Completely daft messages on social media

[ShaunWhite]

I would have attended the event myself if it was free and within easy travelling distance, out of interest and to get to meet other traders. But for £150 I think I'd rather take the money down the boozer or go out to a nice restaurant.

A whole bunch of traders and it's coming down to some very fuzzy reasons and biases.
What's happened to (Cost + Opportunity cost) > (Potential upside * Liklihood of upside) or have I logged into MumsNet by mistake?

[Trader Pat]

I'm sure it's possible to be a highly successful trader without even paying the standard rate PC. A style of trading that has a 55% strike rate can still generate a lot of profit but the margin may be small enough to avoid PC. Wouldn't really make any difference because he would be paying a high rate of commission.

You're right but I'm talking specifically about they type of person who would go to an event like that, probably curious about trading or new to it and are trying to find an edge. If you asked them who they would rather learn from they would say someone who pays the higher rate of PC as higher rate PC payers obviously know their onions.

I'm not sure why anybody who has been involved in the markets for a while would shell out €150 to go to an event like that unless you're not profitable long term and if thats the case then there's something fundamentally wrong with your approach to trading and I'm not sure this kind of event is going to help that.

[spreadbetting]

I'm sure it's possible to be a highly successful trader without even paying the standard rate PC. A style of trading that has a 55% strike rate can still generate a lot of profit but the margin may be small enough to avoid PC. Wouldn't really make any difference because he would be paying a high rate of commission.

Don't think I've ever met one, wouldn't be surprised if some successful gamblers fail to avoid it too. Only one I've heard of is the Aussie guy who's able to arb bookie bets and keep the losers on the exchange, that usually seems to be the go to method. For the majority of traders you're having to turn over £67K in wins and losses just to pick up a grand in comms at 3%.

[Derek27]

I'm sure it's possible to be a highly successful trader without even paying the standard rate PC. A style of trading that has a 55% strike rate can still generate a lot of profit but the margin may be small enough to avoid PC. Wouldn't really make any difference because he would be paying a high rate of commission.

Don't think I've ever met one, wouldn't be surprised if some successful gamblers fail to avoid it too. Only one I've heard of is the Aussie guy who's able to arb bookie bets and keep the losers on the exchange, that usually seems to be the go to method. For the majority of traders you're having to turn over £67K in wins and losses just to pick up a grand in comms at 3%.

I'm just talking mathematically rather than actually thinking of a fitting strategy. Most successful traders win most of the time and keep losses down, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a successful strategy/style of trading that results in big wins and big losses, with the wins outstripping the losses, in which case, it would be similar to gambling.

As for gamblers who back horses on the nose, I would say it's almost certain that they won't pay premium charge. The last year that I was betting I think I made a 13% profit on turnover, which is nowhere near enough for PC. Even a phenomenal 50% profit may not be enough to pay PC, unless you're backing 1-2 shots and they all win.

[Trader Pat]

Only one I've heard of is the Aussie guy who's able to arb bookie bets and keep the losers on the exchange, that usually seems to be the go to method.

I hope you don't actually believe that SB

[spreadbetting]

I don't think he's the only one who's said hes arbed his way out of PC so it must be possible

[Trader Pat]

I don't think he's the only one who's said hes arbed his way out of PC so it must be possible

[ruthlessimon]

I guess at £150 a ticket it doesn't need to create a huge edge to pay easily for itself

I've often wondered, what's better for the market

1. A trader with no edge
2. A trader with a bad edge

The problem with 1, is that it ins't sustainable, & trader 1 has no incentive to execute with real money - long term.

Whereas, trader 2 does have an incentive. He will be correlated to other traders/educator (at times); but will be forced to leave money on the table, to trade their edge. & for those traders willing to go that little bit further, arguably there will always be an edge. This is who I believe Peter appeals to - & maybe this is the bias that keeps patterns/certain traders in the market longterm - too many people are happy with mediocrity, & generic edges

[PDC]

Outside of sports trading some of the best teachers/educators you can get (and I have experienced) are those that are not at the top of their industry. They may even be quite poor at putting things they teach into practice. Likewise some of the worse teachers/educators are those that do actually excel in their industry.

This is because teaching is a skill in its self.

Reading through the posts (and I have been guilty of this in past posts, I hold my hands up) people are saying that you can't be a good teacher if you don't excel in the industry or what could you possibly learn from them. I think it that is more the exception than the rule and in general the best teachers are actually those that don't excel in their industry.

An example of one from financial markets who wrote a book many will have read is Mark Douglas, author of Trading in the zone a failed trader but who was respected by many highly successful traders as a person from whom they could learn. You could say he didn't pay the PC but still the higher rate PC payers went to him to learn and improve, they didn't think, well he is a failed trader so what could we possibly learn about trading from him.

"I started trading in 1978. At the time, I was managing a commercial casualty insurance agency in the suburbs of Detroit, Michigan. I had a very successful career and thought I could easily transfer that success into trading. Unfortunately, I found that was not the case. By 1981, I was thoroughly disgusted with my inability to trade effectively while holding another job, so I moved to Chicago and got a job as a broker with Merrill Lynch at the Chicago Board of Trade. How did I do? Well, within nine months of moving to Chicago, I lost nearly everything I owned."

[stueytrader]

Outside of sports trading some of the best teachers/educators you can get (and I have experienced) are those that are not at the top of their industry. They may even be quite poor at putting things they teach into practice. Likewise some of the worse teachers/educators are those that do actually excel in their industry.

This is because teaching is a skill in its self.

Reading through the posts (and I have been guilty of this in past posts, I hold my hands up) people are saying that you can't be a good teacher if you don't excel in the industry or what could you possibly learn from them. I think it that is more the exception than the rule and in general the best teachers are actually those that don't excel in their industry.

An example of one from financial markets who wrote a book many will have read is Mark Douglas, author of Trading in the zone a failed trader but who was respected by many highly successful traders as a person from whom they could learn. You could say he didn't pay the PC but still the higher rate PC payers went to him to learn and improve, they didn't think, well he is a failed trader so what could we possibly learn about trading from him.

"I started trading in 1978. At the time, I was managing a commercial casualty insurance agency in the suburbs of Detroit, Michigan. I had a very successful career and thought I could easily transfer that success into trading. Unfortunately, I found that was not the case. By 1981, I was thoroughly disgusted with my inability to trade effectively while holding another job, so I moved to Chicago and got a job as a broker with Merrill Lynch at the Chicago Board of Trade. How did I do? Well, within nine months of moving to Chicago, I lost nearly everything I owned."

That's a very good point and example. I think I could probably teach someone else to trade better than I can trade myself (helps that part of my other work is basically education). I think I've mentioned before about CB posting about being pretty poor at trading too at points in time.
We learn a lot by making mistakes but it's cheaper to watch or read about other people making the mistakes for us, wish I had initially with betting and trading, would have been a lot cheaper.

[spreadbetting]

At the end of the day people are free to spend their money as they choose. £150 for a training day isn't much and I'm sure a few may have learnt something worthwhile whereas most may learn a lot more socialising with other traders at the bar . Most traders rarely see the light of day, let alone the inside of a bar, so who knows what goodies get revealed after a few shandies.

[LinusP]

I think we need to organise a BA meet-up, doesn’t have to be official...

[Euler]

I was going to suggest the same thing.

[ShaunWhite]

I think we need to organise a BA meet-up, doesn’t have to be official...

It's a pity BA is located where it is for most of us, although by trader population density Southampton does seem to be the Mecca. Perhaps I need to start an Independant Group with a more (geographically) centrist bias.

[Euler]

TBH, I don't have a problem at all with people teaching, after all, you do need teachers for all aspects of life. It's just you need them to be open and honest about their ability and what they can teach you. I've taken tuition from a golf pro before, but he never won a tournament but was obviously better ability than me, but I was more than happy with that. But if I wanted to go pro I'd have to choose somebody different, at least I'd have a benchmark. Retired pro's would be fine as well, a whole wealth of experiance and again some pedigree.

Curiously, I've never read Mark Douglas stuff for that exact reason. I'd prefer to learn from somebody that started from nought and went on a journey to something special because that would tell you so much about not only how to do it, but how to get there. Doing something is one thing sustaining that success over a long period of time is really special. That's more or less the reason I got hooked into Buffett and flew all the way to Omaha to meet him.