read the random house or webster's dcitionary. Or goto junior high school. What's with elitetrader members? Recognition is the the act of identifying as something or someone previously seen or known. The Wall St. Journal recognized Shortboy when it identified him, and quoted him. When did the author of the article raise unsubstantiated facts so he could question them? Show me a single questioning? Boy you are warped to say such an obvious lie.. When was the last time ANYONE from elitetrader was in the Wall St. Journal, or Tony Oz or anyone else here?? Were they ever RECOGNIZED by the journal? NO! Shortboy was recognized. You know what, you people embarrass yourselves with your warped grip.
What you call "restructuring to maximize returns" I and others, call "manipulation". You can justify it by using whatever euphemism you like. The fact is that anyone can read the links that I posted and make up their own minds. I don't think we will get anywhere trying to convince each other. And again, for your own sake/reputation, refrain from personal insults.
You tell me what difference it makes to you what is in the denominator of a HYPOTHETICAL portfolio. You never mention the veracity of the TRADES, and the TRACK RECORD, yet you are now fixated on a hypothetical number. Why? Yes, the people can judge for themselves why you are so quick to condemn a trader, not for the success of his trading, but for the "manipulation" of a hypothetical figure in a mock portfolio. If the guy's selling signals, why are you so silent about the signals he's selling. No, I say tomato, you say tomatoe.
and I'm gone (provided there is no more slander). Before you started crying about your "manipulation", wasn't there another issue that was such a big deal to you? And wasn't this other issue of such a big deal to you that you attacked Shortboy with the same tenacity as you are now? Just a simple "yes" or "no" will do. People, his answer will be "yes", so before issue #2 came up, he was attacking Shortboy with the same vengeance over issue #1. conclusion: Babak has an ax to grind, obviously.
Vinnie, Congratulations Vinnie - you are the recipient of my first, and hopefully last, negative post. Obviously you have seriously underestimated the "average" intelligence of the people that hang out at this board. A quick glance at your posting list shows that all of your posts are concerned with "Short Boy." You can try being as subtle as you like, but don't get pissed when Babak calls you on it. If you want to advertise your product please pay just like all the other promoters. They keep this board free for the rest of us. Buttheads like you waste our time arguing about a shit product that no serious trader would have anything to do with. Cordially yours, Lightningsmurf
The only one looking like an idiot is you, Gigante! First of all, I seriously don't know why you bother. The folks here at ET are sharp bunch and have totally destroyed ALL of your agruments on multiple occasions. Your pathetic spamming does nothing but entertain us. And yeah, I'll mention something about this shortdick's returns: the market has gotten massacred this year and the best shortdick can muster is 17%?? HAhahahahaha! You realise that by posting about him here, you're only succeeding in shaming the poor bum! Oh, but in your language, that's recognition!
"Shortboy, a Web site operated by short-seller Bill Ginsberg, boasts 200 paid subscribers whose short activities run the gamut. Mr. Ginsberg says a theoretical portfolio based on the trades of his subscribers would be up more than 17% this year, compared to a drop of more than 19% for the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index. Mr. Ginsberg maintains shorting is a safe strategy, assuming investors research thoroughly which sectors of the market are most beleaguered. "It is only a risky strategy for people who don't understand it," he says. But how long can the latest short-selling boom last? The risk, for short-sellers at least, is that the market has fallen so steeply that further big declines are unlikely. Some traders say Wednesday's market gains were due, in part, to short sellers covering their positions with purchases." ---------- So if I had "in theory" followed all of shortboys recs this year I would be up 17% shorting? I am assuming that he is shorting individual shares which are, as Im sure you know, more risky than playing in the outright index. Or, if I had "in theory" just taken a short in the SPY on the first day of trading for 2002 I would be up 19%...in theory of course. So...Id be up more, and have taken LESS RISK simply to short the index, the one which you say best tracks short boy. I'm not the smartest guy on this board Vinny, so maybe I am missing something..but that sounds like a fucked up way to play to me, especially to pay for it. Brandon
Let me understand, Mr. G is calling shorts in a Big Bad Bear, (whether they are questionable or not I don't know) and people pay him for this. Newbies, please read Elder, every other book on trading psychology that you can get your hands on. Then learn to trade for yourselves ps, Chas whats up. xstek
Is 2002 the only year we're on this earth? Why do "members" chime in on 2002 results only as if there are no other years to invest? According to 2 Wharton Business School grads, Shortboy's track record goes back to 1996. If you don't believe that, take it up with them. And his track record shows that he's no "product of a bear market", seeing that he outperformed the S&P from 1996 to 1999. So when the Wall St. Journal quotes Shortboy, and Forbes writes an article about him, and 2 Wharton grads write a chapter in an investment book about him, my guess is that they all did their homework, and they are giving him proper "recognition" as a well regarded name in short-selling. Recognition as a well regarded name. Have any of YOU been in the WSJ? Forbes? A book that also features very well known successful investors? Yeah, being up 17% sucks this year!! Only up 17% in this market? I wish I was up 17%. Jealousy always rears it's ugly head.