exactly..look at OP profile..3K of posts on ET since 2008(!)..it's like 1 post every 10-20 min every single day weekends included..he never trade and never will.. yo! reskfree! what is the point to count money in someone's wallet anyway? go get a real job...McDonald in waiting for ya..f* trading.. Soros is a TRADER,because he make the final decisions where to enter and exit..even if he is behind some corporation...he probably have some good reasons to have one.. you can find his trades here, on ET. looks where he short the oil in 2008..
There is no proof that Soros made any money trading himself. He however owned a fund that made him money. Do not forget that he had workers: those workers were traders. The fund does not need to make money for the owner to make money. All it needs is to be in business. Even crooks made money from twisted version of the model (ask Madoff).
Bullshit. It is fools like you who propagate such things that make him rich by advertising imaginary trading performance for free, which brings more money for him to run, and collect more fees. PS: take the word "colleagues", and put it in caps. As for England, HALF the people involved in trading did the same trade as Soros and colleagues. Are they not also great? We also do not know the overall position of the business owned by Soros, financed by others, and run by colleagues.
so for you, a trader has to be someone working alone in is room while jerking off to penthouse between trade. As soon as he become rich and hire people, he is not anymore a trader. In this case, you can only be correct, no trader (your definition of a trader)will never be a billionaire...because any peoples with half a brain is gonna hire peoples to manage and to diversify when he get a billion dollard. So you are correct... except your definition of a trader is wrong.....but as you are a troll, I am not losing anymore time in this thread.
Yea but not on their own. If you make 100% on your 30k you made 30k. If Soros makes 100% on a billion he earns 200mil in fees. Big diff. Now you might say, well big deal, I'll just make 100% compounded 15 more times and I'm there with him. But there's the rub. If I say you've got a 80% chance of successfully completing a 100% return cycle without blowing up you'd be excited. A coin flip but you have a 80% chance of winning. But what then, if I tell you the payoff is dependent upon you completing 10 consecutive cycles? Not so great, eh? Now even though you're a skilled player with a distinct edge the chances of you getting to your goal are less than even.
let me ask you very straight question-did you ever make any decent amount of money in trading? let say six figures and beyond, while you type your 3+K posts on ET alone?
Y've got a part of the point. One of the other parts is that the money played is not his own. Now why does he not borrow money and trade it if he is that good? He should easily pay the interest cost right?
Riskfreetrading, I don't want to argue, but take this like a losing trade. Admit that your opinion was wrong. You are being outnumbered 10:1 from the answers of all other posters. Be disciplined and listen to your stop loss! Don't defend your opinion against every poster. You're not going to change anyone's mind. Kindly surrender and move on to another trade.