"The 'perfect' trading system - page 145

New comment
 
Dezil:
I see nothing pleases the forum members more than someone else's flush. Sad comrades. It's like, so what if my cow died, but my neighbour's two died...

That's not a valid comparison. You come to the market, you're driven by self-interest, not a desire to drink milk
 
wise:
The investors (the sponsors of his useless activity, not the "PAMM investors") seem to behave like a typical trader. They can't cut their losses and are investing and investing in the hope of a miracle that Artyukhov will give birth to something profitable. But after all "Profit is nothing" (in Artyukhov's words). =)
Then everything is all right, he is a normal participant of the innovation process. The venture form implies the risks of having crazy and not so crazy inventors, they are inherent in the very idea of the project.
 
Dezil:
I see nothing pleases the forum members more than someone else's flush. Sad comrades. It's like, so what if my cow died, but my neighbour's two died...
You've got it wrong... You might want to start by re-reading the thread.
 
granit77:
Then everything is fine, he is a normal participant in the innovation process. The venture form implies the risks of having crazy and not so crazy inventors; they are embedded in the very idea of the project.
As if, yes, but why did we need to call on outside venture capitalists for untested products? They could have quietly siphoned off 100 thousand instead of 3 million. Now these Pinocchios will be saying at every turn that trading robots (any) is very bad. =)
 
wise:
Why, yes, but why did you have to call in the patsies from the outside for a run-of-the-mill product? You could have quietly dumped 100 grand, not 3 million. Now these Pinocchios will tell you at every turn that trading robots (any) are very bad. =)
There were no robots.
 
eugene-last:

This is an incorrect comparison. You come to the market, you are driven by self-interest, not a desire to drink milk
I don't get the logic. At the end of the day any freak or crook can be the owner of a pamm and it's up to each individual investor to decide depending on their (I emphasise their) greed and/or stupidity.
 
paukas:
There were no robots there.
Well, "councillors". What's the difference?
 

wise 12.10.2011 17:12

paukas:
There were no robots there.
Well, "advisers". What's the difference?
Boys, don't fight, the result is the same....)))))
 
wise:
Well, 'councillors'. What difference does it make?
There were no councillors, I can quote the author.
 
What happened? =)
1...138139140141142143144145146
New comment