Trading RAW

[scose-no-doubt]

No such thing as bad publicity. That's why I don't get involved any more.

 

[trader_dante]

I'm sure every vendor would prefer that there was zero scrutiny.

I don't agree. They love the scrutiny. It's free marketing.

What they would prefer is that none of their actual customers come on and say anything bad.

The bottom line is that all any of you have to do is prove you are profitable traders and there would be no need for further discussion.

There would always be need for further discussion. If you think T2W is going to be satisfied with some account statements, you don't know the place, mate

The bottom line for me is that all anyone has to do to prove they are NOT profitable traders is actually sign up and see their trading for youself...

To date has a single vendor done that? If they did I didnt see it.

Many have done this and I'm not sure it still proved anything.

 

[pboyles]

If you think T2W is going to be satisfied with some account statements, you don't know the place, mate

.

Which is of course the perfect excuse not to.

 

[pboyles]

I don't agree. They love the scrutiny. It's free marketing. .

Which is why several have threatened T2W with legal action and forced them to delete posts or entire threads, because they love it, right.

 

[trader_dante]

Which is why several have threatened T2W with legal action and forced them to delete posts or entire threads, because they love it, right.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't keep up with everything on the site as much as I used too) but I thought those posts were from actual customers. E.g. The whole Davie Robertson thing was people that had actually signed up to his services. That's most definetly what they don't want. Actual paying customers saying its a scam is terrible for them because they have been on the inside and had first hand experience of the practices. But I can't imagine anyone is going to care about a bunch of people saying "he doesn't post his record, I reckon he must be a scam".

 

[DionysusToast]

First of all - there's nothing selfless about this - it's pure lulz. It's fun outing scammers.

There's a guy called Nick Elliot on here who's a front for a website that is attempting a viral marketing campaign. I would wager this has backfired on them. The dimwit claimed to have a blog that we found was owned by the company he worked for. He still persists and it's even more lulzy as his employer has obviously instructed him to be nice, regardless of what's thrown at him. I guess commission only jobs aren't going to attract top tier, are they ?

TradingRAW have stepped up to the plate somewhat here - so credit where it's due. On other threads he's just come out with a bunch of generic stuff so there's no way from that to ascertain if he's for real or not from that. On the other hand it is PAINFULLY obvious that Nicky boy is out of his depth.

You haven't really stepped up to the plate in terms of your own abilities, yet you are a vendor. you get a fairly easy ride here though.

If TradingRAW turns out to be real, then good luck to him. If not, he will eventually leave with his tail between his legs.

 

[trader_dante]

There's a guy called Nick Elliot on here who's a front for a website that is attempting a viral marketing campaign. I would wager this has backfired on them. The dimwit claimed to have a blog that we found was owned by the company he worked for. He still persists and it's even more lulzy as his employer has obviously instructed him to be nice, regardless of what's thrown at him. I guess commission only jobs aren't going to attract top tier, are they ?

To be fair, I saw this and it was some good detective work. But I think that's useful information for everyone. That stops people getting potentially scammed by the "blog" because they can see it is an "advert" of sorts from the company itself. I just think there are a lot of other lulzy posts that might not be so beneficial. Not so much from you just in general.

 

[MrGecko]

As for MrGecko's comment on post #44 where he suspects that TradingRAW may stop me out of any positions and therefore, bias my review, I can assure you this will not be the case for the following two reasons

Good on you Amit for agreeing to do the review.

My point about you being stopped out of your positions was a little tongue-in-cheek. What I mean to be saying is that, as you already daytrade US stocks, if tradingRAW suggests techniques or opinions that are in contrast to your own, your review may be skewed in a particular direction.

Lets not get our hopes up here - there will always be a risk of bias when anyone is doing a review. You can't mitigate it, so it is futile looking for the perfect candidate.

However, I do believe that a better review (that is, less chance of being biased) would come from someone who did not have experience of day trading US stocks, as they will have fewer pre-conceptions about what is " good" and what is " bad" practice in this market. Additionally, I think it would be better to have someone who is more likely to pay for the service do the review. Of course you understand this is not a slight against you personally, Amit.

Anyway, well done to tradingRAW for offering someone a free trial, well done to Amit for agreeing to do the review, and, most importantly, well done to Me for suggesting it in the first place.

 

[barjon]

................If anything, people trying to expose others often do more harm than good. Think about that attack on J16 recently. It was brutal. I thought that was going to be the end of him. Instead, his membership went through the roof as people see all the comments surrounding him and actually check out his stuff in the first place when they may never have been aware of it...........

It's an interesting point. Whilst I think that people are often too quick to shout "SCAM" without anything of real substance to back it up, I also think that the increased traffic to the suspect outfit (and that is undoubtedly the case) is a price worth paying for the evidenced exposure of scammers.

jon

 

[timsk]

However, I do believe that a better review (that is, less chance of being biased) would come from someone who did not have experience of day trading US stocks, as they will have fewer pre-conceptions about what is " good" and what is " bad" practice in this market.

Amit is our man in play and, although the comments by MrG are fair enough, I'm sure Amit will offer a more balanced and objective view of tradingRAW's services than has been provided by the 2 existing reviews. I take the point about experience too but, at the end of the day, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. If the tradingRAW content is mere flowery puff 'n fluff - Amit will see through that - whereas a newbie who doesn't know their bid from their ask might not. Anyway, as everyone is happy with Amit - let's just wait and see what he has to say.

No pressure Amit - take your time. And thank you MrG for your constructive posts.

Tim.

 

[pboyles]

Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't keep up with everything on the site as much as I used too) but I thought those posts were from actual customers. E.g. The whole Davie Robertson thing was people that had actually signed up to his services. That's most definetly what they don't want. Actual paying customers saying its a scam is terrible for them because they have been on the inside and had first hand experience of the practices. But I can't imagine anyone is going to care about a bunch of people saying "he doesn't post his record, I reckon he must be a scam".

In the case of LTG aka Live Trader Global it was all customers who were saying it was a rip off, basically they were saying that LTG was publishing false results and the true picture was a loss for the year. Also in the case of Secker it was primarily people who had been on his course saying they were losing money and it wasnt worth it etc.

Baghdady was slightly different, I remember one customer commenting about his experience but it was mainly about the false advertising and how he was caught out. Basically he had his staff pretend to be trading professionals on a TV advert and he claimed to be world champion. The thread was disproving his false claims and it also mentioned that he had filed for bankruptcy in the US.

In all three cases there were threats of legal action and entire threads plus a lot of subsequent posts were deleted, though most of the information has popped up again elsewhere. In some cases there have been subsequent threats of legal action to get the new posts or threads removed, I believed LTG has had 2 or 3 threads removed, Baghdady one thread and 30 other posts, Secker I dont know as I wasnt really paying much attention.

Clearly the information, or should I say the truth, was hurting them hence the threats. In these three cases it was way much more than somebody just saying they were a scam with no real evidence.

 

[scose-no-doubt]

So why would Amit be more balanced than the rest of us? Is he selling his soul for 1/2 price spread from your partners or something 'cos I'm letting you know now I'll talk anyone up if the consideration is right.

 

[trader_dante]

So why would Amit be more balanced than the rest of us? Is he selling his soul for 1/2 price spread from your partners or something 'cos I'm letting you know now I'll talk anyone up if the consideration is right.

Bruv, you talk me up in Jan and I will teach you how to do the windmill

 

[neil]

Bruv, you talk me up in Jan and I will teach you how to do the windmill

Dante is the man:clap:

 

[wackypete2]

Cheers to MrG and Amit. I hope this turns out well for everyone involved.

Peter

 

[tradingRAW]

Cheers to MrG and Amit. I hope this turns out well for everyone involved.

Peter

t2w representative visited my site today...hopefully we can put this behind us and be friends.

 

[tradingRAW]

It's an interesting point. Whilst I think that people are often too quick to shout "SCAM" without anything of real substance to back it up, I also think that the increased traffic to the suspect outfit (and that is undoubtedly the case) is a price worth paying for the evidenced exposure of scammers.

jon

Hello i'm taking sometime to go through this thread as I wasn't able to thoroughly read through all posts.

I agree to some of the comments but...the market will decide. Scammers don't last long and negative traffic doesn't yield any monetary return, what it does is cast doubts to the vendor's creditability. All it takes is one member to voice their bad experience and the scam is done. But shouting out scam to quickly can be an insult to everyone's intelligence. I think people are much more smarter and is capable of due diligence.

 

[tradingRAW]

I appreciate that there seem to be a few people, yourself included, that have taken up the mantle of "T2W Vigilante" in a selfless attempt to expose all scammers.

My personal opinion, is that this is a rather futile exercise.

I'm sure I will come under fire for saying that, specifically because I'm a vendor myself but it's what I believe.

If anything, people trying to expose others often do more harm than good. Think about that attack on J16 recently. It was brutal. I thought that was going to be the end of him. Instead, his membership went through the roof as people see all the comments surrounding him and actually check out his stuff in the first place when they may never have been aware of it.

End of the day, if someone wants to run a scam, they are going to run a scam and get away with it most of the time. Come on, how hard is it to do?

Someones got a paypal invoice to show they paid? How hard is that to achieve? Get a mate to join your service as "proof" and then refund him in cash later on.

I don't know anything about Trading Raw but I bet Dollars to doughnuts he's not going to come out of this looking bad. He's got his name mentioned in almost every single post and now he has a respected T2W member doing a review.

That's great but come on - you think they are going to be negative? If Amit writes a bad review of Trading Raw I will eat a plate of sh*t. All the guy has to do is come on, talk some generic BS and what can Amit say? "Good analysis...it all seemed to be put together coherently" etc. Even if the mentor calls out a load of losers - so what? We all have bad days or even weeks sometimes. As long as he doesn't f*ck up bad which, trust me, he won't when he knows someone is watching, he will be fine. When there are foul practices going on in restaurants etc, you think they are discovered when the restaurant knows the inspectors are in? I don't think so. They clear all the dead cockroaches away. That stuff is discovered by the surprise attack.

I think its a good idea to make people aware of the tell tale signs of fraudulent marketing (and the main one is positive reviews as far as I am concerned, for the reasons stated in my last post) but that's not a sign someone is a scammer. That's a sign that someone is trying to engage in some marketing to get more customers. The reason they might be doing this could be seen as circumspect but it's not an outright sign of a scam to me.

End of the day, the best way to expose a scammer is to actually sign up to their services for a month minimum - not as a reviewer but as a customer - and then write about your experiences.

The guy traded your money and lost it? SCAM

The guy marketed a 90% win rate but had 100 tick stops, 2 tick targets? SCAM

This is factual, helpful information. Much more so than "He's a mentor he must be a scammer" or "he doesn't post a record, he must be a scammer" or "someone recommended him with one post to their name, he must be a scammer".

Just my 2 cents.

but was J16 a scam? I doubt he will be in business for long if it is, because he will be exposed by all those memberships he got.

 

[tradingRAW]

Hi pboyles,
Yes, I'm aware of it's flaws.
I added a T2W Staff edit to pavlov's review saying that it might be bogus. I removed it upon receipt of his PayPal receipt. I'm not sure what else we can - or should - do? In this day and age, I think most members are aware that reviews may not be genuine and take all of them with a pinch of salt. All I can say is that if I was a vendor and wanted customers to review my product/service - I'd want the reviews to at least appear genuine. And the best way to do that is stick to the guidelines linked in my earlier post. Clearly, superficially at least, both these reviews appear to be bogus. If I was the owner of TradingRAW - that would worry me - especially if I'm a genuine person with a good quality product or service and both reviewers are genuine customers. If I'm not - and they're not - then I wouldn't care less.
Tim.

"Clearly, superficially at least, both these reviews appear to be bogus. If I was the owner of TradingRAW - that would worry me - "

This comment is an interpretation, bogus or not isn't the issue, the issue is an assumption drawn without any due diligence. What you are saying is, these reviewers should edit it to make it more real under your assumption that they made bogus reviews? What if they are real? Editing to make it look real would be bogus no? That would be smart scamming.

 

[tradingRAW]

Good on you, all people here are asking for is a bit of honesty.

Its always been the case but a rush to judgement kind of threw thing out of control. Hopefully amit1986 can summit a review soon.