I don't suppose Bill Gates has expended so very much perspiration, but the ability to mass market an idea as successfully as he has can be described as inspiration. Surely it is at the very least a financial inspiration he has exhibited, which is something anybody in this thread should be able to admire and envy. And for the luck of being born the child of Bill Gates, he has stated that his fortune is not destined to be inherited by his children, but to go to charity. I think his children are indeed very lucky, but it is not luck at the prospect of inheriting his dough, it is the luck of inheriting his wisdom and example.
Please don't liken trading to gambling......Gambling cannot be considered a viable career whereas trading can be........thousands of people making a daily living trading and I know of not one person who does the same thing with gambling.....so the answer must be NO.....luck doesn't make you successful.....you make you successful And I speak with absolutely no trading experience whatsoever.....but from the viewpoint of someone who has read all the market wizard books and many more books on securities trading There is a fundamental difference between Gambling and Trading: ask a million people what they do for a living and a positive percentage will say "securities trading".....guess how many would respond with "well, I'm a gambler".....0% That's my take on the situation
I'll agree that Bill Gates is a very bright individual. However, I cannot agree that it is specifically his doing for acquiring his position and wealth. There are certain points throughout social progress where a future monopoly is in the making -- and a huge one at that. If you look at computers, there definitely was a potential monopoly brewing for operating systems. Obviously, in hindsight, it is easy to realize that everyone needed to run the same O/S and software so that everyone could exchange e-mails, programs, documents, etc. However, at that time, computers were still in their infancy. I should correct myself and say that "personal computers" for "mass use" were still in their infancy. Bill Gates, having written a program that was a precursor to dos, happened to get into a situation at the right time and with the right people -- a history playing out like it did, we saw a perfect monopoly created with Microsoft. Microsoft is most definitely a monopoly, but not necessarily a bad one. A lot of people give Microsoft a lot of shit, but that company has created software that is essential to the daily operation of businesses throughout the world -- no small feat. Could it have been someone else besides Bill? Sure, but my point is that it most likely had to be SOMEONE. Are you going to be at the right place at the right time for a trade? That's all it really is -- you have to be trading the RIGHT security at the RIGHT time and in the RIGHT way to make money. How you do that depends on what you know, what you've been through and how much capital you have to survive. There will always be stocks that plummet and explode on a daily basis -- and there will always be people buying the right puts and calls on those stocks the day before -- but were they experts or just statistical blips? Your account statement is the ultimate judge in my opinion, not any one's particular opinion here on ET (including mine).
Good businessman? If his practices describe "good business", then it is a very sad sad sad world. Is he a genius? In a manipulative, evil way, yes. In the sense of making a good product, he is a freaking idiot. Of course he is lucky. He is lucky that IBM picked up DOS. He is lucky that Apple overcopyrighted their computer to the tiniest screw and was absurdly restrictive with licensing. He is lucky that none of his competitors could take him to court because there was no case law whatsoever on software issues. Microsoft has NEVER EVER created or innovated anything. Any piece of software was either stolen or bought out via acquisitions and then dumbed down. And of course he is not some Joe Schmoe. He had a very extensive and brilliant plan to have Microsoft just own the world. There is no doubt he is exteremely intelligent with rich boy "street smarts", but he used his intelligence in a very manipulative & destructive way. MS has been holding back technology at least a decade and continues to be a plague on business and home computer technologies. "And for the luck of being born the child of Bill Gates, he has stated that his fortune is not destined to be inherited by his children, but to go to charity. I think his children are indeed very lucky, but it is not luck at the prospect of inheriting his dough, it is the luck of inheriting his wisdom and example." Yeah right can you say tax write-off for Bill Gates. AND Can you say trust fund, top education, best clothing, no part time job EVER, private chef, amazing house, top notch cars at driving age, and secured executive careers regardless of brain (or lack thereof). Is that concept of being born rich as being lucky that hard to understand? And it is very strange to see people considering day-trading pure luck. The crazy 1999 and 2000 are long gone.
I do both trading and gambling, and I very much do liken the stock market to a casino (see my signature). In fact, I have never said to anyone "I do securities trading", but "well, I'm a gambler" is exactly what I have told people, long before I ever got into the casino side of it. Perhaps if you start reading as many books about gambling as about the market, you will start to hear of how many people do claim to make a living from gambling professionally. I don't know, personally, since I don't read books on either. I just do them.
How long have you been trading for a living? I can't imagine you surviving in this business for very long with the gambling attitude. Clearly there is a difference between saving $50,000 to trade and taking that money to a casino. But actually, to you, there is no distinction is there? Trading is gambling. Wonder where you'll be in a few years (I can make a pretty good guess) lol Please man you can't be that ignorant....Even I know that there is a big difference between trading and Gambling with my limited experience lol...Let me be clear that TRADING CAN BE GAMBLING but I strongly believe that one who TRADES WITH A GAMBLER'S MENTALITY cannot make a consistent living at it That's my view. I feel quite strong about it too Dude, you should start a casino fund where people invest their money with the firm and the firm gambles it in las vegas......I can just imagine the returns the fund would have LOL...
Sometimes you have to be willing resort to sleazy practices to remain at the top of the food chain. That, unfortunately, seems to be a reality of life.....the moment you blink you find yourself being eaten up by the rest of the sleazy competitors who didn't blink.
Can I assume that people who think trading and gambling are not related make money on every trade. To gamble is to bet on an uncertain outcome, unless you are trading on inside information, every trade you make could be considered a gamble. We all have certain set-ups we like to trade and feel the odds are with us, but we have no way of knowing what the outcome will be until the trade is taken. In my opinion, what separates a winning trader (gambler) from a loser is money management. Good LUCK with your trading tomorrow.
If you are gambling, no matter how good your money management skills are, you will likely go home broke.....I don't think the same is true with trading though. So it appears there IS a distinction between trading and gambling.....what a surprise Trading is not a rolling of the dice.......with proper strategy and risk management one can be consistently profitable in trading. Can the same be said of gambling at a casino? No. I can not embark on a career path which can be rightfully described as "gambling." I wonder how many hedge funds would be eager to take on new traders who describe their past experiences in trading as "gambling."