Lindzon makes my “complaining” point on Goldman:

Another film review came in today. I am glad the reviewer sees the big picture points of the film, but I have a quibble that may be educational to others. The reviewer sees the film as being somewhat “dated” and more so a year from now. I could not disagree more and others see it my way too. When illustrating the “wrong” way in the markets one is always forced to use current events to describe a market situation, but the principles must be timeless. My hope is that the vast majority of Broke’s viewers will properly see the timeless principles versus getting hung up on the description of some one event. How do others who have seen the film see it?

A review of my books by Howard Getson.

I don’t like it that Goldman is getting freebies (with the bailout being the biggie), but complaining nonstop when we all only have finite time on this planet…is not productive unless the political landscape changes. More:

This is an article of mine that appeared recently. Here is some feedback I saw on another forum about the article:

As with most TASC, Futures, or other mag articles. Long on claims, opinions, cherry-picked examples/backtests, etc. Short on evidence…You of course, are going to supply overwhelming, statistical PROOF that systematic traders are best? Try talking about trading stats – profit factor, Sharpe, Calmar and others. About risk of ruin. Etc. This is likely a strong reason for blowouts. They think they are profitable, but instead are Hold&Hope or Averaging down. And many of them ARE “systematic” But they constantly subvert their plan when exposed to large positions.

I learn much from people not all connected to reality!

From a reader:

Mike: I have now had the pleasure of watching “Broke” three times. I seem to gain more understanding of its message each time. I believe the video could have been shot at anytime in human history, had the technology been available. This is because the film is about human behavior and the lies humans tell themselves (and others) to justify their responses to stress. What you have generously allowed your “actors” to reveal to viewers are the attempts by them to handle a more and more complicated life. When applied to the markets, through the film, one can begin to understand how participant behavior shapes price discovery and movement. In fact I have been able to broadly apply what I have learned from “Broke” to my own trading (and my own behavior). Indeed the film has served as reinforcement to some theories I have long held – which are not very popular with my friends. It’s all there to be seen in “Broke” – greed, hypocrisy, blame, insight, sloth, vengeance, fear, ignorance, enlightenment (stop me now), but by far my favorite is the interplay between the Shepard (big brother, government, religion?) and his sheep (investors, traders, everyone?). The unpredictable herd changes play like the trend reversals in trading and serve to inform and profit those who can be taught how to approach making money. What a gift is “Broke.” Thanks,  Jack

I love it when people tell me the trend following ‘winners’ are the lucky survivors. In my humble opinion people who think like that are either ignorant in the short-term willing to learn/be corrected or, and I say this bluntly, losers in life unable to accept reality. If trend following winners are the lucky monkeys hitting the keyboards, than the king of the monkeys must be Warren Buffett. Buffett himself makes the case for why this is bullshit (there is no other word) in an excerpt from Snowball:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6

Book excerpt idea courtesy of BreakoutStocks.

Warren Buffett op-ed from The New York Times yesterday.

And a video of the same: