Anybody who shorts flat price two year notes for a directional play on interest rates would not have the intellectual capacity for any strategy beyond retail stupidity. Big D is clearly not a trader in any sense of the term.
And now that bone's been totally exposed, he's acting like a petulant child. This thread just gets better and better
That's my point too. If he would post his returns for those 18 years and some risk/reward figures , I would be much more confident because if he was misrepresenting, lying about his performance , he would expose himself to mail fraud , now would he risk that ? Look , would you be interested to listen to someone who is only marginally profitable ? If I had a 18 year old impressive track record, I would post it right away...
Well, Peternam, with an 8% return track record you certainly have nowhere to go but up. Why are you on ET, exactly?
I agree - it seems most likely that the reason he has refused to provide information (when the obvious con play is to provide doctored statements) is that it would expose him to fraud charges. These threads are highly entertaining
I wouldnt pay somebody $6000 to teach me how to spread trade. Just like to scam options courses that teach you hpow to buy a call and sell a put for $1000. I would pay $6000 it the strategy makes money. How can you say you should be able to sell a non-profitable strategy for $6000, beats me. It should be profitable, otherwise it doesn't even make sense!
I disclosed my figures , where are yours ? I am not the one calling myself a professor ( btw from which university ?) and selling a course. Looking for someone who can do better than 8%/year , is it you ? Most probably not !
I am a noob in trading but I do not agree with this. If I sign up for coaching, I expect to be coached by someone with a consistent profitable record, especially when Bone himself claims consistent profitability in his website. This is different from attending a university course or subscribing for esignal. If Bone say it upfront that he is just selling trading knowledge without talking about his own trading record, then fine, I have no qualms that he is in fact just selling a service and if others willingly pay him 6500 for the knowledge, then it is a case of willing buyer wiling seller. BUT the prospective buyers here are looking for proof of his trading profitability. So, it is obvious they are not after the knowledge alone. They are after knowledge that can make them profitable and they want to learn from someone who can prove to them that there is a profitable record. So, Bone, as a seller, should comply with that request, especially when he is the one who claims profitability in the first place.
I would like to comment on elements in your post: 1. I am stunned by some of the statements. Professors have earned their doctoral degrees, are not self-appointed, are peer reviewed, and are among the best of what the educational system can produce according to the metrics of the educational system! When one takes a class, one at least knows he is learning from the best of the best. Let us try to remember some of the geeks one had in their classes. They may not all have made money, but do one realizes that they were beating others in those exams that the whole class took on the same topic which were taught by the same professor in the same class room at the same time? People may say so what? The point is that they beat their competition under equal conditions. If some did not make money later in their life, it may be due to lack of skill in money making, but also because they were not in money making enterprises. A professor cannot become rich due in part to the nature of his profession. 2. If someone were to tell you that some of his students have become alchemists, do you think there is a message in there? If yes what is that message? To be accurate one should report what happens to all the students. 3. If you sell a software, while the software may not make make you rich, the software still has to perform the tasks it represents it does, it should described them accurately, and it should come with a warranty. Note that if one were to talk about the software's feature, this would not be a replacement of what the software represents it does.
I wonder if you have thought to apply the content of your post above to the content of your post below, such as the first sentence in post below and the statement about professors accomplishments. Any comments?