If it was as good as portrayed, everyone would use it
osho67 said:
I have been reading about this system and get the first impression that it is quite a good system. But then if it was that good as has been portrayed , lots of people would have been using it. I did a search on T2W but did not find many posts on this system
If you have used this system or know anything about this system , please post your comments. It seems I am missing something about this system. I have read positive comments but I would like to read negative comments as well. How to get the total picture?
Responses would be much appreciated. Thanks
I see this said a lot but because of the essential nature of man, its just not true. Below is a repirnt of a post I made months ago at clearstation.com
From: mr_cassandra Replying To : jstri (post 90368) May 22 2005 11:00AM
Title: Partial reprint and additional thoughts
Here's a bit of what I've posted before and some other perspectives as to why 'nothing' would ever become so widespread
I'd add a few things from personal experience as to why distribution of an investing system would 'not' change the face of the investing world (in short because of the human condition).
One big reason it would become that widespread is money. Don't know what Rydexs direct minimum is but Brownco is $5,000.
How many people did you just rule out by this starting minimum?
One reason is seen a lot on this board as various systems are discussed. It would strongly appear from many posters comments that they are looking for a system/method which never has a loss or worse, 2-3 losses in a row.
How many MORE people have you now ruled out because they expected NO losers?
Then theres a corollary to the above;… about drawdowns: even if you delivered a system which had 100% winners, many people can’t tolerate a drawdown during the trade, before its completed.
How many more people did this drawdown problem just eliminate on top of the two prior concerns?
There is an additional corollary: suppose the guy had $5,000 (or whatever) and is all convinced to go, then the first trade is that minus 6% loss shown in the spreadsheet. Be honest and
consider how many normal people that might discourage.
Then you come to another and perhaps the last and hardest problem, even for me, ‘
sticking with something’ long enough for it to work. This cross ties with all the above issues and really they all relate to instant gratification. It probably also cross-ties to pokersams statistics of only 8% of traders make money, those 8% probably are dogmatic about sticking to their rules.
Another issue is just greed, plain and simple. Even if they endure all the above,
many people will always be looking for a 'better' holy grail system. Take for example the widespread FOREX' systems all over the internet. So, you will have X amount of people who fade away and go chase that other grail.
In addition, no matter how much documentation you present here, X amount of people will still believe that atrocious euphemism 'You can't TIME the market'; which is widely disseminated by financial advisors, amongst others. Adherents of this line of thinking won't even try, though I suspect if you showed up in a Porsche in a year, they might then.
One last reason is second guessing and/or raw fear.
When the market is booming and everyones all ecstatic over the bull market, many people would 2nd guess the sell signals. When things are excessively gloomy, they'd be scared to buy. Then, missing signals, they'd get discouraged.
So with out meaning to be a wise-guy, and with respect for the various systems and ‘proprietary’ indicators discussed here; unless you have a system which delivers cash daily to peoples bank accounts with zero work at all, I totally disagree that revealing a concept would cause mass usage and invalidate its underlying functionality.
When you take all the above issues and rule out more and more people who would drop by the wayside, you just don't have enough people left to make a tidal change.
