pay for education and people (many of which are professionals in their own right) are willing to share their knowledge -for money- , but not in trading? I keep hearing "those who can't trade teach", "it's a scam", "you can get that info for free on the net" etc. I almost never hear that of a doctor who teaches surgery in his spare time at a university, or a professor teaching almost every topic imaginable. Why is it that it is fully acceptable to be taught every profession by a "professional teacher" but it somehow has no value if taught by a professional trader? Of course, I am fully aware that there is absolutely no substitute for screentime etc but you can't tell me that this "job" can't be taught at all; in fact, it's a skill just like any other. I also know that yes, one can potentially make more money trading than teaching, but not everyone is in it just for the money; a finance teacher can make more money working for an ib, but prefers sharing his knowledge, having less stress etc...it is concievable, isn's it? Especially after a certain age, so I would assume.... P.S. I'm not selling anything, check my post history
You're right there's quality out there but sometimes hard to distinguish in the miles of miles of scams. The reason? Barrier to entry of becoming a professor (Ph.D) or MD is quite high but any idiot can open up a website.
There is a huge benefit in finding a mentor early on. Having the opportunity to see a true "pro" in action is very valuable, including how they handle adversity. I often buy books to get new ideas, and subscribe to magazine for the same reasons. I would never, however, sign up with some guru, unless he/she could document recent solid performance. If the guru is unwilling to do so, you should likewise be unwilling to pay. Think about it like this: Would you take piano lessons from someone who couldn't or wouldn't play the piano for you? Would you go to a college where the professors didn't need to have any credentials? Trading is hard; mastery of trading is difficult. Working with someone or a group can be immensely helpful, but there are no simple shortcuts.
Trading is one of the few "professions" where you can sell non-working education for $500+ to gullible people. That's probably the only reason. It's high margin, as much else in the finance industry. Why do you think alot of commericals are from banks, brokers, and other finance related companies? TV commercials, billboards, costs lots of money. 10 subscriptions a month is $5000 a month income. It's that easy. Next time somebody tells you that a $500 room subscription is worth it, think about it. If a person is profitable they wouldn't sell it for this low. They would only do so if the trading strategy has an unsteady equity curve, so they would need steady income from "teaching". Or they need the money to scale up, in which case you're screwed because if somebody teaches you a strategy he developed himself, and he has never traded with size, how do you know it's gonna work when you put size in it in the future? It's not gonna make you rich yet you pay thousands to learn the strategy. You take all the risk and he takes the money.
Intersting points thus far. Let me add something else: why is it necessary to have a track record to teach some aspect of trading? Surely it's conceivable for someone to know all about strategies, indicators, money management, system development and testing etc but to have never traded? In fact, MOST professors don't have professional experience in the subjects they teach, but strictly academic.
The difference between training to become a trader and training to become a doctor/lawyer/engineer/electrician/plumber/whatever is that all of those training programs are based upon some sort of licensed body certifying that the training program meets a required standard. You don't just set up shop and start churning out PhDs without first passing muster. Anybody with a copy of "MyFirstWebsite" can throw something together and start advertising as a guru/mentor. To be honest, I actually think the websites that look the hokiest probably are the most legitimate (they've got better things to do than make slick websites, like trade). Also, the comment about most professors having no experience beyond academic is incorrect in my experience. Every prof that I ever had in my engineering programs came from industry before they started teaching.
Good points. I totally agree with your observation of slick sites to be most suspect. Evidence, and the more of it the better, is the key to my trust. The more someone tries to impress me with non-essentials the tighter I hold my wallet. Works for me, feel free to emulate.