Your Questions About Successful Traders Make

William asks…

How long you learn in order to be a professional and experience forex trader?

Some people said it is very long i.e. 2 to 10 years is it true?

John answers:

I can’t speak to the professional aspect but I’ve been trading Forex for a couple years and am marginally successful but it takes a lot of work and in the beginning, a lot of money. I blew through my first $5,000 account in about 2 months. In looking back, I realize that while I thought I was good and would make a killing, I didn’t have a clue. Over the 2 years, I’ve learned a lot and have developed techniques that work for me but it’s a lot of work – 20+ hours per week reading everything I can about the economies of other countries and trying to understand what the market is going to do in response to economic reports and news. You really have to be on top of things and you have to develop a strategy that works for you.

I treat it as a hobby – something I can do to keep the brain active as I approach retirement. My goals are to make more money than I lose and will keep trading as long as I can do that but to be honest, I make more money in the stock market.

The get rich quick schemes for Forex may sound good but it just doesn’t happen for the average individual.

Robert asks…

what is more successful for the day trader short selling or trading?

what is more successful for the day trader short selling or trading? Is their just as much highs and lows in stock? whats the higher statistic: high or lows ?

John answers:

Trading. Short selling is risky if you are not well experienced in market.

George asks…

How Do Royal Mail Communicate If I Have Been Successful With My Share Application?

I have requested some Royal Mail shares and just wondered how they inform me if I have been successful with my application please. Thank you

John answers:

Shareholders of any shares receive correspondence through the post from the Registrars of the Company, not from the Company itself.
Http://www.londonstockexchange.com/traders-and-brokers/private-investors/private-investors/stock-markets/registrars/registrars.htm

Sandra asks…

How a fund manager end up to be instructor?

i had a course in business analysis last month, and the instructor told us that he was like a $500 million fun manager for 8 years. And as many of you know, big funds charge their clients around 20% of profits + 2% commission fees. Even if the fund loses money, the worst scenario is that it will still receive the fixed commission fees. So, if my course instructor was a manager for such a long years, i assumed he is successful enough to return good profits. In other words, he should have collected at least $5 – $15 million.. That’s big cash.. But why he is instructor??! he mentioned that he get paid per week, with no further details.. thanks for sharing your ideas

John answers:

Some hedge funds charge 2 and 20. Mutual funds are typically in the range of 0.50% to 1% with no incentive fee. That amount is paid to the firm, not the manager. The PM’s compensation would likely be a modest fraction of the total fees which also have to support management, sales, marketing, legal, technology, office space, clerical, back office, analysts, traders, etc.

Some financial planners (ex: American Express) call themselves portfolio managers even though their role has little resemblance to mutual fund or hedge fund portfolio managers. This doesn’t pay anything like the real job.

Your instructor may be teaching for the fun of it. If he made big money and still needs a job, then consider the role of taxes, excessive spending, messy divorce, college tuition, etc.

James asks…

Where are the successful liberal businesses that will pay livable wages?

Okay, you have Costco, Trader Joe’s, and a few other companies that have their owners decide by choice (as they’re entitled to) that this is the path they’ll take in terms of pay.

Where is the massive influx of intelligent and witty liberals to open, run, and operate hundreds and hundreds multi billion dollar corporations and pay this liveable wage that they fight so hard complete with benefits and everything? Can’t they compete, considering liberal economics and liberal CEOs should be extremely intelligent relative to their “dumber” conservative counterparts (as cited by liberals in studies) and thus superior businessmen?
Talking in 2013 with contemporary companies, higher competition, and a more embedded global market.
Apple, Google, and Microsoft pay liveable wages because their workers are engineers and computer scientists. Of course they deserve a wage. I’m talking about LOW SKILL SET WORKERS who are demanding liveable wages.

Then why won’t they work for those companies? Wait, don’t they need a skill set to work for those companies? Oh darn…..looks like the fry cook needs to enroll and take a C programming class.
Why hasn’t anyone noted that Apple, Google, and Microsoft don’t pay liveable wages to the janitor sweeping the floors? They’re paying it to the PhD electrical engineer or the witty computer science intern who is famous for his own compiling algorithm.
Oh please, I know a lot of hippy Occupy Wallstreet liberals who work at thrift stores for $7.25/hr.

John answers:

“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” Ronald Reagan
The Liberal ideology is a theory which holds forth beliefs that have no basis in reality.
They are Advocates of a policy that empowers a strong government to enslave its people with a high tax burden incident to the support of extravagant and unnecessary social programs destructive to both the work ethic among the lower class, and the incentive to innovate and succeed among the working class.
The problems we face today are because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
A democracy will continue to exist up until
the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous
gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority
always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from
the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally
collapse over loose fiscal policy
A broken government can’t be fixed by the same government that broke it.
@

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.