VS truths

ben_catt

Member
Messages
71
Likes
1
Just came across this whilst surfing and was very surprised at the content:

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=aTpxIpwJaLQY&refer=uk

Just a couple of things sprung to my attention:

The Advert Channel, owned by former stock trader Vince Stanzione........

Former? Surely Vince isn't just selling manuals about trading. What happened to the £400 a day?

``In the U.K. people like watching advertising, on the whole,'' said Stanzione, who also owns part of Betonmarkets.com........

Interesting. In this manual and seminars he repeated states he makes no commission from recommending any particular sites or software packages but here it says he owns part of Betonmarkets.

I suppose that is why he is constantly harping on about them. Unbelieveable....
 
ben_catt said:
Interesting. In this manual and seminars he repeated states he makes no commission from recommending any particular sites or software packages but here it says he owns part of Betonmarkets. I suppose that is why he is constantly harping on about them. Unbelieveable....

Could both be true, you know. He might make no commission from recommending any particular sites or software packages, and also be a shareholder in Regent Markets, which owns BetOnMarkets.
 
I have been told that if you click through to betonmarkets from vince's website, then it sends through his affiliate identifier. Why would this be needed if he wasn't taking a cut??
 
Roberto said:
Could both be true, you know. He might make no commission from recommending any particular sites or software packages, and also be a shareholder in Regent Markets, which owns BetOnMarkets.

But that isn't what he portrays to his seminar attendees.

Believe me, I have watched his 9+ hour seminar video set and he spends a ridiculous amount of time showing people how to place bets on betonmarkets.co.uk. There's no need to do this, a monkey could work it out.

People pay ridiculous amounts of money to this man and he then has the gall to force them to watch him play about with his site for an hour. Very dishonest, especially when he never mentions he is a part owner....
 
Well done Vince

Another gap in the market.Well done Vince .Power to your elbow mate.
So he is an affiliate,aren't we all we all in one form or another and how many
attendees actually sign up through his referrer number on the date or through his website?
More bitter and twisted people it seems to me.Back to the old vitriol and there was me thinking that character assassination was "demodée"
The fact that he brodcasts his affiliation to BOM and that his affiliate number is there for all to see
doesn't give me the same impression.
More sour grapes?How much time do you all spend digging the dirt?Have you ever thought that your constant bleating could be counterproductive?
Yeah!he's a bad lad that Vince.Now how long has he been making a success of his life for I wonder?

Bonne soirée
Frog

Simple comme bonjour :devilish:
 
Good point, comme toujours, Monsieur Froggie.

I also wonder when the video was made, and how long VS has been on the shareholders' register of Regent Markets. I don't actually wonder or indeed care enough to try to look it up at Companies House, I admit, but it might occur to someone who believes that VS is honest and wouldn't mislead anyone that his situation may have changed recently. I realise that such sentiments sometimes seem to be in rather short supply in some quarters, but there it is anyway, as a very obvious "possible explanation" for those who for some reason felt in need of one.
 
Former Trader?

I believe the "former" refers to VS actualling trading in the stockmarket for an employer,before seeing the light and making a huge success on the back of his observations.Just working for yourself and taking on your responsibilities says something in any case.
There is a very good article about the VS' rags to riches story in a mid to late '90s Guardian article,this may help explain the many facets of the VS trading empire.

Encore bonne soirée
Frog

Toujours simple :devilish:
 
Fair points well made.

I'm not talking about his affiliate deal, I'm talking about him actually owning an unknown quantity of betonmarkets.

Surely this should be openly expressed in literature such as the one where he was selling a fixed odds betting service where he told you the bets? As I remember it was £100+ a month and constantly lost money for all subscribers. Did Vince own part of betonmarkets at this time? Maybe... Would ill-informed bet suggestions which made everyone lose constantly make him and his company more money? Something to perhaps think about.
 
ben_catt said:
Fair points well made.

I'm not talking about his affiliate deal, I'm talking about him actually owning an unknown quantity of betonmarkets.

Surely this should be openly expressed in literature such as the one where he was selling a fixed odds betting service where he told you the bets? As I remember it was £100+ a month and constantly lost money for all subscribers. Did Vince own part of betonmarkets at this time? Maybe... Would ill-informed bet suggestions which made everyone lose constantly make him and his company more money? Something to perhaps think about.

The only "guaranteed" way to win at gambling is by owning the casino !!

The only "guaranteed" way to win at stock-trading, is by being a broker, you get commissions whether your clients win or lose ( where are all the customers yachts etc )

You could argue that owning an interest in betonmarkets, VS was shrewdly ensuring that he benefitted from the 80% of players who lose. The 20% of winners are irrlevant.

What diff does this make ??
If you are a successful player, it shouldnt matter.
Only losers will be suspicious - it is one more excuse they can use for their losses, rather than tackling their failings as traders.

Nobody is forcing these people to place bets.
I take it they are all over 18 !! ;)
 
trendie said:
You could argue that owning an interest in betonmarkets, VS was shrewdly ensuring that he benefitted from the 80% of players who lose. The 20% of winners are irrlevant.

What diff does this make ??

The point I was trying to make was that VS was selling a system through which he gave bets which his customers placed on a site that he part-owns. And guess what, funnily enough, most bets he sold to his customers lost. Surely there is some law against that.....

Looks like, from the replies I had I am in the wrong so I'm gonna leave it there. Thanks for your replies,

Ben
 
frog said:
Have you ever thought that your constant bleating could be counterproductive?
:

In a word Frog, NO :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy:


PS. Glad to see the VSSS (Vince Stanzione Suck Squad) is still with us.

PPS. Did you all make £480 today?
 
The Advert Channel is nothing more than Chav TV competing with so many other Chav channels.

I'll make a sportsman bet with anyone, both the TV channel and betonmarkets won't be around in a years time. Too much established competition in both areas.
 
Benn

Thanks for your comments.
Though I fully appreciate and understand your take on vested interests and misrepresentation and infact would not condone these myself,I do believe that Roberto made a valid point about the the timing of the tape and it's relevance to current VS interests.
As usual and as previously stated I am only trying to differentiate between fact , hysteria and puerile persecution from certain parties.

Which brings me directly to you Anley.
As predictable as your English climate and I'm afraid as usual you're probably wrong.The more you bleat the more you perpetuate the name.Think if Vs had never been mentioned on these boards how much exposure he would have missed out on.
Lastly your penultimate post says rather a lot about you don't you think? :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

Bonne journée à tous
Frog

Simple comme bonjour :devilish:
 
anley said:
In a word Frog, NO :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy:


PS. Glad to see the VSSS (Vince Stanzione Suck Squad) is still with us.

PPS. Did you all make £480 today?


No, 765€ thankyou.
:devilish:
 
Top