InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 475
Posts 40458
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 02/18/2007

Re: peeved post# 37254

Thursday, 11/08/2007 4:59:59 PM

Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:59:59 PM

Post# of 87069
Peeved, did you just say "guaranteed" 95% positive trades??

LOL, is that really your opinion of SWARM just because they did that a couple of days? I tell you what. If they could almost guarantee the market 95% in winning trades this system would be bought out immediately for 100 billion dollars to the highest bidder ok?

Do you even know what a cash cow that would be? And a very important issue here is that the system has to do 95 constant as you say with big money which is practically undoable. It's one thing to achieve a good performance with 1 or 2 contracts like they did in the test demo, but when you move 1000 contracts on a daytrading basis in and out of the futures markets you get serious liquidity problems and can't avoid slippages which gets on your performance.

If somebody out there would think that 95% with a big amount of money is even realistic, he would already bought all shares available of SPZI because SPZI holds 120 million of 141 and if that above would be realistic we are looking at a 100 billion dollar company within 18 months.

I don't think that somebody is really buying heavy SPZI shares right now as you can see on the chart. Another thing. Do you really really think it's realistic that Paul does license out this SWARM thing for only 1.5 million (which is a joke in my eyes) if he really thinks there is the slightest chance that this system makes 95% winning trades on a constant basis? Do you really think he would do that? Do you even realize what kind of money he could demand for such a system? You know sometimes it's worth to think about realitey and not just about dreams. Does that all make sense to you? smile