For the 99% that is absolutely correct, however life always wants the truth to come out, those who get ahead of the curve means that any third parties trying to adjust to, let's call it, an income based narrative, have no angle. The other benefit is that as they know that you know their methods they think twice before having a good crack at it. It is immensely efficient, there is also an interesting line which apparently no one understands, boasting for income and showing experience for capital, the former is for self benefit, the second helps everyone, assuming they listen which they don't so it helps no one but there you go. Yes but, you can actually generate more returns by being transparent rather than opaque, that lack of clarity is how the markets work, people always think they are the "unique ones" and will try anyway. The problem is that it only works for capital generation, for income it is about finding the gaps in the narrative. This causes a widening spread in wealth distribution, only a handful know how it works, the other downside for most people is that they would have to find something else to do with their time. My, and the people I know, view is Dennis Turtles, print it in the papers, they won't listen anyway but at least you tried to explain how it works, I sleep well at night.
Your post from 16years ago is enlightening. "prices are probably not random, IMHO. if a good discretionary trader was to play stone-paper-scissors with an average trader...he would probably win despite the fact the result should be random... to say that because a series of closing prices fails the runs test that price movement is random is stretching the test too far... how about testing the range of daily prices? the time of day of the high/low? the size of gaps, the location of the high/low, the location of intraday pivot points, the day of the week of highs etc etc etc... i don't think we can prove randomness (i'm no mathematician so laugh if you want) only that trading based on some types of information is more random than trading on other types of information. Q1 " Actually I already know how I will look back at the posts, I have no narrative, and have found a way to break down anyone who does have a narrative, almost always used for their gain. This is the crossover point for society where those with more, let's call it honorable, agendas flex their muscles against those with more self-serving agendas, which is what happens when everyone over in-debts themselves, no margin of error. It turns out the car hire company just tried to force through a €1,000 blocking payment without consent, they kept authorising these odd amounts like they were using my card as their personal cash flow. Then the in-lieu coercion of "but you're not insured" comes and I politely point out perhaps they should tell customers what the charges are when they ask and keep to the amounts agreed before, not after, the fact. So I'll take a trip back up to Northern Europe next week and drop it off, however I made sure I had my monies worth, I think I've put something like 7,000km on it these past weeks. Having a narrative is fine, as long as you're the one with the best narrative, I just take the non-narrative approach, wait for those who have one to implode, and see where the dust settles, they could have just been honest about it up front. The only problem with that is I end up on the receiving end of the first shot, the party must go on, but I'm actually now very experienced at neutralising multiple narratives in parallel, good old Newton and the Third Law. I also notice I'm the only one who posted trade logs, even the newbies were quiet, just shows how far everyone is pulled in to the core of the normal distribution narrative. So much effort, so little return. Actually on that note, I finished the wine, need to go and buy some more, working holiday and all that. I would like to say the same about how everyone will look back in ten years and realise they were pulled so far in they couldn't see daylight, in most cases they can plead ignorance because no solution was provided, but I've provided the solutions, some they can do themselves, some they need support with, even evidence to confirm they work. Alas non-accredited means doing it the hard way, I can be pulled in myself, almost was a couple of times, or stand outside and occasionally say, no, it really is better over here. Right, where's that wine.
Wake up man. That you have no narrative, is your narrative. There is no "outside"/objective place to stand in the world. You are always inside... On the topic of car hire. Avis have always been good for me. I recommend them.
That's funny. "It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key." That is factually incorrect, because I am doing it right now, I also know others who have done it. I admit, for all intents it is impossible to everyone, being stupidly complex as you have to unwind every narrative known, but it is possible. Their competitor, they were always good to me until now, the problem is with all car hire, the profits are so tight they look to squeeze at any margin of error. When my Brother decided to back out of the gentlemans agreement he would pay for Lexus Hybrid, yes I know but they do impressive MPG for cross continent driving meaning I don't have to stop every few hours and I'm not buying a diesel, apparently the fumes are cumulative like radiation, thereby causing me to throw the book his way, I had to get a rental temporarily while I readjust. Just another day on the non-narrative roller coaster. I did speak with Tesla about a P85D as I saw the charging stations at Folkstone, interesting although I'm not using the autopilot knowing what I know about algos, not including I have to pay cash for the thing as I don't exist in any credit systems anywhere and haven't done the depreciation calculations yet. I never thought I would consider a Tesla, but there are advantages once you dive in to the details, plus you pay 10minutes of parking for 4hrs in Westminster, often free charging, no car tax, and no congestion charge, bonus, while it lasts!
Thanks, MDMA. Your post inspired me to pay $9999 to Kermit the Frog and Fozzie Bear at the University of Securities and Absurd Commissions Online to certify that I'm an "accredited trader". Now the P&L is flowing and compounding like the Amazon delta. Where IS that wine.
TDMA...why do you visit this site? Why are you here? You're not here to learn because you've already attained a highly competent level of market expertise...correct? So what is it? Are you really here to expose the fraud that is prevalent throughout this site? Are you that altruistic? Are you here to teach? It doesn't appear so...I find your insight vague so far. I don't come here to learn, but I do come here to listen. Why? Personally, I don't know very many individual traders that take trading as serious as I do...I want to be involved in general conversation about the markets any way I can. I don't teach much at all and probably never will, but I do give caution to those that are new or struggling...basically trade small and think for yourself...don't give your money to anyone! I believe many of the veteran members of ET give similar advice frequently...they deserve some credit! I think you have a possible hidden agenda...maybe it's only to stroke your own EGO? Are you capable of being more truthful? Can you placate us? Oh, I come here for the entertainment as well and I'm putting you in this category so far. If you actually start to convey your wisdom more clearly, I will take you more serious...not that you care!
That statement sounds like alternative facts. Only an "I" would self-reference subjectivity as objectivity.
It's here. No, the gap between the resources I have available is too wide, it's more efficient than institutions, no matter how experienced people think they are, this discredits them. I thought it could be used to teach newbies and disgruntled traders the path of least resistance to success, I was wrong, their narrative is too embedded, the "veterans" with their high leverage style statements purely reinforce it. Which still always aces a ficticious narrative, and heaven help a truthful statement which is check mate. The margin of error rule, it is virtually impossible to guarantee something 100%, so seed 1% doubt with statements like "alternative facts". Except evolution doesn't have a margin of error, which means in the financial markets there is no margin of error, and that is what separates income traders from capital traders. One uses a ficticious margin of error for marginal gain, the other knows anomalies are capital evaporating one way journeys.