Category: Critics

Traders v. Trading

December 08, 2007

I recently saw a comment (intended to be negative) that "The Complete TurtleTrader" was about traders not trading. Putting aside for a moment the validity of that statement, the point and or distinction of it is?

Stephen Aust: A Critic Goes Off the Cliff

October 15, 2007

A review on Amazon of my new book by Stephen B. Aust is titled "It Made My Brain Hurt":

I really, really, really wanted to like this book. I pre-ordered it, but wish that I had just sat in a bookstore to spend the 60 minutes that it took to read it. Then I could have invested (the money that it cost me to purchase it) in the markets instead. The book contains the "legend" and a little on the "results," but not much substance on the "lessons," so what is the point? This book was a real disappointment.
I keep reading how poorly the "turtle traders" are doing in the current markets...massive losses.

The facts of what is in my book don't mesh with Aust's view.

Feedback on Domain Sale

September 15, 2007

This post drove this feedback:

Mr. Covel: Can't pass this up. Indeed, I understand the concept and use of analogy. Use it myself now and then. I thought the story on Depend(s) simply was not constructive. My initial reaction was that, not unlike a good many other situations, the person who received the largess from P&G or whoever, may have, to put it very gently, been exploiting a situation. To people I know, I would be more blunt, and say rip off. But I am neither suggesting that or even saying that.

The flip side of your position might place blame on the decision-making of an entity that should have known better. Exploiting a situation is the nature of capitalism. Same thing in the markets. You seem to be placing a moral view on my action. Your argument would be akin to blaming the winning side for the losing side's losses in a zero sum game.

Foul Language

August 31, 2007

A recent podcast brought in:

I am insulted by the language that you use [here}. I found you unprofessional. My wife was ashamed to hear your message. If you can't speak proper English then how can I trust your trends? If you wish to continue gutter language then take me off your e-mail [list]. If your next message is some of the same then I will e-mail all my friends and tell them what I am hearing from you. I am retired and teach young men at risk and they do not [sic] us your language. Gene A.

Gene needs a dose of the real world! I did enjoy his red herring of connecting foul language to the veracity of my statements regarding trend following. Bad logic.

"Covel Is A Nut!"

July 11, 2007

I posted this podcast the other day. A critic on the web offered:

The 2 minute expression by Covel is a very poor statement about a topic. There are many many things that he does not know about trends. These things I mention are facts....facts about trends. If you have heard Pring speak, he is in the same boat as Covel. When you sit in a session on trends with Oliver Velez, you will come to see a similar vagueness about trends, particularly in the area he avoids addressing: their beginnings. Prentice Hall representatives, Covel's publisher for his trend compilation, both in the financial department and the editing department, feel that there is still a lot left to be desired as well. Do not expect anyone to make sense of the snippet. Covel is not in a position to admit anything. Do get that straight. Covel is never going to be able to assign utility to trends. Covel cannot do that in any way. You are missing a lot. That is just the way it is in your realm or space. Read the Abstract of Magic Numbers in the DOW, Batchelor and Ramyar, Septembr 2006. The research examines the length and duration of successive trends in the Dow Jones Industrial average. This is research on a subject. The subject to be researched has to exist. It is possible that the subject of their research doesn't exist as you think Covel suggests. For people who make money using trends, they usually, over time become more knowledgeable, skilled and experienced. The mathematical representation of trends is a broad and exacting science. There is almost no more effective, efficient or optimal utilization of any financial representaion [sic] of markets than the mathematical representaion [sic] of trends. If Covel, Pring, Velez, Batchelor, Ramyar, Steenbarger or you ever got to see the mathematics related to trends it would make absolutely no difference at all. That is just the way it is. John Netto wrote a book that deals with trading to make money. 55 bucks when new. Now a used copy goes for up to 200 bucks. The book has trading information in it from a trader who knows how to trade. There is bullshit out there all over the place. And there are facts and science and coded software that defines things very accurately and correctly and in such a way that money can be extracted to the extent that the market offers. Some people can figure things out. Some people write about things that they have heard of. Some people cannot understand what others have figured out and there is little chance that any understanding can be found by anyone who is trying to understand a person explaining or reading something that the author has just heard about. Covel is missing just about everything on trends. You are worse off; you are missing what Covel is telling you he is missing.

I feel like I just listened to Brando's character Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now.

I Miss the Point

July 10, 2007

Philip J. McDonnell, a critic of mine, offers this piece about me in one of his recent comments. Not sure what he is illustrating with his comment though (I don't profess to be mathematician). Decades of trend trading performance was made up by me? All trend traders are lucky? That said, I welcome the interest.

Running from Leverage

May 10, 2007

Emma Humbert wrote a review of A Demon of Our Own Design recently on Victor Niederhoffer's site:

I have a problem with this book, A Demon of Our Own Design: Markets, Hedge Funds, and the Perils of Financial Innovation. It irritates me to no end that Richard Bookstaber made his money first at Salomon Brothers and then at a major hedge fund that goes out of its way to block hedge fund regulation of any form. His career and fortune was made working at firms that use a lot of leverage and highly complex investment strategies to make money. And he was in charge of risk. But now that he has become a long/short equity manager, a relatively simple strategy that does not require much leverage, he is saying leverage and complexity are bad things. I find the whole thing a little disingenuous. Which is not to say the author does not make some valid observations.

Fools?

May 06, 2007

From Warren Buffet's annual conference:

The “Sage of Omaha” has said repeatedly he is in fine health and does not want to retire. However, uncertainty over who will succeed the 76-year-old investor upon his death has weighed on the share price of Berkshire, the US insurance-to-clothing conglomerate he has built. Mr Buffett, Berkshire’s chief executive and chief investment officer, wants the next generation of leaders to split the roles. He has said he has three, unnamed, internal candidates for the chief executive position. During the meeting, Mr Buffett criticised the “electronic herd” of hedge fund managers, saying their fast trades in and out of assets were a “fool’s game”.

I find it hard to call Jim Simons a fool, who seems to fall within Buffett's criticism. But frankly, I am not sure what Buffett means by in and out. He may be criticizing holding periods of 6 months as in and out. Or to him a one year holding period could be in and out. How can you call the hedge fund managers who produce billions in profit every year, not trading like Buffett, fools?

Deception In the Internet World Is Fleeting

April 06, 2007

I have had my share of critics. There are those who don't like trend following trading. There are those who don't like the fact that TurtleTrader.com was even started and has become a great resource for thousands. I have met and talked with many of these people. Some are stand up people with differing opinions, some live in a world of deception. A few of the latter are somewhat well known.

That world of deception is something I have come to know more about in the last 6 months. Specifically, the deception of email and chat forum posts. Consider that last fall on the same day I received (2) emails. One was from a supporter and a considered friend of mine for years. The other email was an anonymous attack email telling me how dumb I was. Fair enough. One good email, one bad! That's life. Ah, but here is where it gets interesting. Those (2) emails, both sent from Yahoo email accounts, had the same IP address. It was the same person.

Then in the last few months, unrelated to the case above, I started noticing chat forum posts offering agenda type criticism. There seemed to be (2) people leading the charge. One of critics was from a "name" known in some small Wall Street circles, the other was an anonymous alias. The named critic heaped on the negatives from his perspective and so did the anonymous critic. However, the anonymous critic with the alias was VERY praiseworthy of the other critic who was using his real name. It all struck me as odd since they sounded like the same person. The two chat forum posters were one in the same. They were posting under the same IP address.

In a past life I was a baseball catcher. On the baseball field we had a way for dealing with people like these. It was called a fast ball high and tight, and if they got hit, well, that was the point.

One of the best quotes about internet chat forums comes from David Silverman in an issue of Stock, Futures and Options Magazine:

Just as they did in the pits, traders continue to trash-talk, deceive, manipulate, confuse and lie. What I was told so many years ago remains fresh today, and anyone who does not understand this and totally relies on the information they read in chat rooms may get eaten alive. That the Internet is being used to pass misleading information about the markets - and thousands of other things - comes as no great shock, but what I realized as I read one bogus posting after another, is that the anonymity the medium provides can make chat room lies far more insidious than any ever told in the pit. On the trading floor, market professionals, fully aware of the rules of the game, aware of the stakes involved, and able to look any trader in the eye to help determine the degree to which the truth might be shaded, needed protection only from the egregious lie. In chat rooms, by contrast, where the naive and uninitiated congregate with the potential hustlers and con men, it is no fair fight. Anonymity fuels the liar's sense of invincibility, and often statements are so bold and outrageous it's amazing anyone takes this nonsense seriously.

Waft

April 01, 2007

Victor Niederhoffer recently posted on his blog:

I have often thought that there are hidden signals in markets. My favorite signal is silver, which I call the omniscient market in that whenever something is good or bad it seems to hit the silver market first. Recently, I have been discovering the hidden signals in the Dow Jones, which seems to go the 50 and 100's during the day, much more than randomness would suggest. Another hidden signal is the movement in bond prices that always seem to predate a major move in stocks. Another one is the Israel market, which I have found quite useful in predicting where the US markets will waft.

If Niederhoffer can profit from this, and stir clear of those sudden market moves that quash belief in mean reversion, I wish him well. The word "prediction" strikes as a problem in waiting.

Larry Williams Opines

March 29, 2007

I caught a review of TurtleTrader recently from Larry Williams. In part it said:

"Long story to this website; mostly negative, vile stuff about people that is not correct, and sets themselves out as the savior...Where is their heart? This is not how good thinking people treat others. There are many ways to make a good cup of market soup.. some like it hot, some like it cold, some like it in the pot, nine days old."

Controversial, tough, opinionated, passionate is my goal. I would be curious as to the exact "vile" parts of my websites. I do thank Larry for taking the time to give free press.

Jeremy Siegel View

March 15, 2007

Jeremy Siegel offers this view about recent market activity. An excerpt:

When stocks were in this uptrend, the market attracted many "trend followers" or "momentum players." These are speculators who make no judgment about whether stocks are cheap or expensive but only want to jump on the bandwagon. There's an old expression on Wall Street -- "Make the trend your friend" -- and that's just what these speculators did. But these trend-followers knew that the bull market wouldn't last forever. They protect their profits by placing stop-loss orders below the current price. A stop-loss order tells the market maker to sell whenever the stock penetrates a predetermined level. Because the market never moved down 2 percent for so long, many stop-loss orders were placed 2 percent below the market. Once the 2 percent limit was breached, a wave of selling broke out.

Don't Call Me a Loser

March 04, 2007

Feedback in from last night:

Hi Michael, I have been a subscriber to your newsletter and have read your book. I understand there are many great trend followers in the past and will have many more in the future. However, I find your complete dismissal of other systems a little disturbing. I have read a few cases, where you have labeled readers who question trend following as losers or otherwise. Has it occurred to you that there may be more than one way to do things? While you cite the various trend followers as proof that trend following works -- fine, it does. But at the same time, you can't completely ignore the successes of others that do not use trend following.

Clearly, Warrren Buffett is not a loser, but he is my opinion the ultimate unrepeatable outlier. And my use of the term "loser" has been to describe market "losers" as in losing money. There are winners and there are losers. Should we not talk about losing situations like the LTCM crisis? Or should people who buy and hold no matter what, making less money than trend following, be excused from criticism? Given the fact that most people have still never heard of trend following and that most academics still say it doesn't really work, your email feels like a compliment.

"No Way It Works!"

February 16, 2007

I caught this criticism of trend following recently:

"Not only is trend following invalid statistically but, looking at the bigger picture, it has to be invalid logically without even running your unusual tests. If wealth distribution is to remain in the range of 20 to 80, trend following cannot exist. In other words, if the majority followed the trend (hence the concept of trends), and if trend following is in fact profitable, the majority will become rich and the 20-80 distribution will collapse...So in brief, no - trends do not exists and can not exist either statistically or logically, with the exception of the forever upward drift of population and general markets with some curves steeper than others, those of the countries with the extra weapon called land and immigration."

I am assuming this guy would argue that every dollar ever made by a trend following trader was just dumb luck? Don't the performance numbers mean something to a guy like this? Of course, trend following is really about answering these 5 questions:

* How do you determine what market to buy or sell at any time?
* How much of a market do you buy or sell at any time?
* How do you determine when you buy or sell a market?
* How do you determine when you get out of a losing position?
* How do you determine when you get out of a winning position?

At the end of the day everyone needs a trend to make money, but the five questions are where the rubber meets the road.

Also Looking for Performance

February 07, 2007

This guy has been writing in for a while now. His latest:

Mr. Covel: In the interest of trying to figure out the efficacy of trending et al, I did a search for CTA returns. I came up with the Barclay Index; this may or may not be germane, but if it's right, the average returns aren't anything to write home about. If I have it wrong, then please point me in the direction for information as to what these great and not so great traders get in the way of returns.

The same answer applies. It is worth noting that this reader does have my book.

"No Performance" Criticism

February 06, 2007

I found this excerpt from a criticism of this site:

One of the brilliant marketing tactics used on the site is the continuous repetition of the open question "Why are they (the TF managers) so rich?". The question is offered as a sophist response to the real world question as to whether TF makes money. The marketing brilliance lies in the fact that there is never a need to provide factual support or performance records.

The performance data on pages 299-354 of my book Trend Following is clearly a mirage. I agree! Those pages don't really exist.

Passionate Criticism

November 06, 2006

The book Trend Following brings forward the passion. Here is a review seen recently:

After reading 100 pages I still have yet to see a definition of trend following. Tries to add props by invoking great trend followers. This book really pissed me off, website is the same, lauds trend following, rips everything else. What the F**K is it?

I can't tell whether reviews like this are serious (i.e. not just competitive business reviews) or whether the reader really doesn't "see" it. I do know from literally thousands of reader emails, that the book does answer this question for many. That said, I wish it answered it for all!

A Review from Mars

October 27, 2006

I saw this review recently about Trend Following:

"This is a poorly written book that is riddled with survivor bias. Furthermore, it never gives specific advice regarding how to find the trends to follow. Instead, it just profiles the heroics of guys who could see big trends coming (by some means other than systematic technical analysis) and won big by guessing right. What a frustrating piece of junk."

I do not profess to be a literary giant and people will have different tastes for different writing styles. Fair enough. But the notion that the traders profiled in Trend Following (and trend followers not profiled) were "guessing" right for 30 years and were not using systematic technical analysis - is asinine.

Now in all fairness, maybe this reviewer doesn't get what trend following is? I found another review by this same person for another book. It said:

I'm in the process of getting serious about investing as returns from existing investments are now a sizable part of my annual income. This book's main argument, that the stock market is going to be flat, at best, over the next decade seems pretty persuasive. The most persuasive reasons for this are:

- The market, when starting from a high P/E and low interest rates, historically is flat at best.
- The market historically overreacts to a bubble (like the Internet bubble) and we have not yet completed that overreaction.

[The author] recommends:

- Small-cap value oriented stock picking. This is the direction I was already intending to pursue. I think I'm going to need some help with this find the right kind of stock screening data.
- Hedge funds. This is counter to my strategy (and the whole value approach to investing) of really, deeply understanding your investments.
- Betting on a falling dollar. [The author] provides no specific ways of doing this.

I'm interesting in joining a club of serious investors who want to pool what they are learning in the areas of small-cap and value investing."

It is fair to say this reviewer doesn't get it. Frankly, I would like him to see it, but I do it find interesting how some people simply miss what trend following is and how it works.

Attacking Faith?

October 18, 2006

From Chris comes a head scratcher:

"I will be the first to give you a passing grade for putting a face on the trendfollowing methodology. And I follow your site with a great deal of respect for the body of work you produce. I just can't seem to understand why you seem to get so bent out shape when successful people credit God for their trading success or any success. If you don't believe in anything but your own greateness, well, I can respect that. But, for those of us who respect your work, and also have an abiding faith in God--please stop attacking our faith."

I did not know I was attacking Chris' faith. I do believe attributing trading success to "God" (whatever that means for whoever's religion) is illogical. Trading success, or any success for that matter, comes from hard work.

Another reader responded:

"Hi Michael-I feel I must come to your defense on this one. I guess I have followed your site for a year or so and to my way of thinking you have never attacked anyone's faith or lack thereof. I remember sending you my remembrances of my friend xxx and his comments on people who displayed Bibles or worse pictures of Jesus in their offices. If I had to bet ole' Chris probably has a big picture of Jesus in his office and I for one hope it helps him in his trading. In the Marine Corps we call folks like Chris REMF'S. If you are not familiar with the term I will send you the translation but I bet you know what it stands for!"

It is not my desire to have some big "faith" debate - to each his own. But when it comes to trading success...faith is not a reliable answer.

What Separates Them?

September 14, 2006

Yesterday I made the case at a presentation here in Hong Kong that the difference between those great traders who make it and those who don't is drive. The ability to stick with, to never quit is the Maginot line between winning and losing. One person in the audience said it couldn’t be that easy. Who said mental toughness is easy? It's not.

Criticism: Learning from It

July 06, 2006

I get criticized by some people. They don't like my message perhaps. Or maybe they detect an attitude that doesn't work for them. It all comes with the territory. Along those lines I saw Mark Cuban offer a good bit on criticism today at his blog:

"The easiest thing in the world to avoid is criticism. All you have to do is nothing. Do nothing of your own free will. Do only what is asked of you and nothing more, and chances are you will never be criticized. For those of us who set goals and want to have an impact in the business world in particular, criticism is part of the job description. You have to be able to be able to take it and sometimes you can’t be afraid to dish it out. Although criticism is typically perceived as a negative, it can be one of the most positive and motivating forces any of us can experience. The key to turning criticism into a positive is understanding the nature of the criticism. In a nutshell it comes down to content. Is the criticism based on content or not. I’ve received a ton of criticism in the media over the last few weeks. People criticized where, when and how I did things. Not a single person criticized or challenged why. I get criticized a lot. So what. If someone says something of value. I will learn from it. If they criticize to fill up a column or to hear them[selves] talk, I can get a good laugh out of it. What it all comes down to is content and effort. If someone puts in the effort and challenges the content and makes me rethink my position, I come out ahead. So criticize away."

This 'attitude' is useful for anyone and everyone no matter what they do or pursue.

Clarification on Systems Trading

April 13, 2006

Feedback on Trend Following:

"A frequent (and valid) criticism of the book Trend Following is that its author often says the word "trend following" when in fact what he means is "mechanical systems trading" in general -- forgetting that there [are] several major classes of mechanical systems, only one of which is trend following."

No, that's not what I mean. The book Trend Following is about long-term trend following trading. It lays out with detail the men who trade this way. Most trend followers are systematic, but the decision to systematically trade comes only after making the decision to trade as a trend follower. Trend following trading is a style. It is a method based on a philosophy. On the other hand, "systems trading" means nothing in the abstract unless you define what kind of system it is.

The Pedigree

April 11, 2006

I was at a local function today near where I live. An older gentleman walked in with a copy of Burton G. Malkiel's A Random Walk Down Wall Street. For a quick refresher, here is the Publishers Weekly review of Malkiel's book:

The eternal truth of this updated investment classic, originally published in 1973, is simple: you can't beat the market. Well, technically, you can beat the market, but not profitably, because the transaction costs of your brilliant trading will eat up the extra returns. You can also beat the market by pure luck-but you can't deliberately beat the market, because you can't predict future stock prices. You can't predict them by divining Wall Street's crowd psychology; or by charting trends in stock prices; or by doing lots of research on companies' business prospects. You can't predict them from hemlines (though there's been "some evidence" for correlation between skirt length and market prices in the past, Malkiel poo-poos future possibilities) or Super Bowl winners (this, he says, makes "no sense"). In fact, according to the efficient market theory, which states that all knowable information about a stock's value is already reflected in its share price, you can't predict them at all.

Back to my story. I said to him in a very pleasant way, "There are some problems with your book." He was surprised I recognized it or knew anything about it. He wanted to chat. He then told me of his background. Taught at Princeton. Graduate School at University of Chicago and a career at the Federal Reserve. Impressive background. We kept talking. I mentioned that my book laid out contradictory information to Malkiel's long-time bestseller. Guess what happened? Nothing. He did not want any debate. No new information was desired that might upset his long held view and he got away from me fast. However, I did find his address in the phone book and sent him a copy of Trend Following.

James Altucher: Critic

December 18, 2005

Even though James Altucher refuses to recognize trend following as viable, I do appreciate and thank him for his mention of my blog and book Trend Following in his 'RealMoney.com Blog Watch' for December 17, 2005.

Doesn't Like Trend Following

December 17, 2005

Feedback recently posted about the book "Trend Following":

"This book is another pie-in-the-sky book. Technical analysis is not the end all to investing in markets. Sure, the author has empirical data but...so what. He fails to mention the enormous DD's one has to endure in order to make money. It is proven that mechanical trading systems do not hold their weight in gold. By and by, they become obosolete [sic] because...they were curtailed to a selective time frame that no longer supports their viability in the wake of present time. Relying solely on mechanical trading systems that are derivatives of technical analysis is futile to longevity investing in the markets unless you have a lot of money you can use to weather the storm with. This strategy is best suitable for CTA's and hedge funds...people who have the money to put up and stay in the game with...if the situation gets kind of murky."

1. I wonder if this reader read p. 6-10 of the book?
2. I wonder if this reader read p. 246 of the book (last paragraph)?
3. I wonder if this reader understands that the Nasdaq is in a 55% drawdown spanning 5.5 years?
4. I wonder where it is proven "that mechanical trading systems do not hold their weight in gold?" What does that mean exactly?
5. I wonder what "By and by, they become obosolete because...they were curtailed to a selective time frame that no longer supports their viablilty in the wake of present time" actually means? If readers can interpret for me, send in an email.

In terms of trend following becoming obsolete, that cry has been screamed by skeptics for over 30 years. I know some very wealthy trend followers who must wake up every day dreading their "obsolescence"!

Confusion Reigns

October 04, 2005

I have seen both positive and negative reviews for the book Trend Following. The positive praise needs no comment. It's great and I appreciate it. The negative views of the book, however, are very instructive. There are typically two types of negative reviews. The first kind is usually written by people attempting to prop up some other "strategy". The other kind is written by people who think they know exactly what trend following is, but in reality they have no clue. For example, one negative reviewer of the book offered this opinion about another book detailing so-called "Elliott Wave" trading:

"One problem is that [he] gives extensive wiggle room in his use of retracements to define patterns. This means his categories, while appearing rigorously objective, actually overlap to a considerable degree. You will often be left with 2 choices for a label, despite applying the rules consistently. That isn't necessarily [his] fault--he is being realistic. No one ever said the market was easy. I wouldn't tackle this text if you were unfamiliar with classical technical analysis. Elliott wave can be a frustrating theory. I've gotten headaches trying to count corrective patterns. Despite what [he] says, conventional indicators, candlesticks, and chart patterns can be very helpful when wave counts are not. Classical technicals and Elliott often overlap--suggesting the same conclusion. When they do, then you know you have a potential profit opportunity."

It is safe to say, whoever wrote this review, is not possibly in a place to begin to understand or even critique trend following trading. His current belief set rests entirely on Holy Grails and magical thinking.

United Kingdom Regulation

October 02, 2005

In the ongong debate about regulation, the United Kingdom has been far from perfect. David Harding, of London-based manager Winton Capital Management offered:

"We wonder why British investors are being protected from sophisticated, scientific, statistical investment techniques, while being peddled endless highly speculative stocks on which they lose all their money".

David nails the contradiction with famous British sarcasm.

Reuters Misses the Point

June 20, 2005

From Reuters:

"SINGAPORE, June 20 (Reuters) - Oil prices soared to a new record high over $59 a barrel on Monday, extending last week's surge as a threat against Western consulates in OPEC member Nigeria jolted traders already worried about tight supplies. Oil prices climbed more than 9 percent, or nearly $5, last week, drawing additional buying interest from trend-following hedge funds as they surpassed the previous early April high."

Trend followers are not pushing the market to $60. They are following a trend.

Confusion and Critics

May 06, 2005

It seems "some" believe I don't accentuate drawdowns of trend followers enough. I am very clear on pages 95-100 of my book Trend Following. Trading is risky. You can win and you can lose...and drawdowns are part of the game.

The issue of "testing" by trend followers was also recently broached as a trend following critic declared:

"[Trend following systems] are often untested...If tested, their variability is too high to rule out randomness, and...If tested relative to uncertainty, they assume past seemingly non-random movements of prices are predictive of what's going to happen in the future."

I find these comments odd. Does this critic really believe trend follower David Harding, as one example, does no testing of his trend following methods? Does this critic believe 25 plus years of performance from various trend followers is actually random luck?

Angry, Angry Reader

April 28, 2005

This email arrived just about one year ago today from someone named "Joe Blow":

"What do you know about trading?...You have written regurgitated fluff on the facts that long terms exist. Bravo. Your book reminds me of how Kiyosaki writes on money to the masses - totally useless. I would not read anything you have to say and I am sure to see your book at a discount in Borders selling $4 - like so many."

As Ed Seykota might say, perhaps it is time this reader look into himself and analyze the root of his anger. In terms of the price of my book, I would like to see Amazon drop the price some, but it doesn't appear $4 a book will be here any time soon!

Critical Insanity

April 18, 2005

There are critics of trend following out there. But their typical method of operation is to launch personal attacks instead of debating the strategy on the merits. That said, in today's Washington Post Howard Kurtz wrote an article titled "For Every Story, An Online Epilogue Via E-Mail and Blog, Anyone's a Critic". Some excerpts of where the anonymous chat/blog world has gone:

"ABC's Linda Douglass says she has "learned that I have not just critics but people who seem to hate me that I don't even know about." "It's very nasty and personal and scatological," says Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank." But the increasingly caustic nature of some online criticism is prompting many journalists to complain that their honesty and motivation are being trashed along with their work."
Howard Kurtz

"You want to pay attention to what legitimate critics are saying out there," Nagourney says. "In journalism, you screw up from time to time. But it's become so toxic -- attacks for the sake of attacks." "As for "smear artists" on the Internet, Greenfield says, "The freedom that it gives anonymous twerps to spew out invective -- that they don't like the way you look or think you're an idiot or a child abuser -- that's just part of the process."
Howard Kurtz

"There's so much noise that you have to tune it out. It's very rare I'll write any story that doesn't get criticized by someone...Complete strangers make assumptions that they know your innermost thoughts."
Howard Kurtz

Feedback on Recent Review

February 20, 2005

The recent review of my book "Trend Following" here has generated feedback:

"A couple of observations on your comments re: Kate Welling. To start, your book is a very good read. I have been following you, your site, etc. for some time and agree with your view of trading. Others have and will continue to make money in arbitrage, value investing, etc...The end story of the different methods boils down to understanding your style/method and sticking to it. If it were easy to get rich trading just by learning math, there would be a lot of wealthy former math teachers running around!...Back to Kate, understand that she works for Weeden & Co., a small broker dealer in CT. They have a small research product, trading, banking, etc. And that is what she sells! She works in a sellside shop that makes it's living selling THEIR advice."
Reader Feedback February 20, 2005

Peter Deoteris on Trend Following

February 18, 2005

Welling@Weeden Writer Peter Deoteris Drops the Ball on Trend Following.

Free Audio CD

Free Michael Covel Audio CD.

Free Newsletter

Sign up now for free Trend Following® email newsletter. Published since 1996 for thousands of traders, corporations and individuals in 70 countries.

Endorsements

"A mandatory reference for anyone serious about alternative investments."
Jon Sundt
President and CEO of Altegris

Seminars

Information request form for in person seminars.

Blogroll

Big Picture
Blog Maverick
Bull (Not Bull)
Freakonomics Blog
Infectious Greed
Knowledge Problem
Mises Economics Blog
Reason Hit & Run
WallStrip