Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 18:43:20 06/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 06, 2001 at 18:04:51, Graham Laight wrote: >On June 06, 2001 at 13:24:26, Chris King wrote: > >>On June 06, 2001 at 13:01:56, Graham Laight wrote: >> >>>Once upon a time, chess computers were expensive, and not especially good. >>>Gradually, they became cheaper and better. Now anyone (who already has a >>>computer) has the ability to sit at home and generate excellent chess moves very >>>cheaply. >>> >>>Right now, if you want to buy the stock selection program "Tradingsolutions", it >>>will cost you $1,000. Presumably, it will allow you to select stocks and time >>>your purchases to improve your chances of making money. >> >>If the people who make this program are so clever why aren't they making >>fortunes for themselves on the stock exchange, instead of trying to con people >>into buying their overpriced program. > >Granted - a good point. > >However - I wish to make 3 points in reply: > >* it probably makes better recommendations than most of the public would > >* the same question should be put to stockbrokers, media tipsters, fund >managers, or anyone who ever recommends shares The reason anyone does this or similar things is that there are two obvious ways to make money with knowledge: 1) Apply the knowledge. 2) Sell the knowledge. Some types of knowledge can be applied extremely easily and with great reward. "Double your money every week" is a good example. One year later a dollar has turned into $2^52, which is big money, and hardly something you'd want to risk by telling someone else about it. "Earn 10% interest" is not a good example. If you have a hundred bucks now, in a year you have $110. That's a good return, but this doesn't mean anything if you don't have the money to invest. So in this case, selling the information could prove to be a significant improvement over applying it. If they are claiming a guaranteed 100% yearly return, or something like that, that's a major red flag, and I would be almost certain that there is a catch. I'd be less concerned about something that allows you to earn a sane return with a sane amount of risk. People who manage funds are in the latter category. They can make more money more reliably by selling their knowledge rather than applying it for direct personal benefit. There is nothing wrong with this. bruce
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.