Lord Anton Kreil

[EnlightenedJoe]

The majority of that training is almost certainly useless box-ticking crap done solely because HR need to have all the necessary paperwork in place to show their investors that their money is in safe hands. If you distil all the fake lip service training out of the equation, having less than a month's worth of useful material left over is not out of the question.

I thought the same. So I compressed everything I knew and tried to baby feed my elder bro with it. 4 months later he was showing severe signs of gambling. I didn't dare to ask him if he was going to lose his shirt. But I said I made a mistake and lets forget about it.

Trading is simple, yes. But not that simple.

These train you quick schemes are like the 7 minute abs. Ultimately, not too productive:

 

[foroom lluzers]

Any position not made in real time is hindsight. That is why calls is a silly endeavor.

It goes like this:
1. Make a call.
2. It wins.
3. They say make another call.
4. It loses. You are a loser.
4a. It wins. They say it was hindsight.
4b. It wins. They say photoshop.
4c. It wins. They want you to teach them and be a signal service.
4d. It wins. They want brokers and platforms.

Personally, I would never make a call because I do not know if I am helping a terrorist, a pedophile, a serial killer, or just a general all around d*ck.

Most people are extremely lazy and seem to be okay with intellectual property theft. I have a real problem with that. So I will always be happy to talk trading theory with anyone, but most people deserve poverty, and I have no desire to stand in the way of that.

missed the most important point , like access to your live accounts to verify , 3 years audited reports and a copy of your Photoshop , tell us the secret.

 

[joetroscoe]

Now we are grasping at straws. 2/40000 = 0.00005% probability. Would you like to play lotto instead. No training to do and costs you only one dollar.

Anyway, I have all the info I need. I wish you success in realising your dreams.

Personally I reckon it's a lot simpler with a call out than pro-audited accounts. Again, I have never requested a call out. So, it's not necessary.

I see you do not understand the process. All the best.

 

[joetroscoe]

I thought the same. So I compressed everything I knew and tried to baby feed my elder bro with it. 4 months later he was showing severe signs of gambling. I didn't dare to ask him if he was going to lose his shirt. But I said I made a mistake and lets forget about it.

Trading is simple, yes. But not that simple.

These train you quick schemes are like the 7 minute abs. Ultimately, not too productive:

What is funny is that 7minutes HIIT and a good diet will absolutely get you to your goal.

 

[joetroscoe]

missed the most important point , like access to your live accounts to verify , 3 years audited reports and a copy of your Photoshop , tell us the secret.

The secret is that there are no secrets. The richest traders are all men who followed a process and had a fundamental conviction.

The Big Short is a movie you should watch if you can do so in the country that you reside in.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

What is funny is that 7minutes HIIT and a good diet will absolutely get you to your goal.

I can't remember stating a goal. I am happy and content as I am. Originally, I was curious of what Anton's got. Now I am not curious.

 

[joetroscoe]

The majority of that training is almost certainly useless box-ticking crap done solely because HR need to have all the necessary paperwork in place to show their investors that their money is in safe hands. If you distil all the fake lip service training out of the equation, having less than a month's worth of useful material left over is not out of the question.

Correct. Unless you are a complete novice who has never seen a stock quote, a month of concentrated information is more than enough time to get competent.

 

[joetroscoe]

I can't remember stating a goal. I am happy and content as I am. Originally, I was curious of what Anton's got. Now I am not curious.

That's a good thing. Anton specifically states who his courses can help and who they cannot. For you it would be an absolute waste of money.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

That's a good thing. Anton specifically states who his courses can help and who they cannot. For you it would be an absolute waste of money.

I wouldn't quite say that. If he pays me, it will be totally worth it. I can give him some pointers that will help him along.

 

[foroom lluzers]

That's a good thing. Anton specifically states who his courses can help and who they cannot. For you it would be an absolute waste of money.

BS

Every trader has a comfort zone , check with proper psychologist .Is he psychic psychologist?

 

[joetroscoe]

I wouldn't quite say that. If he pays me, it will be totally worth it. I can give him some pointers that will help him along.

At least you have a sense of humor!:cheesy:

 

[joetroscoe]

BS

Every trader has a comfort zone , check with proper psychologist .Is he psychic psychologist?

Quite right you are every trader does have a comfort zone. He does have a module on psychology however. Most people are not psychologically fit to be traders as they cannot tolerate pain well. That is why there is a freebie video outlining some reasons NOT to buy the course. If you are any of those things, keep your money, you will only wind up frustrated and then try to blame the institute.

 

[foroom lluzers]

Quite right you are every trader does have a comfort zone. He does have a module on psychology however. Most people are not psychologically fit to be traders as they cannot tolerate pain well. That is why there is a freebie video outlining some reasons NOT to buy the course. If you are any of those things, keep your money, you will only wind up frustrated and then try to blame the institute.

Oh! he is refusing to take money?

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

He does have a module on psychology however.

It's going from bad to worst. This warrants deduction of another point from Anton.

Most people are not psychologically fit to be traders as they cannot tolerate pain well.

They can if they have a proper trainer. For instance, if Anton pays me for some pointers, I would tell him: if the trainee can't stand the pain, get him to reduce size.

Here's an easy to use formula on it: incompetent trainer = painful trainee

 

[foroom lluzers]

It's going from bad to worst. This warrants deduction of another point from Anton.




They can if they have a proper trainer. For instance, if Anton pays me for some pointers, I would tell him: if the trainee can't stand the pain, get him to reduce size.

Here's an easy to use formula on it: incompetent trainer = painful trainee

It is easier to pull the blind mask of " no trading psychology is involved in trading " , on all the blind noobs. The psychology module , I suspect , is equivalent to the dumb guide to psychology , as practiced by those who can't.

 

[spinola]

Anton states retail guys have an edge over institution because of their agility, so a retail trader needn't pursue institutions framework, especially when , as the ft Points out...

' 99% of actively managed US equity funds underperform '

And those are supposed to be the professional institute portfolio traders.

I guess if one wanted access to head drill former IB staff it'd be worth it , but , for small independent traders , it seems to be unnecessary if your objective is to self trade with your own money. Because , again, ' 99% of actively managed US equity funds underperform '.

These are people trading other people's money, so it looks like it actually impedes success in trading , by placing oneself in that ' institutional approach trading mindset environment '.

Having noted that, what is the institutions approach when using technical analysis , if using , to help assist trade entry into positions? Do they use TA to get in a position after the fundamentals have been proven sound etc ? I assume they try to capture value ? Or do they lean towards directional momentum, because, after all, they're still short term holders of 1-6 months ? And, because of which, may mean they're ' over-fundamentalising ' the need of said same , in their trade ideas .

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

' 99% of actively managed US equity funds underperform '

They over-perform compared to 99% of internet traders who "loose" their shirts.

Funds earn from management fees. It is not in their interest to take large risks. If they are rewarded purely on performance fees, they will "loose" their shirts just as quickly as the internet traders.

 

[barjon]

They over-perform compared to 99% of internet traders who "loose" their shirts.

Funds earn from management fees. It is not in their interest to take large risks. If they are rewarded purely on performance fees, they will "loose" their shirts just as quickly as the internet traders.

They are also a bit hog-tied by money flow. If money is coming into their fund they have to buy and if it's going out they have to sell - whether they like it or not.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

They are also a bit hog-tied by money flow. If money is coming into their fund they have to buy and if it's going out they have to sell - whether they like it or not.

Happy to take your word for it. Can't say I know precisely how they work.

But managements fees was what the trader I told you about was after.

The point of it all was, the incentive for risk taking wasn't great enough for them to take the risks. They'd be content to collect steady management fees.

 

[foroom lluzers]

They over-perform compared to 99% of internet traders who "loose" their shirts.

Funds earn from management fees. It is not in their interest to take large risks. If they are rewarded purely on performance fees, they will "loose" their shirts just as quickly as the internet traders.

You should not have taught the highly risky methods to internet traders , now you see who teaches the new traders and why they have too much testosterone with the size thing.