Old post revival
I have to say the opinion of teaching due to lack of ability to do what your teaching is inaccurate and certainly not true but only an opinion
I have some experience with this subject, and I'm sure there is may with this opinion and even many in which this does happen to be true, but what ratio ?
Or do we even know.
I would have to say that even if there is 50-50 chance of this that does not make it true.
Consider there are those who have already created wealth and what are you suppose to do once you get past the wealth, the success, the big house, the many cars, the many vacations. Then what ?
There are those who enjoy teaching what they know and many do it for free, and others feel payment is needed for various reason too.
Are people expected to provide a service for free once they have known some level of success?
And even if you have not reached the level of success from personal trades or personally utilizing the information you have gathered does not make the information inaccurate either.
So whats the point ?
Well, the umbrella in suggesting that teaching or even being paid to teach could also be applied to the public school system as well. Meaning you can't take them seriously because they were unable to achieve success in what their teaching and thus the settle for being paid to teach what they have ?
This is certainly not true.
And so it's equally not true for all other industries, but I would say trading does appear to attract more program sellers then actual proficient traders.
Or does it ?
Perhaps sales people in general just have another product to sell ?
They are already successful at what they do and the product could very well be sales of training programs and not about the product at all.
If there are affiliate programs that profit from the sales of the teaching then it's likely that is the program and not the actual product at all.
I'm not really making a good point about this really, but can just say that there are those who enjoy sharing what they know and if they charge for it out of habit, or charge on principle, or even offer it for free then I see no evidence that this is because they could not actually trade them self.
I know that the MTI trading plan is very good, and is quite expensive.
This person has traded and I don't see that he really needs to even do the training and teaching but it's obvious he enjoys and like doing what he's doing.
You can see this in he mentor-ship program and the people that he has working there.
I really enjoyed the system,charts,DVD set and Ultimate Trading Package for something like $4,000 bucks from what I remember.
I switched to Linux and non of there software works well with linux so I'm sorry I had to stop the services, but I had to make decisions.
I am still using most of the information I learned from them and recommend it to anyone. Was well worth the $4k and more in my opinion.
The problem with trading in general is that it does not produce residual income no matter how large of a time frame you trade.
The larger the time frame the larger the risk, and the longer the trade takes to transpire. But you still have to be watching it.
With training and teaching you can have people that teach and also some have the DVD set which sells and this creates residual income which is different then trading.
Trading will not really produce residual income unless you use robot or something.
I think this is the difference with traders vs teacher and not measured by any such success for failure as to whether they have decided to be a teacher or a trader because there are just too many variables
.
Anyhow just bored watching charts and reading posts so I figured I'd spark the old post on this subject.
Happy Trading.
