The Proof of Fantastic Results

I'd like to draw an analogy to what seems to be a favorite topic which appears to split many discussions into 2 camps (perhaps 3 groups if you include those on the fence, the agnostics).

If I said to you that I clocked my Ferrari at 300 MPH on the I-5 would you believe me? Probably not, I certainly wouldn't believe it.

If, however, I showed you the citation that I received or more likely the newspaper article describing the trouble that I go into after being caught doing that you would probably have no problem believing it.

If I tell you that I took a $10,000 account and turned it into $1,000,000 over 1 year and am now selling you the system so that you can do it would you believe me? If so, what reason do you have to believe what I have said? You would (and should) want to see proof before buying the system.

This doesn't just apply to trading but almost any claim that anybody makes.

The vendors are constantly competing for new customers from a rather small pool of prospects. And once a customer commits to a service, the odd's of that individual returning to the pool as a willing buyer of a new service is very low.

This leads to a spiral of one-upsmanship in order to attract attention in an increasingly competetive group of very similar advisory services.

For me personally, when I visit a vendor's web site, or read their sales pitch, they all tend to blend together after a while...looking and sounding basically the same.... using slightly different words to say or promise the same thing.

Do I believe a vendor has somehow discovered a trading system that consistently produces a 96% win rate ? AND, out of the goodness of their heart they want to share this miraculous secret of unlimited wealth potential with me ?

pt is that a nay or ay vote whether youd buy this thing? if nay please explain why.

max

quote:

---

Originally posted by max

pt is that a nay or ay vote whether youd buy this thing? if nay please explain why.

max

---

Let's rephrase your question... your asking me: would I give $5,000 to someone that replied to an inquiry for records of past performance with a vague statement of the system having a "90 % accuracy" ?

What the vendor is saying is: I cannot provide reasonable proof, I have not prepared any type of formal trading records to back up my claims, so instead trust me and take my word for it, it's 90% accurate.

My immediate question is: what exactly does the phrase "90% accurate" actually mean ?

Here is my simple question for any vendor: why can't the vendor provide reasonable proof, a week by week or month by month non-proprietary track record ? What is the actual reason why ?

For example, the vendor could very easily maintain an excel spreadsheet table showing the actual performance of the service on a month by month basis. In January 2006 the system produced this profit or return on investment. Then provide that simple performance information to new customers. So why won't the vendor provide even that simple level of non-proprietary information about the service being offered for sale ?

....meanwhile over in the real world:
In order to obtain and hold a CTA license a trader must maintain very specific and detailed records verifying an actual trading history. The CTA is required by law to provide this non-proprietary performance information in the form of a disclosure document to new clients / customers. This is not some simulation from a computer program, or some other made up story, it is produced from independently verifiable trading records. A violation of this rule, will result in action (a fine and possible loss of the license) by the CFTC/NFA levied against the CTA.

So if all licensed CTA's maintain and provide a detailed non-proprietary trading history of their service to their customers, why can't Falcon or any of these unlicensed and unregulated advisory services ?