Mike Baghdady - should I take a course or not?

[cymail]

1. So you'd take my word for it if I said I was world forex champion? There's no proof but you can just take my word for it. Where's the video where he makes 300% and why is it on a demo account and not real money? Does he have too much money already?

2. I'm sure some people do use such tactics to avoid paying court fines.

3. You intimate that he lied under oath to a court. I'd like to hear him use that as an excuse.

4. He lost 90k trading with the broker so indeed they would have an idea of his trading ability.

I'm sure you are pulling my leg. But assuming you are serious...

1. The only way you could tell someone's claim was 100% genuine is if you saw their audited accounts. As far as I'm aware no 'big' successful trader ever opened his audited accounts to public scrutiny. So unfortunately, for 'big' successful traders, we only have their apparent 'big'ness and their word to go by.

2. Indeed I'm sure some do.

3. Lying is not necessary at all. Embellishing the truth, within the law of course, is sufficient. And rarely is that even necessary. It is a well known fact that most cases are won by the lawyer with the shiniest shoes.

4. No man wins all the time, and no man, unless they don't mind being Corzined, would keep much more than necessary on their trading account. And when a big trader is caught on the wrong side of an announcement, well of course big things will happen...

 

[The Leopard]

Hello Cymail,

Just out of interest, why has it taken you 5 and a half years to make your first post?

I'm sure you are pulling my leg. But assuming you are serious...

1. The only way you could tell someone's claim was 100% genuine is if you saw their audited accounts. As far as I'm aware no 'big' successful trader ever opened his audited accounts to public scrutiny. So unfortunately, for 'big' successful traders, we only have their apparent 'big'ness and their word to go by.

2. Indeed I'm sure some do.

3. Lying is not necessary at all. Embellishing the truth, within the law of course, is sufficient. And rarely is that even necessary. It is a well known fact that most cases are won by the lawyer with the shiniest shoes.

4. No man wins all the time, and no man, unless they don't mind being Corzined, would keep much more than necessary on their trading account. And when a big trader is caught on the wrong side of an announcement, well of course big things will happen...

 

[Bint_Crusher]

We can work out a price, I'm sure.

Picture and terms please.

 

[Club]

cymail does have a point.

You guys go hell bent trying to persuade all to not take a training course. You spend countless hours researching, digging and pointing out lies and claims. Its all fantastic work and appreciated to help those newer traders...BUT.

You then spend the next 10,000 posts talking complete crap and HIDING all the information. No newcomer to the website is going to sit and read and "understand" the entire thread. They see you all taking the mickey, having fun, doing stupid faces etc. Then they get bored and go and hand Baghdady 10k because they couldn't filter all the good stuff from the bad.

If you are going to try and help people, at least do it in a fashion that lets people see it. Otherwise your just wasting your time.

 

[wackypete2]

cymail does have a point.

You guys go hell bent trying to persuade all to not take a training course. You spend countless hours researching, digging and pointing out lies and claims. Its all fantastic work and appreciated to help those newer traders...BUT.

You then spend the next 10,000 posts talking complete crap and HIDING all the information. No newcomer to the website is going to sit and read and "understand" the entire thread. They see you all taking the mickey, having fun, doing stupid faces etc. Then they get bored and go and hand Baghdady 10k because they couldn't filter all the good stuff from the bad.

If you are going to try and help people, at least do it in a fashion that lets people see it. Otherwise your just wasting your time.

Seriously? So it's everyone else's fault that some lazy b@stard hands over $10,000 because he cant be bothered to filter out the good from the bad? Due diligence takes a bit of effort. If you can't do that then good luck, but don't cry when your money is gone.

Peter

 

[pboyles]

cymail does have a point.

You guys go hell bent trying to persuade all to not take a training course. You spend countless hours researching, digging and pointing out lies and claims. Its all fantastic work and appreciated to help those newer traders...BUT.

You then spend the next 10,000 posts talking complete crap and HIDING all the information. No newcomer to the website is going to sit and read and "understand" the entire thread. They see you all taking the mickey, having fun, doing stupid faces etc. Then they get bored and go and hand Baghdady 10k because they couldn't filter all the good stuff from the bad.

If you are going to try and help people, at least do it in a fashion that lets people see it. Otherwise your just wasting your time.

It was about a year and a half ago but everything kept getting deleted, that's why quite a few threads don't make any sense.

 

[pboyles]

Oh well, that's three more posts they'll have to read.

 

[Club]

Seriously? So it's everyone else's fault that some lazy b@stard hands over $10,000 because he cant be bothered to filter out the good from the bad? Due diligence takes a bit of effort. If you can't do that then good luck, but don't cry when your money is gone.

Peter

Not my money.

The people that can't be bothered to filter out are the people that the vendors are trying to attract, the people that you guys are apparently trying to help. :clap:

 

[wackypete2]

Not my money.

The people that can't be bothered to filter out are the people that the vendors are trying to attract, the people that you guys are apparently trying to help. :clap:

Yes, I understood that. Poor wording on my part.

Peter

 

[Bint_Crusher]

It has to be openly admitted that T2W policy is working on a hidden agenda. 50 of the pages at least in this thread contain venomous vile comments about a person who has a reputation amongst REAL traders and I am sure if he could track down the actual perpetrators they could be held in court.
On the other side I have simply tried to take the other side of the argument and support Mr Mike Baghdady and interjecting some humour whilst doing so and most of my posts get pulled.
Does anybody really thing what you say on here about a company is going to impact significantly? If that is the case then it must be assumed that the majority of people are gormless enough to risk their money without due dilligence.
The vile and venomous lies endorsed by this forum surely must tell a story. The P((***** of T&& is to ****** visiting M$$$$$$$ from T^^^^^^ O£££££ @ The term £** $$$$.

Hello hello, this post is still here after 2 minutes
Hello HELLO this post is still here after a full HOUR
HELLO HELLO, 3 FULL HOURS. Fun police must have taken the day off.

 

[pipsplease]

Club - you have a point and its time to get back to what this is really about.
Mike Baghdady and Training Traders!

IS THIS FRAUD ?????????

On last months event calender on the Training Traders website there is an event listed on the 5th and 6th of February showing a "Waiting List". When you expand this entry you will find that the "Waiting List" is for a "Price Behaviour Trading Strategy Course".
This gives the impression that Training Traders is busy enrolling students onto a very popular course does it not? This entry has appeared every month for at least the last 6 months giving the impression to prospective students that this is a really busy and successful training company.

Fact. There is no such course and their never has been such a course. There has never been a waiting list. So does this represent an acceptable marketing approach or is it fraudulant??

 

[Digbyarbuthnot]

Club - you have a point and its time to get back to what this is really about.
Mike Baghdady and Training Traders!

IS THIS FRAUD ?????????

On last months event calender on the Training Traders website there is an event listed on the 5th and 6th of February showing a "Waiting List". When you expand this entry you will find that the "Waiting List" is for a "Price Behaviour Trading Strategy Course".
This gives the impression that Training Traders is busy enrolling students onto a very popular course does it not? This entry has appeared every month for at least the last 6 months giving the impression to prospective students that this is a really busy and successful training company.

Fact. There is no such course and their never has been such a course. There has never been a waiting list. So does this represent an acceptable marketing approach or is it fraudulant??

I wonder how much does he charges for these non-existent courses?

So he runs non-existent courses to go with his non-existent 'World Champion Trader' title.....

 

[timsk]

It has to be openly admitted that T2W policy is working on a hidden agenda. . . . The vile and venomous lies endorsed by this forum surely must tell a story.

B_C,
The reason your posts are removed is pure and simple: they are flagrant breach of T2W site guidelines. Abusive and offensive comments are just that; cloaking them in so called 'humour' doesn't make them any more acceptable. As for T2W having a hidden agenda - that's utter codswallop. If it did, there's no way I'd be on the staff. And yes, if there was a hidden agenda - I'd know about it. As for "vile and venomous lies" - most of them come from members like you and are most definitely not endorsed by admin', staff or moderators. Period.
Tim.

 

[the hare]

As for "vile and venomous lies" - most of them come from members like you and are most definitely not endorsed by admin', staff or moderators. Period.

Tim, even you must admit that there's been a change of policy in respect to Mr Baghdaddy.

I wouldnt go as far as to say that t2w are endorsing negative comments, but they are allowing material to remain, when peviously the same material was imediately deleted.

 

[cymail]

Hello Cymail,

Just out of interest, why has it taken you 5 and a half years to make your first post?

Aaah! Most observant of you sir, especially considering that you are a relative newbie. Unless, of course, your past contributions to these excellent fora have been, like mine, only of the eyeball kind. If that is so, I beg your fogiveness for daring to suggest you are new here. And in that case, I must also confess that, for many years, I too was indeed anonymous like you were - enjoying and learning about the ups and down of the financial world and the well-heeled gentlemen (and ladies) who make it all happen, through the keen lenses of T2W.

Finally, over 5 years ago, after many happily anonymous years, I convinced myself that I was ready to become a full fledged member, with all the consequent priviledges of being able to read T2W from cover to cover like one devours a good book or dare I say a good (and free) training manual.

 

[Bint_Crusher]

I am correct in what I say, I am extremely correct in what I say, I tell neither lies nor do I intentially abuse anybody. I give guidance where required and defend my quarter with my life. I am often approached as a trading and lifestyle GURU in the most sure knowledge that the statements I post are the TRUTH the facts are judged Subjectively just like my TRADING which is surely what this site is about. I admit to having a sense of humour that more befits an Army Barrack room but hey that is where I grew up. Just please keep in mind the great and rightness of the things I say and everybody on here will all stay nice and happy, and maybe stop hounding honest men trying to make a living.

 

[timsk]

Hi the hare,
Welcome back!

I'll answer the two points you raise in reverse order if I may . . .

I wouldnt go as far as to say that t2w are endorsing negative comments, but they are allowing material to remain, when peviously the same material was imediately deleted.

I would agree with you that some posts are allowed to remain that might have been removed in the past - but this is not a result of a change in policy. At least, none that I'm aware of. As you know, we take advice from our legal team, so I can only presume that they have not advised us to remove posts that fall into this category. There could be any number of reasons for this: a general social shift in attitude regarding online content, members being more aware and 'savvy' about what they write etc. Whatever the reason, T2W is neutral and without bias - it merely provides a platform for comment and does not seek to support or oppose views of any members - except those that break the law and breach the site guidelines of course.
:cheesy:

Tim, even you must admit that there's been a change of policy in respect to Mr Baghdaddy.

Again, none that I'm aware of. That said, contrary to popular belief, the staff and mods do take on board comments made by members - on both sides of disputes such as this - and they are digested and fed back to admin'. Nothing stays the same, everything changes, T2W is no exception. So, the site evolves but, this is more a case of gradual metamorphosis over time, rather than a formal black and white policy shift overnight.
Tim.

 

[the hare]

As you know, we take advice from our legal team, so I can only presume that they have not advised us to remove posts that fall into this category..

and in what category would you classify these post as ? defamatory perhaps ?

 

[pboyles]

For the benefit of anyone who has recently joined this controversy dates back to August 2010 when the fake TV advert and the bankruptcy filing were initially exposed. The information was quite quickly deleted (more than once in fact).

The reason given was that T2W had received legal threats and that in fact Baghdady and his crew were attempting to identify the people who had exposed the information to threaten them as well. I have no doubt that this did happen, although I thought at the time that T2W perhaps caved in a bit too easily, especially in light of the seriousness of the allegations. Baghdady and his sidekicks did attempt to 'manage' the situation with hilarious results.

Fast forward a year and a half and the same information has been exposed again, plus some other information such as the bailiffs, the Turtles not being fully funded etc. On this occasion the information has been allowed to remain. Therefore something has changed, we don't know what.

I think there isn't really a policy as such, it all depends on who complains and who deals with the complaint, which actually doesn't help much but there you go. Baghdady was a T2W 'partner' at one time but I don't actually think that had a massive bearing on things, perhaps partly due to embarrassment.

 

[the hare]

For the benefit of anyone who has recently joined this controversy dates back to August 2010 when the fake TV advert and the bankruptcy filing were initially exposed. The information was quite quickly deleted (more than once in fact).

.....

Fast forward a year and a half and the same information has been exposed again, plus some other information such as the bailiffs, the Turtles not being fully funded etc. On this occasion the information has been allowed to remain. Therefore something has changed, we don't know what..

Tim assures us nothing has changed, and I have no cause to either disbelieve him, or to believe him.

I tend to favour an evidence based approach (like wot i do when trading) I would suggest starting a thread slagging off one of the many other vendors who previously could not be be named and shamed, and see how thats handled.

If there's been a general shift in moderation policy, or any of the other reasons Tim provided, then the thread should remain, if the threads pulled, or posts deleted, then its a reasonable indication that the rules are being applied selectively.

It may of course be an indication of other things, such as some vendors taking a more agressive stance at reputation management, but I'm sure we could design a suitable experiment to get to the bottom of this once and for all.

Whilst I more than welcome the lulz this issue provides, I am genuinely interested in knowing why t2w would stand by and allow a bunch of annonymous forum members potentially damage the reputations and carears of a group of possibly innocent people. Both current and potential advertisers must be aware of whats happening, and in an industry where exaggerated claims are commonplace, its hardly reassuring, who's going to be singled our for a mauling from the mob next ?

I've discussed the imortance of perception with Tim on numerous occassions, and we are unlikely to agree, but the fact that this thread hasnt been heavily edited, or removed from public view whilst the accusations are reviewed, does send out a very clear signal. Its not an endorsement, but its a signal.

Compare the way the accusations in this thread are allowed to stay, with the accusations a few weeks ago that a vendor had double charged a credit card. In that case the accusations where almost certainly unsubstantiated, and the thread was initially removed from public view, edited, and IIRC, completely removed (which was the right thing to do)

I think I'm correct in stating that the vendor accused of double charging a credit card runs his business as a sideline, selling a niche software component to a small market, and isnt 100% reliant on income from that business. if the worst came to the worst and his reputation had been totally detroyed, I'm sure he'd survive.

If the details provided to the court are correct, Mr B is relient on income from his training business (he's not employed by anyone in a full time capacity, nor does he trade). A number of others are also relient on this buiness for their livelihoods, and the damage that these accuations could cause could be serious.

There has to be a very good reason why t2w are showing absolutely no concern for the damage that these allegations are causing, particularly when being made against a company with a history of threatening litgation.

intriguing isnt it