Forex Mentors - The Best Investment You Can Make? | Page 48 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Forex Mentors/Gurus publish your accounts records 10 replies

Success Stories--Those without Harvard Education, Aweso Mentors, or Genius Intellect. 46 replies

Are commercial trading mentors sucessful? 17 replies

Mentors & Tutors for new traders 39 replies

Attachments: Forex Mentors - The Best Investment You Can Make?
Exit Attachments

Forex Mentors - The Best Investment You Can Make?

  • #941
  • Edited 7:03am Dec 5, 2009 5:02am | Edited 7:03am
Quoting daytrading
Coscorp,

My argument is far from weak.

We are not in the 'forum' any more - we are now in the commercial section. If you buy without knowing, you belong to the category who deserve to be conned out of money.
A matter of opinion.

We are in a "Commercial Forum" section. I always do my due diligence and if I were to find find that something had been misrepresented I would be the first one to say so. In my direct experience - this isn't the case.

Quoting daytrading
If you read my previous post to Aediaz1, you would have realized that my criticism is not against an individual as such, but against a business in here that conducts itself badly.
That's not what has transpired to me. He called you a troll - you got upset - it's in the nature of things.

Quoting daytrading
here is personal - its business - please realize that and refrain from implying that I don't like someone. I don't like the business practise shown here, that's all.
If you say so - however pulling in his "Where Are You Now" (??!?) thread from the members' section gives more strength to a different picture in my opinion.

Quoting daytrading
it what you will - its nothing but a diversion from the real questions. You are taking the wrong side if you try to defend a business that is not willing to prove its legitimacy.
To whom does he "have" to prove his legitimacy? To you? - for what reason - what authority entitles you to demand that anyone for that matter do so? In my view those who chose to follow his trading activity in a private form are the ones that are entitled to stay whether he is legitimate or not. You may not like his style, what he writes, how he writes it, but in the end it's those that actually are members that have the correct information and can pass judgement on whether they got what they expected or not - no one else. Funny thing is I haven't seen any do so - even ex members have given him credit albeit his style of trading may not have suited them.

If one is not sure about becoming a member - they don't have to.

It's as simple as that.


One last thing - regarding the AH strategy -

Have I used it successfully? Yes.
Have I used it unsuccessfully? Yes.
Have I seen it being used successfully? Yes
Have I seen it fail? Yes

Is it infallible? No - and to this I don't believe I've read anywhere that anyone ever made claims to that effect.

Is it another possible tool in the box of strategies one can pull out if inclined?

Yes.


In the end, again - what it comes down to for me, is:

Have Jacko's contributions brought value to the Forum and to those that have chosen to follow his style of trading?

The answer is most definitely

Yes.

Quoting daytrading
regards
daytrading

Cheers
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #942
  • Dec 5, 2009 9:41am Dec 5, 2009 9:41am
Quoting coscorp
A matter of opinion.
Daytrading's posts are factual, with links to supporting evidence, they're not just opinion.

But when it comes to opinion you have to consider the source. Is it coming from an experienced and professional veteran of the business or from an inexperienced novice who probably couldn't differentiate between good and bad advice anyway. It's the latter who are more likely to subscribe to services like Jacko's because they simply don't have the knowledge and experience to evaluate. Daytrading is providing some extremely valuable information in order for them to reach an informed decision based on fact, not just opinion. As he quite rightly pointed out, "If you buy without knowing, you belong to the category who deserve to be conned out of money." The aim here is to enlighten those people before they buy.

As far as your opinion that Jacko's contributions brought value to the forum and to those who have chosen to follow his style of trading, there is very little evidence of that actually being true, in fact the live trading results together with the material Daytrading has posted suggest the complete opposite!

Perhaps you would like to spend more time addressing the content of DT's posts, or is your inability to do that the reason for all the smoke? Blowing smoke seems to be something which the Jacko contingent have in common!
  • #943
  • Dec 5, 2009 12:28pm Dec 5, 2009 12:28pm
Quoting pipmutt
Daytrading's posts are factual, with links to supporting evidence, they're not just opinion.
What supporting evidence? That one can't see the P/L statements therefore they don't exist? That in my view is an opinion - i.e. no one will show them in public thus they can't/do not exist - it is not "evidence"

Quoting pipmutt
But when it comes to opinion you have to consider the source. Is it coming from an experienced and professional veteran of the business or from an inexperienced novice who probably couldn't differentiate between good and bad advice anyway.
Agreed - however one should also attempt to give a little more credit to an adults' capability of discerning good from bad - though for some it may take some degree of personal experience. There are exceptions though I'll give you that.

Quoting pipmutt
It is the latter who are more likely to subscribe to services like Jacko's because they simply don't have the knowledge and experience to evaluate.
Not necessarily - I have the sensation (possibly mistaken) that your position is that any paid service is of no real use to whomever should choose to subscribe -even if the service is actually very good. Yes, there are extremely bad ones out there too it's normal. We differ on the opinion whether Jacko's is in the first or second category. To that extent, I contend that I have a little more facts to base an opinion on than you do - given, obviously, that we are all different and his style won't suit everyone.

Quoting pipmutt
Daytrading is providing some extremely valuable information in order for them to reach an informed decision based on fact, not just opinion. As he quite rightly pointed out, "If you buy without knowing, you belong to the category who deserve to be conned out of money." The aim here is to enlighten those people before they buy.
Again our opinions differ - what - unfortunately - I have seen lately are nothing more than blatant attacks on the bonafide of another member without having any evidence whatsoever to support those attacks (including implying he had directly or indirectly created false members) if not the use on occasion of old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member. Hanover had also something to say to that effect if I'm not mistaken.

On the rest I agree that one must do his best to be fully informed and follow through on due diligence - I believe I've stated that a number of times in the past.

Quoting pipmutt
As far as your opinion that Jacko's contributions brought value to the forum and to those who have chosen to follow his style of trading, there is very little evidence of that actually being true, in fact the live trading results together with the material Daytrading has posted suggest the complete opposite!
Yes, of course it is my opinion - if that wasn't clear, my apologies.

To the second part - the threads' status within the Factory and the esteem demonstrated by far more important and senior member's than myself would seem to tell a different story - again - in my opinion. I would also suggest you go and have a look at Dan UK's Journal (I believe I've cited him in the past as well) - to my knowledge he is not a member of the private group - yet he seems to be doing quite well.

Quoting pipmutt
Perhaps you would like to spend more time addressing the content of DT's posts, or is your inability to do that the reason for all the smoke? Blowing smoke seems to be something which the Jacko contingent have in common!
Which content? The "There are no public P/L statements thus it's all BS or The posting of ironic posts made 3 years ago? Or linking to a thread which had nothing to do with trading?

I'm sorry but that is all I see lately - right or wrong as it may be.


But, yet again - to each his own.


Always a pleasure.

Cheers
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #944
  • Dec 5, 2009 3:35pm Dec 5, 2009 3:35pm
Quoting coscorp





Again our opinions differ - what - unfortunately - I have seen lately are nothing more than blatant attacks on the bonafide of another member without having any evidence whatsoever to support those attacks (including implying he had directly or indirectly created false members) if not the use on occasion of old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member. Hanover had also something to say to that effect if I'm not mistaken.
Hanover said what and where?
  • #945
  • Dec 5, 2009 3:43pm Dec 5, 2009 3:43pm
Quoting coscorp

Again our opinions differ - what - unfortunately - I have seen lately are nothing more than blatant attacks on the bonafide of another member without having any evidence whatsoever to support those attacks (including implying he had directly or indirectly created false members) if not the use on occasion of old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member. Hanover had also something to say to that effect if I'm not mistaken.


Cheers
Those blatantly ironic posts you speak of are those of your mentor with 30+ years of market experience asking for someone to tell him what a pull back was because he did not know. From that statement alone it would seem pretty obvious that your learning from someone without much more experience than yourself, which is ok if you know this ahead of time and make a conscious decision to proceed ahead, but not ok if you are duped into it.
  • #946
  • Dec 5, 2009 3:53pm Dec 5, 2009 3:53pm
Quoting coscorp
What supporting evidence? That one can't see the P/L statements therefore they don't exist?
Well if someone who is selling or endorsing a product and claiming to be profitable, yet when challenged they can't produce anything to support their claims and can't post live trades, then any prospective customer should obviously bear that in mind before he hands over his cash.

Taking into account the lack of evidence (and it seems lack of some very basic market and TA experience) from the vendor and his groupies, and then taking into account the detailed and factual posts from Daytrading (complete with links and quotes), it's not too difficult for any reasonably intelligent person to reach a sensible decision.

Add in the mix the fact that this particular vendor doesn't offer a free trial or preview but demands all his fees are paid in advance with no public offer of a refund, and to be honest you'd have to be crazy to even consider it!

I'm not against paid-for services per se, but snake oil is what it is, there are plenty of people selling it and apparently plenty of people gullible enough to buy it!

If you, or anyone else, still has doubts then I strongly recommend you read Daytrading's posts to help you get a better understanding of the issues here. If you can't understand what's written then ask questions, simple.
  • #947
  • Dec 5, 2009 3:57pm Dec 5, 2009 3:57pm
Quoting billflet
Hanover said what and where?


http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...&postcount=932
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #948
  • Dec 5, 2009 4:09pm Dec 5, 2009 4:09pm
Quoting endroute
Those blatantly ironic posts you speak of are those of your mentor with 30+ years of market experience asking for someone to tell him what a pull back was because he did not know. From that statement alone it would seem pretty obvious that your learning from someone without much more experience than yourself, which is ok if you know this ahead of time and make a conscious decision to proceed ahead, but not ok if you are duped into it.
Again - ironic, in my view.
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #949
  • Dec 5, 2009 4:31pm Dec 5, 2009 4:31pm
Quoting pipmutt
Well if someone who is selling or endorsing a product and claiming to be profitable, yet when challenged they can't produce anything to support their claims and can't post live trades, then any prospective customer should obviously bear that in mind before he hands over his cash.
It's not that they cannot - they choose not to - it's a bit different

There are 6 months of live trades posted on the Daily FX forum - if they hadn't been live he would have been crucified in an instant.

Speaking in general terms yes they should - and if they feel it isn't for them or they don't feel everything pans out to their satisfaction then they should not join - simple.


Quoting pipmutt
Taking into account the lack of evidence (and it seems lack of some very basic market and TA experience) from the vendor and his groupies, and then taking into account the detailed and factual posts from Daytrading (complete with links and quotes), it's not too difficult for any reasonably intelligent person to reach a sensible decision.
I don't consider myself a groupie if that was the implication, for others I cannot speak - having said that I do happen to consider myself a reasonable intelligent person and have found that my decision has been supported by the evidence of what I have read witnessed and gained through joining and being able to watch him trade including - perhaps moreso - losing. But I don't purport for that to be valid for everyone. All I can lay testimony to is what i have directly witnessed.


Quoting pipmutt
Add in the mix the fact that this particular vendor doesn't offer a free trial or preview but demands all his fees are paid in advance with no public offer of a refund, and to be honest you'd have to be crazy to even consider it!
Then don't do so - but as I stated already I've know him to refund without any issues apart from I would presume confidentiality.

Quoting pipmutt

I'm not against paid-for services per se, but snake oil is what it is, there are plenty of people selling it and apparently plenty of people gullible enough to buy it!
Very true - however like I said we appear to differ in which category Jacko sits.

Quoting pipmutt
If you, or anyone else, still has doubts then I strongly recommend you read Daytrading's posts to help you get a better understanding of the issues here. If you can't understand what's written then ask questions, simple.
Speaking in general terms I believe I have agreed with yourself and Daytrading that there are scams in the industry - many of them. The issue in this particular instance is whether Wayne Jackson is himself a scam. In this I feel I have a very clear picture as I have had an inside view of what he does for over a year now - whereas you do not - and are basing all your assumptions on the lack of seeing something to the contrary. Again the fact that someone chooses not to disclose something does not mean it doesn't exist.

I can just imagine people standing outside Los Alamos saying that building an A Bomb was impossible (where was the evidence?) while Oppenheimer and his group were actually doing just that inside the complex.


Cheers
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #950
  • Dec 5, 2009 5:13pm Dec 5, 2009 5:13pm
Quoting coscorp
http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...&postcount=932
I can't for the life of me understand how I gave the impression in post #932 (or anywhere else) implying that somebody "had directly or indirectly created false members" or was using "old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member".

Just to reiterate: I'm not accusing anybody specifically of anything, or seeking to discredit any one service provider in particular. I was merely issuing a caution about vendors in general, based on my own experience, and on what I have been told, or have read. I believe that's in keeping with the thread title ("Forex Mentors - The Best Investment You Can Make?").
  • #951
  • Dec 5, 2009 5:25pm Dec 5, 2009 5:25pm
Quoting hanover
I can't for the life of me understand how I gave the impression in post #932 (or anywhere else) implying that somebody "had directly or indirectly created false members" or was using "old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member".

Just to reiterate: I'm not accusing anybody specifically of anything, or seeking to discredit any one service provider in particular. I was merely issuing a caution about vendors in general, based on my own experience, and on what I have been told, or have read. I believe that's in keeping with...
I apologize for not being expressing myself more clearly - what I was referring to was specifically the following

Quoting hanover
I guess it goes without saying that you've considered very carefully any possible legal ramifications.
which - to me - tied in quite aptly to the implied creation, either directly or indirectly, of false members as it may be construed as slander.

I second your warnings about vendors in general.

Again my apologies for creating any unwanted confusion.
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #952
  • Dec 5, 2009 5:26pm Dec 5, 2009 5:26pm
Why so much attention on Jacko?

Even if he is a scammer (and I’m not claiming he is), $700 a year subscription is unlikely to crucify anyone financially, and more importantly, many who subscribe seem fairly content with the service.

And those who aren’t happy with the service, well there are some valuable lessons that can come out of it for them; such as, all the information I need is free right here at FF, and it’s ultimately up to me to find my own way, no one else can do it for me.

If you can learn just these 2 things for a mere $700 dollars from a Jacko subscription then every newbie would do well to subscribe.

* * * * *

I think this thread is a storm in a tea-cup and has become a forum for individuals to exercise their creative debating skills. Because it’s just not adding up: $700, content subscribers, ………all when there are fish much bigger than Jacko out there “blatantly” ripping off traders, eg., ………..pick your bucket-shop.

If your true intention is to help you would do more good directing your energy towards them.

Peter

PS I do not subscribe to Jacko’s service
  • #953
  • Dec 5, 2009 5:26pm Dec 5, 2009 5:26pm
Quoting coscorp
....basing all your assumptions on the lack of seeing something to the contrary.....
Then you quite obviously misunderstood Daytrading's posts if you read them, they go way beyond issues like lack of any posted statements or trades.

Read them again starting around page 61 of this thread, if you still don't understand their importance and significance then ask specific questions but I think you'll find there's enough to be getting on with, and which cast serious doubts over Wayne Jackson's trading experience and the validity of some of the trading approaches he's selling.
  • #954
  • Edited 5:54pm Dec 5, 2009 5:42pm | Edited 5:54pm
Quoting pipmutt
Then you quite obviously misunderstood Daytrading's posts if you read them, they go way beyond issues like lack of any posted statements or trades.

Read them again starting around page 61 of this thread, if you still don't understand their importance and significance then ask specific questions but I think you'll find there's enough to be getting on with, and which cast serious doubts over Wayne Jackson's trading experience and the validity of some of the...
Yes Sir, If You Say So Sir!

Thank you Sir!


(sorry couldn't resist)


PeterE - bravo.


Allow me to leave you with one last thought:

Negative proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false.

Commonly in an argument from personal incredulity or argument from ignorance, the speaker considers or asserts that something is false, implausible, or not obvious to them personally and attempts to use this gap in knowledge as "evidence" in favor of an alternative view of his or her choice. Examples of these fallacies are often found in statements of opinion which begin: "It is hard to see how...," "I cannot understand how...," or "it is obvious that..." (if "obvious" is being used to introduce a conclusion rather than specific evidence in support of a particular view)
Nihil inimicus quam sibi ipse Marcus Tullius Cicero
  • #955
  • Dec 5, 2009 6:15pm Dec 5, 2009 6:15pm
Quoting hanover
I can't for the life of me understand how I gave the impression in post #932 (or anywhere else) implying that somebody "had directly or indirectly created false members" or was using "old, blatantly ironic posts, made by that member".
I see no correlation either--not even a splinter.
  • #956
  • Dec 5, 2009 6:24pm Dec 5, 2009 6:24pm
Quoting coscorp
...because a premise cannot be proven false.....
(sigh) Several things have already been proved, with supporting evidence complete with quotes and links, page 61 onwards, all you have to do is read it if you want educating.....or don't.
  • #957
  • Dec 5, 2009 7:24pm Dec 5, 2009 7:24pm
Quote
As far as your opinion that Jacko's contributions brought value to the forum and to those who have chosen to follow his style of trading, there is very little evidence of that actually being true, in fact the live trading results together with the material Daytrading has posted suggest the complete opposite!

That's a rather interesting claim. I couldn't care less about your opinion on his methodology, but I'm very curious on how his live trading results "suggest the complete opposite!" Please explain.

Quote
Well if someone who is selling or endorsing a product and claiming to be profitable, yet when challenged they can't produce anything to support their claims and can't post live trades, then any prospective customer should obviously bear that in mind before he hands over his cash.

Are you saying he didn't post live trades? Really? After all you just wrote a post referencing "his live trading results"? I must really be missing something here. After all, daytrading seems to agree with you. He responded to me with, "Stay with the substance, i.e. the fact that you are being played if you really believe what comes from those 2 threads (daily fx and here)." I was surprised it was posted without qualification. How am I being misled in taking the DailyFX thread at face value? Yes, I understand it's not the same as an audited record, but the implication here seems to be something more than that. Don't just make some vague allegation about "questions and controversy" over timing. Spell it out.

Moving on, again there's this supposition that he should produce a track record. As I posted here, I haven't seen any trading education sites providing statements. But still, there's a few I think are legitimate, a selection: LBR Group, Ray Barros, DLC Profiles. They all charge for their services (as one would expect), but I don't see any audited track records. Let's stop with this pretence that offering statements is standard.

And if you were thinking to link back to daytrading's post where he quotes jacko asking a poster to verify their statements, then take a look at the context of thread. Eleven posts later, jacko writes:

Quote
Again, there is no malice intended...I just think that if you post something, then if necessary, you should be prepared to verify those statements. (I am not meaning that he needs to show statements, but at least some form of rational reasons for his post-dated trades)"
  • #958
  • Edited 1:43am Dec 6, 2009 1:06am | Edited 1:43am
I just read the thread in question regarding the profitability of trading a pull back vs. divergence. http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=7413

I suggest everyone read all 2 pages of the thread and you'll see that the the trader JMBTX is asking a question and Jacko is asking JMBTX to explain pull back from the trend vs. divergence.

Jacko as a Sr. Member is asking a Jr. Member's to answer his question, simply because the Jr. member original question showed a lack of understanding.

I think all of us can relate to a real life situation where a Jr. person at work asked a question and we ask them to explain to us first so we can correct them.

That lack of understanding being that there isn't a which is more profitable. If the trend is going to pull back there likely is going to be some type of divergence already.

If you read on in the thread you'll see other users finding it funny because they understood where Jacko was coming from and on page 2 another user clearly states that Jacko has a sense of humor.

This supposed damning evidence by Daytrading is total joke and you all fell for it without even reading the whole thread. Totally taken out of context. You people want to believe the worst about Jacko so you'll believe anything.

The Original Poster of the thread never replied back to the thread he started and Jacko's questions were directed to him specifically. That's the way I see it and it appears if you read the entire thread some of the other members saw it the same way too. To me, Jacko was clearly trying to test JMBTX's knowledge by asking him those questions.

http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=7413
Don't wish it were easier, wish you were better. ~ Jim Rohn
  • #959
  • Dec 6, 2009 1:35am Dec 6, 2009 1:35am
Quoting daytrading
In case your analysis was wrong, you still run the danger (after being stopped out) to place the re-entry according to the strategy at the stop point, only to find out that your re-entry gets triggered (you have already lost 50-100 pips on the original trade),the price moves 30 pips in your favour and then continues in opposite direction - having formed support around the level you re-entered.

What's next?...
You either do not fully understand the anti-hedge method or you are lying about it. Either way you are making a misrepresentation willfully or out of ignorance.

#1 The anti-hedge is only placed ONCE and only if price has move 50 points past the price you were stopped out at. There is no anti-hedge for an anit-hedge (I.E. you do not keep reentering).

#2 If you were wrong about the direction and price moves the other way the anti-hedge order will not trigger and you can cancel it.

#3 The Anti-Hedge is discretionary not an automatic placement.

Again, you either willfully or out of ignorance misrepresented the method.
Don't wish it were easier, wish you were better. ~ Jim Rohn
  • #960
  • Dec 6, 2009 1:55am Dec 6, 2009 1:55am
Quoting LasVahGoose
You people want to believe the worst about Jacko so you'll believe anything.
Conversely you want to believe the best so you'll believe anything!
0 traders viewing now