The lady is paid handsomely for admin work then uses the money to attack Seykota for more money when a verbal agreement is rescinded. Now that would surely be the definition of a gold digger?
It's scary how these ladies could come up with some sexual allegations a few years down the road when they discovered that you have become rich.
The farm near Bastrop, TX is just one of his properties. You don't need google to find its address as Ed has posted about it on his site a few times. Perhaps you've heard of white pages? His current main address is in Carolina, Puerto Rico. Also, there is no data indicating the sale of his $4 million house in Incline Village. I've seen rumors about his bankruptcy posted by some anonymous nobodies on internet forums, but there is no public record, no evidence of it.
Ed is alive and well. I've spoken with him in the last month or so, he was in Austin and seemed happy to be there. He just launched a neat feature on his site to help people interested in TTP to connect. If you Google Puerto Rico + Acts 20 and 22. you might consider where you might like to live if you had capital gains and ordinary income from futures transactions and the effect that low tax rates could have on CAGR... Or maybe you might like to consider where you might like to live if you enjoy playing bluegrass music with friends and are a bit less concerned with making keeping more money... You might even consider posting your speculations, questions and commentary on FAQ. I bet the responses will be enlightening and entertaining for everyone. Chances are you'll eventually get a response. Alex
Yes, I saw his recent updates to the FAQ (most recent March 19). It seems to me he is focusing on selling his trading tribe workshops for $3500 a pop these days. The CAGR to drawdown ratio since 2011 is abysmal for trend following systems. You can do tests and easily find out that if you traded as aggressively as Seykota did in 70s-90s (aiming for 60% CAGR), you would have blown up sometime during the last decade. You must have the CAGR to begin with before you start considering any tax optimisations.
Dont aim for 60% (or anyother) cagr, aim to limit downside. Your upside CAGR number is just what you happen to get with your downside controls in place.
That's beside the main point. It's the CAGR to max drawdown ratio that matters, not CAGR or max DD in isolation. It's also the bias of hindsight. Had you built a model right after 2008, aiming to sustain 40-50% max drawdown, you would have suffered a very rude awakening a few years down the road. What I have also noticed is that the drawdowns are becoming increasingly longer in duration. If a significant drawdown lasted a couple hundred, maybe around 400 calendar days in the past, then in the recent past we've been getting dradowns lasting 600, 800, 1000 and even more days. One after another. You can also easily verify this in the track records of trend following CTAs. What I'm getting at is that this is killing the MAR ratios down to the levels that are becoming comparable to the basic buy and hold (non)strategy.
If you design a system for max 40 to 50% drawdowns there is no reason to ever lose much more than that. Here is some deep wisdom for you: "keep bets small and then systematically keep reducing risk during equity drawdowns. That way you approach your safe money asymptotically" - Ed Seykota