Dr. Doom

190 replies [Last post]
snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

Who the hell is this whacko?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27171452

GWB43's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-31

snaggletooth wrote:Who the hell is this whacko?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27171452
Who knows...an' why should ya care what he thinks what 'chew thinking man?

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

GWB43 wrote: snaggletooth wrote:
Who the hell is this whacko?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27171452
Who knows...an' why should ya care what he thinks what 'chew thinking man?
 
He scares people.
 
So does this biotch: http://www.cnbc.com/id/27184545

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Do you favor the idea that your clients do not hear all points of view"

buyandhold's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-23

I believe him. I don't think the financial and government elites have yet addressed what happened here, let alone come up with a solution.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

A couple of years ago there was a guy named Put Trader who posted on this forum.  He warned that the market could go down and virtually all of the "advisors" on the forum whined that he was hurting their feelings, making them sad.
 
One, a baby broker at a bank, declared that Put Trader didn't know what he was talking about because the stock market always goes up because earnings always go up.
 
Put Trader also suggested that clients paying 1% of AUM was acceptable to them when the 1% tended to reduce the client's annual return from, say, 15% to 14%--but that they would not be as willing to allow their return to go from negative 20% to negative 21%.
 
Again the "advisors" all whined about how that made them feel sad.  That they were "professionals" and that paying them 1% of a portfolio's value was acceptable because they send their clients a birthday card and invite them to a BBQ on the office parking lot.

bspears's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-08

Welcome back Put!!  It was getting very boring around here.  I would like to hear what's in your personal playbook right now.

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

Hah, these are "provocative" old remnants floated by a compulsive and passive aggressive personality-disordered advisor wannabe. Real advisors know their own value and won't take that bait.
After meeting with and talking to all of their clients, good advisors will sharpen their professional skills (knowledge) or take up raquetball, thus meeting new potential clients (who desperately want the benefit of our perspective and experience)in tough times like these.
 
Stand back and watch, Spears, your "Put" has no genuine ideas for the times, only deconstructive agitation during the storm.

anabuhabkuss's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-02

Put,Regardless what the market is doing, a loser is still a loser.

exEJIR's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-12

Putsey,
 
I've been wondering where you have been. 
 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Here's something you could do to add some ooomph to a portfolio.
 
Buy Fluor for 37 and write a Nov 40 straddle for 11.
 
If the stock rises to 40 next month kiss it goodbye.  You'll have made 14 points on an investment of 26 points in a month.  That's better than 50% in a month.
 
If the stock is below 40 next month you can either allow stock to be put to you, or roll the position to December for a small credit--buying more time for it to rebound.
 
There is a bottom in here somewhere.
 
A similar trade is possible in Apple--I'm long the stock and short the Nov 120 straddle.
 
Ditto for Research in Motion--go long the stock and short the November 65 straddle.

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

You have to learn about puts and straddles to pass the series 7. Being able to master the basics is why they say, "the series 7 is basically an intelligence test to screen out the dummies."
Not using them takes real intelligence.
 
I don't think you're gonna learn how to BS here, consider moving along now.
 
For some real excitement, research the economic term,  " law of diminishing returns."

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Let me see if I have this right.  If FLR moves from 37 to 40 my strategy earns a 13 point gain and, according to the "advisor" calling himself "walking9," I'm not intelligent if I do it?
Yeah, that 50% in a month is something nobody would want.  My bad.

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

Uh huh.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

I guess buying GE at 19.50 and writing a Dec 20 straddle for $4.40 would be insane.  The return would only be about $5 on $15--33% in two months.
 
Maybe there's an ex date in there to help bump 33% in two months up to something like negative 25% that walking9 has been getting the suckers who think he's an "advisor."

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

Anyone who can afford to waste time here (myself included) is in a different market or discipline than what you describe.
Invest in your own education, and come back after you make it.
 
Good luck.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

The problem with using options as part of an overall strategy is that the "advisor" has to have an above average IQ so that he or she can explain them to the client.

 
The Options Clearing Corporation is frustrated that the bright advisors are retiring leaving dim bulbs who believe that their role in the grand scheme of things is to meet with their client once a year to give them a summary of the tax implications of their activity--and, of course, to send the client a birthday card and a $100 Outback gift card at the end of the year.
 
I'm I being too honest?

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

Naive might be a kinder and gentler way to put it.
 
You'll not get a rise out of your attack, consider investing in some passive aggressive counseling.  ( I mean that in a kind way. ROI. )

Indyone's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-31

Provocative Put wrote:Here's something you could do to add some ooomph to a portfolio.
 
Buy Fluor for 37 and write a Nov 40 straddle for 11.
 
If the stock rises to 40 next month kiss it goodbye.  You'll have made 14 points on an investment of 26 points in a month.  That's better than 50% in a month.
 
If the stock is below 40 next month you can either allow stock to be put to you, or roll the position to December for a small credit--buying more time for it to rebound.
 
There is a bottom in here somewhere.
 
A similar trade is possible in Apple--I'm long the stock and short the Nov 120 straddle.
 
Ditto for Research in Motion--go long the stock and short the November 65 straddle.
 
OK...this is definitely you, Put.  Where the heck have you been?

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

For some reason I am not able to take part like the rest of you, but I am able to find little windows of opportunity.
I want to explain something that has worked very well for me a number of times.
 
Google makes it a practice to announce its earnings on the Thursday before the third Friday of the month--something about options in there.
 
Anyway, at 3:45 today GOOG was trading in the 340 range and I decided to make a wager that it would rise about 10% on earnings--to the 370 range.
 
So I bought 20 Oct 380 Calls, wrote 20 Oct 370 calls (forming a bear call spread wagering the stock would be beow 370).  I also bought 20 Oct 360 calls and wrote 20 Oct 370 calls (forming a put bull spread wagering the stock would be above 370).
 
I did it for a net credit of $9.50 per share or $19,000.  Commissions at Fidelity are $8 per leg ($32) plus 75 cents per contract ($30) so my net credit is 18,957.43--the 57 cents is that weird taxes stuff.
 
So what could happen?
 
Well, tomorrow the stock could close at 370.  It's at 373 in the after  hours market right now.  If it's at 370 tomorrow afternoon everything will expire adn I'll keep ALL of the money, which makes me happy.
 
On the other hand if it's below 360 I'll have to buy 2,000 shares at 370, but I'll sell them for 360 so I'll lose $20,000 on that, or $1,043 more than I collected this afternoon.  That will make me sad, but will not ruin my life or anything.
 
If it's over 380 tomorrow I'll have to sell 2000 at 370, but I can buy them for $380 so I'll lose $20,000 on that--but I get to keep the money from today so I'll be out of pocket $1,043 for that too.  That too will sadden me, but won't ruin my life.
 
If it's between 361.60 and 379.40 I'll avoid losing.  As of now I like the odds.
 
If I didn't know how to craft things like this myself I'd be willing to pay an "advisor" to suggest them to me.  I bet there are thousands of guys like me out  there--wishing somebody would call them with ideas that might return hellatious profits if they work out.
 

Indyone's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-31

Ouch...doesn't look like that GOOG trade worked out so well...at least thus far...

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

And people ask Jones advisors how come we don't do options. 
Probably because it's more fun to fly to Vegas, take a $20,000 cash advance on your credit card, put the chip on red or black and spin the wheel.  At least while you're there you can catch a show. 

Indyone's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-31

Aw, he'll only lose a bit more than a grand either way...that's probably in Putsy's trading budget.  Options are interesting, but for the most part, I've limited myself and clients to covered call-writing.  Not very sexy, but pretty easy to explain to clients and a great way to produce income, if you don't mind having to sell stock positions from time to time.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

If somebody bought in 1998 and held till today they'd be even.  The idea of buy and hold has fallen out of favor among the baby boomers.
I showed you nimrods a way to risk $1,000 and possibly make close to $19,000 in a single day.  I can assure you that there are thousands of guys--and gals--who are desperate for advice on how to take advantage of the volatility without risking much.
 
As I said last night, you have to have an IQ higher than room temperature in order to appreciate things like this, and be able to form complete sentences in order to able to explain them to your clients.

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

The idea of buy and hold has fallen out of favor among the baby boomers.

 
Partly what they pay us for.
 

As I said last night, you have to have an IQ higher than room temperature in order to appreciate things like this, and be able to form complete sentences in order to able to explain them to your clients.
 
Why others get MAs in counseling, and why you consider retaining one and paying for help with your apparent passive-aggressive personality disorder. A college education might help your social skills, too.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

That "paying you" idea is falling out of favor faster than the Dow.  The idea that Joe and Joanne need to pay you 1% of their account so that you can tell them to buy and hold is a scam, and more and more of them are figuring it out every day.
On the other hand, if you also brought to the table the abilty to intelligently discuss the markets, the effects of volatility on option premiums and how to capitalize on those premiums without extraordinary risk you may actually be worth a few basis points.

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

So long, then.

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

Provocative Put wrote:
That "paying you" idea is falling out of favor faster than the Dow.  The idea that Joe and Joanne need to pay you 1% of their account so that you can tell them to buy and hold is a scam, and more and more of them are figuring it out every day.
 
1%?  That's getting off cheap.  They should be paying us at least 1.5%.
 
Case in point:  Say we recover in 5 years and are back at Dow 14,000.  The average investor might have already bailed out.  If we can keep our clients in the market, it seems like 1.5% a year would be better than locking in a 40% loss.
 
 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

What if the Dow trades between 7000 and 10,000 for ten years?

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

Will wonders ever cease?

jamesbond's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-03-21

Don't be so dismissive. We just went through a 10 year period where we went from 8500 to 8500.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

What specialized training do you have for helping somebody with their budget?

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Well, I worked on the floor of the CBOE for a couple of years.  But the best training I had was that I was a Regional Sales Manager for Institutional Options strategies with an NYSE firm with 287 branch offices and 3,600 registered reps.
 
If you uncovered a hot prospect and asked for an "expert" to come help you--that person was one of four.  I was one of them.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

I believe that a well constructed portfolio would commit 15 to 20 percent to speculation such as I suggest.
 
The average investors are screaming for help, and they deserve more than platitudes such as "Hold On, It Will Come Back............Some Day."
 
Sadly the average "advisor" is not intellectually capable of doing much more than that.
 
 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

I suggest taht everybody should set aside 15 to 20 percent of their portfolio for speculation.  Should they lose that money they should stop and the remaining 80 to 85 percent will eventually recoup the loss.
The strategy I suggested yesterday--go long Fluor at 37 and short the November 40 straddle cannot possibly result in a loss greater than 66 points, which would only happen if Fluor goes bankrupt within the next four or five weeks.
 
While that may happen the odds are long, very long.  The stock is down from 100 earlier in the year.  It has a hell of a beta, but with those high betas come opportunity.
 
The upside gain is limited.  If FLR, which was at 43 on Monday is at or higher than 40 in a month the gain will be 16 points.
 
The 11 points the come from the straddle can be used to pay for the shares, leaving a cash requirement of only $2,600.
 
By the way, today the trade was available at 35 with 10 1/2 coming in from a 35 straddle--max gain only 10 1/2 in a month.
 
I find it curious that so many "advisors" sneer that that is not worth their attention or attempt to understand.
 

gvf's picture
gvf
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-01

Put, I sympathize with what you're saying.  I really do.  If I had the time to do it for all my clients, I would.  At the moment, with my client base, I really only have time to write covered calls for some people.  At some point, it becomes economy of scale.  Tell me you have the time to balance accounts, make sure cash disbursements are being met, advise clients on educational funding, insurance, estate planning, taxes, day-to-day stuff, annual reviews, and then be able to establish and manage option strategies on top of it all.  If I had 10-50 clients with 100m-500m AUM, then I would consider it, I really would!  Unfortunately, I'm servicing more than that.  I really don't think anyone here is too dimwitted to set up option strategies, but I do think many of us have a large client base that makes it difficult to micro-manage such transactions.How would you handle it? 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

It is not at all time consuming to engage in sophisticated options strategies--just choose one that you believe in, put it on, and have a planned exit strategy should it not work out.
The true danger to the stock market is on the short side--either shorting shares or writing calls naked.
 
The downside risk is scary as we've seen in the last several weeks--but it is not unlimited so there is no reason to be super cautious.  Especially now that the market has already lost 30 to 40 percent.
 
The danger to today's clients is not further erosion so much as not mounting a significant advance for a decade or longer.
 
Your clients are going to have to AVERAGE huge returns in order to return to what they had last October by the time they retire.
 
It ain't gonna happen in diversified stock fund.  It ain't gonna happen in an annuity.  It ain't gonna happen in muni bonds.
 
It might happen in commodities, but if you think that options are scary.............
 
I know, I know---hold on, it will come back if you live long enough.  Meanwhile let's talk about how you can cut 10% off your electricity bill by weather stripping those windows.
 
I'm a professional financial advisor...........see, my business card says so.
 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Is this Ferris Bueller the biggest cypher I'll encounter on this forum, or are there others who are more vapid than he?

walking9's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-09-30

are there others who are more vapid than he?
 
Could be you. One who tries to make a virtue out of trading options, while attacking the fee-only model as being expensive, appears to be dull.
 
Why don't you call yourself, "tempest in a teapot." Try taking up squash, and prove yourself on the court, man.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

When the client's results in a fee only model is a negative return, and that fee increases the negativity the model is wrong.
 
Fee only can be justified so long as the asset base grows so that the man-child who is the "advisor" is able to pillage the account for the pound of flesh and still leave a reasonable return for the sucker client.
 
Not unlike making a mortgage loan to a borrower that will default, but the  home will be worth more so the default--while inconvenient--will not affect the lender's bottom line.
 
The idea that a twenty-five year old kid who achieved a GPA of 2.2 before dropping out of some third rate college in his junior year brings something worth having to the table is specious.
 
When the market was roaring along somebody like that--let's call him Jason--was thought he was a financial wiz kid because his accounts were growing.  They were not growing any faster than anybody else's, but that was irrelevant--they were growing.
 
Then one day the music stopped.
 
All across the fruited plain there are families staring at their statements, and staring at the fees that are being sucked out of those balances, by the Jasons of the world.
 
I'm not saying they're not nice guys.  They don't beat their wives, they don't kick their dogs, and they pay their bills.  But they're pretenders--posers strutting around in $300 slacks and golf shirts emblazoned with country club logos of places they drove by---perhaps even played as a guest of somebody who knows somebody they know.
 
They introduce themselves as, "Hi, I'm Jason Jones.  I'm a financial advisor, are you working with anybody locally?"
 
As we all know, if you ask that often enough somebody will let you talk some more.
 
As we also all know, if you talk some more to enough people somebody will actually open an account with you.
 
As we also all know, once that account is open Jason Jones is now saying a prayer that he doesn't phuck it up.  Well, not all of the Jason Jones's.  There are a lot of them, sadly way too many, who are sociopaths.
 
They don't care what happens to the clients and their money as long as they're getting paid.  They see their function as nothing more than asking enough people..........you know the drill.
 
When you think about it, doing nothing but asking enough people..........then showing them a computer print out a couple of times a year..............sending them a birthday card..........inviting them to a BBQ at the office...............is actually what could be described as a job that could be done by a trained chimpanzee.
 
If you think that your best clients are not staring at their statement and wondering what you did to justify that fee you're naive.
 
I first picked up a phone and smiled and dialed in 1972.  I have been involved in the hiring, training and advancment of thousands--as in thousands--of men and women who come in and eventually leave the revolving door.
 
We have experienced a stock market CRASH.  This is not a bear market, this is a crash.
 
There has never been anything like it before.  Perhaps the 1929 event--but certainly not the tech bubble or the market fart of 1987.
 
Look at GE, yesterday it traded in the 18s.  Its yield is better than 6%.  GE is not likely to be going bankrupt, it's just that nobody wants to buy GE.  There are lots and lots and lots of those stories out there.
 
Your clients are thinking, "What the hell is wrong with Jason?  Here we are having lost 40% of our retirement fund and all he can say is hold on it will come back?"
 
We, you and I, know that the reason that's all he can say is that he's a poser--a man-child wearing great clothes and carrrying a business card that says he's a financial advisor.
 
It is to laugh.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Why should a financial "advisor" be paid if their client experiences losses?
In the past the argument against compensating brokers with a portion of their client's gains was forbidden because it was thought that it would encourage churning accounts in a frenzy to generate large returns.
 
Since most of today's "advisors" do little more than shove their client into a mutual fund family with a sales contest going and then tell them to hold on for the long run why not compensate them with a percentage of the fund's gain?
 
There is much made about the client and "advisor" being teammates, partners.  But unless the "advisor" stands to suffer when the client suffers it's not really a partnership at all.
 
If an "advisor" is worth their fees they should be willing to accept nothing from the client unless the client's return exceeds a minimum expected rate of return.
 
Telling your client, "I won't make a dime unless you earn at least 5%" is a hell of a lot more honorable than telling them, "I"m going to suck 1.5% out of your account every year even if you're losing."

anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-09-29

Telling your client, "I won't make a dime unless you earn at least 5%" is a hell of a lot more honorable than telling them, "I"m going to suck 1.5% out of your account every year even if you're losing."
 
So in other words, I should take my conservative clients and make sure that they invest aggressively.
 
My job isn't to maximize returns for my client.  It is to make sure that my client maximizes their chance of reaching their goals.  It's not the same thing.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

You have clients whose goal is to realize as low a rate of return as possible?

anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-09-29

Putsy,
 
None of my clients have goals that have to do with a rate of return.  My clients have goals that are things like:
 
"I'd like to send my child to the best school that accepts them."
"I'd like to retire comfortably at age 65."
"I'd like my family to maintain their same standard of living if I die today."
"I'd like to not be a burden on my family if I need care when I get older."
 
Your idea stops the advisor from being a partner with his client.  It encourages the advisor to invest above the client's risk tolerance.   
 
 
 

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

Which of those goals is not more easily realized when the client experiences a positive rate of return instead of a negative rate of return?
 
What does having you as an advisor have to do with their child's ability to get into a good school?
 
I can assure you that retiring comfortably at 65 will be easier if the return is greater.
 
Life insurance takes care of number three.  I am not suggesting that one should invest for maximum return instead of buying insurance.
 
It is far easier to not be a burden on your family if you have an "advisor" who knows how to maximize the return you are able to generate instead of establishing below average goals and then boasting that they were achieved.
 

anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-09-29

"Which of those goals is not more easily realized when the client experiences a positive rate of return instead of a negative rate of return? "
 
Putsy, every goal is more easily realized when the client experiences a positive rate of return.   That misses the point.  
 
Under your "plan", if I lose 20% for my client one year and then make 30% for him the next year, I make more money than if he makes 4% each year, yet he is in worse financial shape.   Additionally, if we invested above his risk tolerance, he may bale out of his investments and not make the 30% then 2nd year. 
 
"What does having you as an advisor have to do with their child's ability to get into a good school?"
 
Work on your reading comprehension.  The goal has nothing to do with getting into a good school.  It has everything to do with being able to send the child to that school.
 
I can assure you that retiring comfortably at 65 will be easier if the return is greater.
 
You absolutely can't assue this if the greater return comes with greater volatility.  Joe and Sam each have $1,000,000 and need $3,000 a month to live comfortably for the rest of his life.  Joe's investment gives him 3.6% every single year.  Sam's investments average 5%, but with great volatility.  Sam's investments take big drops during his first two years of retirement.  Sam ends up broke.  Joe gets his income every year and he leaves his family $1,000,000 at death.
 
Life insurance takes care of number three.  I am not suggesting that one should invest for maximum return instead of buying insurance.
 
It is far easier to not be a burden on your family if you have an "advisor" who knows how to maximize the return you are able to generate instead of establishing below average goals and then boasting that they were achieved.
 
Who establishes below average goals?  People establish the goals that they want to achieve and are realistic.  Going after high goals can lead to disaster.  Ex. The client wants to retire at age 65.  They would love to have $15,000/month of income.  They only need $7000/month to be comfortable.   Investing in a fairly conservative manner will allow them to be comfortable.  In order to have $15,000, they will have to take a ton of risk and underdiversify and hope to get lucky.  Oops, it didn't work out.  "Sorry, client, we failed at your high goal.  Now, you can't retire."
 
This isn't life where you reach for the stars and if you fall short, you land on the moon.  This is more reaching for the stars and if you fall short, you end up in worse shape than you started.
 
If a fiancial goal is easily attainable, increased risk decreases the chance of success.  If a financial goal is difficult to attain, increased risk increases the chance of success, but it can come at a cost that isn't worth paying.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

For those who are following along.  Google opened in the 370s and almost immediately traded up to about 382.

 
At that point the bull put spread narrowed to 3 1/2 so I covered five of the twenty spreads.
 
After that the stock traded down into the 360s and the bear call spread narrowed to 4 so I covered five of them.
 
The resultant gain in the five that are now closed is just shy of 1.75 so I've reduced yesterday's closing risk of a bit more than $1,000 to about $200.
 
Right now the stock is trading at 372--almost dead solid perfect to capture the $14,000 and change that is still on the table waiting to be picked up.
 
Yesterday somebody referred to the idea as a "zany options strategy."
 
It started out as no more than a $1,000 potential loss, is now a no more than a $200 potential loss and a possibility of making as much as $14,000 in a single day.
 
That's the kind of zaniness that clients envision when you hand them your card.  They don't anticipate paying you to give them an annual report, a birthday card and a hamburger or two at a BBQ on the office parking lot some spring evening.
 
Be honest with them, ask them if they're happy with their portfolio and your "advice."

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

What character flaw are you displaying when you assume that speculating with 15% of your money will result in a loss of 100% of your money?
 
I'll ask again.  What would be wrong with you earning zero in a year when your client earned also earned zero?
 
Would you be willing to accept an agreement that gave you the first two points above 5% to the client.
 
If the client doesn't earn at least 5% you don't get paid a single penny--but if they earn 7% or more you get paid 2%.
 
I bet you'd have to fight them off with a stick.

anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-09-29

That's the kind of zaniness that clients envision when you hand them your card. 
 
They can envision what they want when I hand them my card.  However, when I open my mouth and tell them what I do and how I work, they realize that this isn't what they are going to get.  The value that we provide our clients is not in picking the best investments.  If we could do this, we wouldn't need clients. 
 
You come one here and talk about your great trades.  Yet, it's obvious if you were so good at investment picking, there would be another zero or 2 zeros on the end of the size of your trades.  We're not investment pickers.  We're financial advisors.  If I knew what was going to happen in the market, I'd borrow and invest and be very wealthy.  I'm quite comfortable with my lack of knowledge as are my clients. 
 
By the way, I will make more than $14,000 today and it doesn't matter what happens to Google.

Provocative Put's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-10-14

I am unable to cut and paste responses.
 
I do not have clients, per se.  I manage my own account and some money for my brother.  My arrangement with him is that he will give me a Christmas gift that reflects how well I did for him during the year.
 
I've gotten a gag gift of a lump of coal and also tickets for two on a cruise ship called The Silver Wind from Montreal to New York--with him and his wife along to share the experience.  Google Silver Wind to see what it's all about if you don't know.

bspears's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-11-08

I would rather do that quarterly...better cashflow for me. 

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×