# What are your trading objectives?



## pavilion103 (19 October 2013)

Not sure which sub-forum to put this in. Please move if appropriate. 

I'm curious to know what people's trading objectives are in terms of lifestyle implications. 
Not so much: my objective is to make 30% p.a.
But rather: my objective is to make 30% p.a. which will allow me to take an extra holiday a year or to work part time etc. 


I'll start. 
My major focus is freedom. I do want to accumulate wealth but it isn't my primary consideration. My trading objectives are based around freeing me up from employment, which would allow me to devote my time to other things that I would like to accomplish. 

My trading strategies also incorporate the principle of spending a small amount of time each night 'tidying up' trades, so that I'm not stuck at the screen (I guess a semi-passive income). 

My goals:
- Cut back to 4 days a week at work (with the option to return to 5 at any time I like)
THEN cut back to 3 days a week (with the same option as above). 
I'd like to achieve this in the shortish-medium term.
THEN when I am making a decent wage from trading, take a 6-12 month leave period (with the option to come back full time if I like) and then consider my options and see how my overall net worth is looking. 
Luckily I have a job that may be able to facilitate this arrangement. 
It is a very cautious approach with a strong safety net due to the volatility of trading.
THEN if all goes well spend my time pursuing other "ventures"/"opportunities"

How will I do this?
1) ASX momentum setup strategy
2) Sub 10c stock strategy
3) Some Index futures trading at night
4) Some medium term Index futures trading getting on a good trend and adding to it. 

I've put a huge amount of work into my trading in the last 3 years and see this as an enormous possibility to work in the way that I desire. 


What are others' objectives?


----------



## CanOz (19 October 2013)

My current metric for my intraday trading is to get my average trade to $50.00 or more. So to clarify, each time I pull the trigger, on average I net $50. I think it's a reasonable goal given my statistics so far. I think it will take me the better part of this year to achieve this part of my plan.

In doing this I want to establish an auditable record of results. 

I have other plans that will need the credibility that this brings.

My goals are to be able to provide a similar living and lifestyle that we are accustomed to now, whist building wealth for the future as well. I want to remain an entrepreneur, enjoying the benefits of freedom.

I wont go into my other projects that I have on the go, but I have several irons in the fire and we're always looking at opportunities for myself or my wife in small business. 

The transition from career employee to self employed has been difficult but living in china has made a differnce, in regards to cost of living. I would not have done this if not for this situation. 

I don't particularly want to trade fulltime as a career, as I tend to enjoy the analysis more than the actual trading itself. I also enjoy sharing my knowledge with others so that's something I can see myself doing as I gain more and more experience and reach the level I want to reach.


----------



## payday (19 October 2013)

My objective is to be the best that I can be. As a full time trader, it is incumbent upon me to derive as much income as possible. I love this game. The freedom it gives and the almost unlimited potential in terms of dollars. To me, the only outcome of trading is the amount of money you can make. It might sound flippant, but that's what makes me tick. There are so many ways to play this game, but as long as you are making money then that must be the right way - until it isn't! It can be challenging and frustrating at times, but that only gives me more drive to improve - to succeed. I view it almost like a sport. The more you practice, the better you get at it. You just need the right attitude and the right training of course. I don't set myself percentage limits or dollar limits - rather - I set myself performance targets ie being consistent in my trading and trading my setups when they occur and staying disciplined. The market is ever changing - that's why it never gets boring for me. 
I guess my material objective is to be able to afford a kickass ski trip every year to wherever the powder is coming down the hardest.


----------



## burglar (19 October 2013)

Though I do it very badly, I love trading!

I like penny-dreads, the adrenaline is unbelievable.
Unfortunately I have acquired a few bad habits which keep me poor.

But one day I will be RIDING THE TIGER again!

(Falcon FCN from $0.19 to $1.42 and oops, slips, back to $0.50 before exiting)


----------



## pavilion103 (19 October 2013)

burglar said:


> Though I do it very badly, I love trading!  I like penny-dreads, the adrenaline is unbelievable. Unfortunately I have acquired a few bad habits which keep me poor.  But one day I will be RIDING THE TIGER again!  (Falcon FCN from $0.19 to $1.42 and oops, slips, back to $0.50 before exiting)  <img src="https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=54825"/>




Check out my sub 10c stock thread. 
Will be interesting to monitor some of these!


----------



## tinhat (20 October 2013)

I am relying on an active investing approach rather than trading to generate the majority of my current income plus accumulate capital plus I use the same strategy to manage my mother's money which funds her retirement and I manage funds under trust for a disabled family member.

Income stocks: At the moment I look for opportunities to take positions with 6-7% net yield from companies with sound balance sheets, decent ROE and either stable or growing EPS outlooks. The days of accumulating the big four banks and Telstra at yields of 7% net are gone but there are still companies yielding 7% before franking credits with good balance sheets out there.

Capital Gain/Momentum: Aim is to invest in companies where I feel there is an opportunity for a 20%+ return over the holding window (whether that be three months to twelve months) on stocks with solid balance sheets. This will be based on a combination of FA discount to value and TA momentum. An example is BOL. I bought not long ago and am up 20%. I have no conviction towards this company but it has a sound balance sheet. I bought based on momentum.

Short term trade. Not often, but every now and then I hop onto volatility in a stock to make a day trade or very short term trade when I am having a day in front of the computer rather than outdoors where I  prefer to be. I do this very rarely and with very small position sizes but tend to do OK. I'm looking for a 5% return and will more often take profit and sell out if I get a 10% return. The last example was IDC where I bought and sold on the 08/1013 for a 10% profit.

Actual performance of the portfolios I manage has been good income generation from dividends but soft capital gains overall, below those objectives, which I put down to making lots of mistakes and going through a learning curve over the past four years - most notably not cutting capital losses early.


----------



## burglar (20 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> Check out my sub 10c stock thread.
> Will be interesting to monitor some of these!




Every portfolio should have a lottery ticket.

I don't pretend to understand charting.
I've been here three years and this is what I have learnt.
The colours *are *significant.

Hoping to learn more along the way.
I watch on with interest.





I need a better broker to be successful.
I need to be successful to change broker.


----------



## zipzap (20 October 2013)

Nice post, 30% per annum is high, espeically as an average return. I think as part of your objectives you need to look at what is going to achieve 30% per annum. You are not going to get there trading Blue Chip shares, not without leverage anyway...

So in terms of what to trade to achieve 30% per year and some years you'll have nategtive returns and some years you'll make 100% plus, you're left with small cap and mid cap stocks or leveraged instruments like CFDs, futures and the like and that is a zero sum game so bloody hard to make anything at all.

Setting realistics objectives is probably step 1, 30% per year may not even be a realistic objective.

ZZ...


----------



## cynic (20 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> ...
> What are others' objectives?




1) Money!
2) More Money!!
3) Even More Money!!!
4) Refer 1-3
5) Refer 4
6) Refer 5
7) Etcetera


----------



## Julia (20 October 2013)

tinhat said:


> I am relying on an active investing approach rather than trading to generate the majority of my current income plus accumulate capital plus I use the same strategy to manage my mother's money which funds her retirement and I manage funds under trust for a disabled family member.



It's a huge responsibility to manage other people's money.  
We all make mistakes, even after many years, and I'd be sick with worry if I were getting it wrong even slightly with someone else's funds. 

Not something that worries you, tinhat?


----------



## cynic (20 October 2013)

Julia said:


> It's a huge responsibility to manage other people's money.
> We all make mistakes, even after many years, and I'd be sick with worry if I were getting it wrong even slightly with someone else's funds.
> ...




 + 1

Funnily enough, there's a whole industry of people that do just that and yet somehow manage to elude accountability when things turn pear-shaped!


----------



## Country Lad (20 October 2013)

zipzap said:


> Nice post, 30% per annum is high, espeically as an average return. I think as part of your objectives you need to look at what is going to achieve 30% per annum. You are not going to get there trading Blue Chip shares, not without leverage anyway....




In my view, 30% is quite achievable.  It is an average of only about 0.13% per trading day.  I would say that is particualrly achievable with the strategy pav has in place. 

ZZ, it may be worthwhile looking at pav's post below and his posts on his trading strategy for sub 10 cent shares as your comments are not really relevant to his post.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## So_Cynical (20 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> What are others' objectives?






cynic said:


> 1) Money!
> 2) More Money!!
> 3) Even More Money!!!
> 4) Refer 1-3
> ...




I'm with Cynic, its about the money, first comes the money, everything else is bull****.

Nic Taleb talks about **** you money, having enough money to say **** you to everyone...that's the sort of money i want/need, the end goal is the financial ability to say **** you.


----------



## burglar (20 October 2013)

cynic said:


> + 1
> 
> Funnily enough, there's a whole industry of people that do just that and yet somehow manage to elude accountability when things turn pear-shaped!




tinhat, I assume your mother is of pension age. 
How pear-shaped can it get?

My mother was in an aged care facility.
They took 85% (indexed) of her pension to cover all her needs.


----------



## pavilion103 (20 October 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I'm with Cynic, its about the money, first comes the money, everything else is bull****.  Nic Taleb talks about **** you money, having enough money to say **** you to everyone...that's the sort of money i want/need, the end goal is the financial ability to say **** you.




Lol why the heck would you want to say that to people? Got a chip on your shoulder?

I want money to have freedom and enjoy life and help others enjoy it too. I've got nothing against anyone else, just want to help as many as I can!


----------



## tech/a (20 October 2013)

Country Lad said:


> In my view, 30% is quite achievable.  It is an average of only about 0.13% per trading day.  I would say that is particualrly achievable with the strategy pav has in place.
> 
> ZZ, it may be worthwhile looking at pav's post below and his posts on his trading strategy for sub 10 cent shares as your comments are not really relevant to his post.
> 
> ...




Don't know about that CL
The method I introduced PAV
To I worked on in 1998 I couldn't
Return 30% a year consistently
In a single trade sure

Knowing what I know now
---- 
Perhaps PAV can.


----------



## pavilion103 (20 October 2013)

tech/a said:


> Don't know about that CL The method I introduced PAV To I worked on in 1998 I couldn't Return 30% a year consistently In a single trade sure  Knowing what I know now ---- Perhaps PAV can.




It would be achievable though Tech? Not out of the realms of possibility?
We did ok at the start of the year to return 50% on a small account in a very short time!

I guess it depends on account size also.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (20 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> Lol why the heck would you want to say that to people? Got a chip on your shoulder?
> 
> I want money to have freedom and enjoy life and help others enjoy it too. I've got nothing against anyone else, just want to help as many as I can!




If the ultimate aim is to enjoy life and help others enjoy it, do you need to be rich first?  Wouldn't the more expedient way be to devote your life _right now_ to helping others and forget about being rich?   You don't need money to live in the slums and serve soup as a full time job.  All you would need is enough to cover rent and some food.  All the happiness in the world is yours, serving others.

Or is it about making money for yourself and family to live in luxury and not have to work?  And then give some of it to charities so that you don't feel guilty?


----------



## cynic (20 October 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I'm with Cynic, its about the money, first comes the money, everything else is bull****.
> 
> Nic Taleb talks about **** you money, having enough money to say **** you to everyone...that's the sort of money i want/need, the end goal is the financial ability to say **** you.




I loved Taleb's quote. It looks like you and I may be about to turn into a mutual appreciation society!

@Pav, it's not so much about wanting to say "FTSE you" to people, but more about being empowered to enforce personal boundaries. 

Having had past experiences of unscrupulous individuals and/or corporate entities inappropriately interfering in my life via the exploitation of their respective positions of power and/or trust, I can definitely appreciate what Taleb's angle might be and therefore relate strongly to it.


----------



## Julia (20 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> If the ultimate aim is to enjoy life and help others enjoy it, do you need to be rich first?  Wouldn't the more expedient way be to devote your life _right now_ to helping others and forget about being rich?   You don't need money to live in the slums and serve soup as a full time job.  All you would need is enough to cover rent and some food.  All the happiness in the world is yours, serving others.
> 
> Or is it about making money for yourself and family to live in luxury and not have to work?  And then give some of it to charities so that you don't feel guilty?



Maybe somewhere in between the two.  I don't think anyone should feel guilty about wanting a comfortable life.  Neither is there any obligation to provide for others.  

Neither should there be any implication that to donate to various charities is to avoid feeling guilty about having worked hard and saved in order to ultimately feel secure.

And I don't really think most ordinary individuals would consider they were experiencing 'all the happiness in the world' by living in some slum and serving soup to others.  It's quite possible to look after ourselves and at the same time volunteer time and energy to help others.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (20 October 2013)

Julia said:


> Maybe somewhere in between the two.  I don't think anyone should feel guilty about wanting a comfortable life.  Neither is there any obligation to provide for others.
> 
> Neither should there be any implication that to donate to various charities is to avoid feeling guilty about having worked hard and saved in order to ultimately feel secure.
> 
> And I don't really think most ordinary individuals would consider they were experiencing 'all the happiness in the world' by living in some slum and serving soup to others.  It's quite possible to look after ourselves and at the same time volunteer time and energy to help others.




I guess so, but...

Trading for profit involves *taking* from others less clever than yourself.  Charity involves *giving* to those less fortunate.  I saw a clash in values.  And knowing pavillion's strong Christian faith, I would like to know how he reconciles this clash in himself.  There''s a Bible quote which says: "Ye cannot serve God and mammon".... but pavillion is giving it a red hot go!

Luke 16:13
"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon (money)."


----------



## burglar (20 October 2013)

cynic said:


> I loved Taleb's quote. It looks like you and I may be about to turn into a mutual appreciation society!
> 
> @Pav, it's not so much about wanting to say "FTSE you" to people, but more about being empowered to enforce personal boundaries.
> 
> Having had past experiences of unscrupulous individuals and/or corporate entities inappropriately interfering in my life via the exploitation of their respective positions of power and/or trust, I can definitely appreciate what Taleb's angle might be and therefore relate strongly to it.




I waited off to see if someone could say it better than me!!


----------



## Julia (20 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> I guess so, but...
> 
> Trading for profit involves *taking* from others less clever than yourself.



Not necessarily.  You might be buying at a point which suits you, but from someone who bought at a lower price and has achieved his/her profit objectives.  Same with selling.  People have different objectives and needs and every decision to buy or sell is voluntary.  You are not diddling someone by offering them something which does not exist eg.



> Charity involves *giving* to those less fortunate.  I saw a clash in values.



I'm not sure why you see this as any sort of clash in values.  Perhaps consider that part of the reason to make money is in order to fulfil one's desire to help others.  Think Gates, Twiggy Forrest et al.



> And knowing pavillion's strong Christian faith, I would like to know how he reconciles this clash in himself.  There''s a Bible quote which says: "Ye cannot serve God and mammon".... but pavillion is giving it a red hot go!



For someone who is usually pretty non judgemental, are you sure you're being fair here?  There are plenty of people here who just want to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that, but you're singling Pavilion out because of his Christian faith.  If he can combine making money with contributing to others, I'm not sure why you're finding a problem with that.


----------



## sails (20 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> I guess so, but...
> 
> Trading for profit involves *taking* from others less clever than yourself.  Charity involves *giving* to those less fortunate.  I saw a clash in values.  And knowing pavillion's strong Christian faith, I would like to know how he reconciles this clash in himself.  There''s a Bible quote which says: "Ye cannot serve God and mammon".... but pavillion is giving it a red hot go!
> 
> ...





So are you saying that any one with a Christian faith should not work to support themselves?  Do you think they should should just starve to death rather than support themselves?  I have never found anything in the Bible to support such nonsense.

Trading is no different to running any other business.


----------



## Country Lad (21 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Trading for profit involves *taking* from others less clever than yourself.




That is more making it up than a valid argument or reality.  

Firstly, if  we are buying a rising price (that is what trading for a profit is all about)  then the other side is also selling into a rising price, just too early, so at that point nobody is taking from others.  Secondly, trading is part living on your wits and part experience.  If I am better at that than the next guy then that is life.  Not taking from others at all, just a level playing field in the real world.


----------



## sails (21 October 2013)

Country Lad said:


> That is more making it up than a valid argument or reality.
> 
> Firstly, if  we are buying a rising price (that is what trading for a profit is all about)  then the other side is also selling into a rising price, just too early, so at that point nobody is taking from others.  Secondly, trading is part living on your wits and part experience.  If I am better at that than the next guy then that is life.  Not taking from others at all, just a level playing field in the real world.




I agree CL.

Using GB's mentality I suppose he would also say you shouldn't get a job because it would be denying someone lose that job effectively robbing them of an income.

And I suppose he would have the same mentality at running a business because you might be taking market share from someone else and effectively robbing them of income.  A trading business is no different. 

That is a silly draconian mentality. 

 However when it comes to sensible Christianity, it is not wrong to use our skills to work hard and achieve our best, IMO.  The Bible encourages helping those in need and it often takes money to do so.

All the best to Pav...


----------



## pavilion103 (21 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> If the ultimate aim is to enjoy life and help others enjoy it, do you need to be rich first?  Wouldn't the more expedient way be to devote your life right now to helping others and forget about being rich?   You don't need money to live in the slums and serve soup as a full time job.  All you would need is enough to cover rent and some food.  All the happiness in the world is yours, serving others.  Or is it about making money for yourself and family to live in luxury and not have to work?  And then give some of it to charities so that you don't feel guilty?




I do that now. Surely you've read posts about the extent of my charity work/community involvement?


----------



## pavilion103 (21 October 2013)

For some reason GB wants to attack me personally at any opportunity. 
I appreciate the support of others in the forum, it really does make GB look silly (doesn't seem to get the hint).

Sick of having threads derailed by idiots. I'm here to have a genuine discussion with others who are too 

Enjoying the responses guys. Maybe I misunderstood that quote CL. I definitely want the money to be able to break free and not be tied to conventional 9-5 living!


----------



## craft (21 October 2013)

My objective is to identify my real objective.

I’ve had plenty of objectives and goals that justified my obsession with the market which have turned out to be self deluding mirages, their importance evaporating as their attainment approached and never turning out to be the real driving force. 

Maybe the objective is really to just feed some chemical that arises from the stimulation of taking on the market. Everything else (money, stuff, freedom, helping others, whatever) is just a by-product. 

Maybe I’m just unbalanced.

Certainly didn’t have the balance Pav demonstrates in his opening post – for example I burnt every bridge I possibly could when getting into the markets full time. No safety net was/is  a reverse objective I guess.


----------



## tinhat (21 October 2013)

Julia said:


> It's a huge responsibility to manage other people's money.
> We all make mistakes, even after many years, and I'd be sick with worry if I were getting it wrong even slightly with someone else's funds.
> 
> Not something that worries you, tinhat?




It's kept me up at night a few times over the past few years because I've been an inexperienced investor and made some expensive mistakes. It's not brain surgery though! Noone is going to die if I make a mistake.

It is also my observation that most people are excessively risk averse. Yep, I worry but I (and probably many people here) take on more risk than the average person and I expect to achieve a higher pay-off in the long run, which includes living a more comfortable life in the long run.



cynic said:


> + 1
> 
> Funnily enough, there's a whole industry of people that do just that and yet somehow manage to elude accountability when things turn pear-shaped!




That was my main motivation. When she became widowed I felt she was very. I didn't like the accountant she had and got rid of him. Who do you trust? I figured I should be able to do at least as good a job as a fund manager and at a lower cost.

I would imagine that a lot of the older members here have the same motivation - to manage their own SMSF or nest egg so that they keep control over their own money and out-perform managed funds.



burglar said:


> tinhat, I assume your mother is of pension age.




Yes.


----------



## CanOz (21 October 2013)

This is a good thread, so keep it on topic. If you wish to have a side discussion, then make up a new thread for it.


----------



## Country Lad (21 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> For some reason GB wants to attack me personally at any opportunity.




I wouldn't worry about that pav, he isn't singling you out, he does it regularly to others as well.  My notes have him as naturally negative and not to bother debating him on any topic.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 October 2013)

Country Lad said:


> I wouldn't worry about that pav, he isn't singling you out, he does it regularly to others as well.  My notes have him as naturally negative and not to other debating him on any topic.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad




You keep notes on me?  That's weird.  

Canoz has deleted my posts so I have no right of reply here.  See the religion thread.


----------



## tech/a (21 October 2013)

*Aims*
(1) Make another income. I can do this passively or aggressively.
(2) Make super work for me harder than external sources.
(3) Control my funds as much as possible.
(4) Ease of movement I can control $100s of 000s with a mouse click--that Is very attractive---cant do that with property. In and out in minutes.

My biggest fear isn't the market taking my savings but having my funds with another party that goes belly up.
Storm financial --et-al
There is also a fear of having a broker fall over with the majority of my super in with them.

When you have larger than average funds to control external factors that could cause total loss are my biggest concern.


----------



## Julia (21 October 2013)

tinhat said:


> It is also my observation that most people are excessively risk averse. Yep, I worry but I (and probably many people here) take on more risk than the average person and I expect to achieve a higher pay-off in the long run, which includes living a more comfortable life in the long run.



Your last phrase probably answers the question in the thread title.  I agree about this.  I'm very happy, however, that the days of needing to take risks are over.  I know some people enjoy it.  I don't.



> I would imagine that a lot of the older members here have the same motivation - to manage their own SMSF or nest egg so that they keep control over their own money and out-perform managed funds.



Yep, all about having control for me.



Country Lad said:


> Firstly, if  we are buying a rising price (that is what trading for a profit is all about)  then the other side is also selling into a rising price, just too early,



Not necessarily too early from their point of view. 
Could be a value investor convinced the price has reached their valuation.
Could be someone who bought at $X and determined to sell at X% profit.
Could be someone who was trading to acquire house deposit, reached the goal, and got out.
Lots of reasons, none of which leave that trader other than happy about the trade.



Gringotts Bank said:


> You keep notes on me?  That's weird.



I'm sure most of us have 'mental notes' on our co-forum members.


----------



## cynic (21 October 2013)

craft said:


> My objective is to identify my real objective.
> 
> I’ve had plenty of objectives and goals that justified my obsession with the market which have turned out to be self deluding mirages, their importance evaporating as their attainment approached and never turning out to be the real driving force.
> 
> Maybe the objective is really to just feed some chemical that arises from the stimulation of taking on the market. Everything else (money, stuff, freedom, helping others, whatever) is just a by-product.




Isn't it interesting how the people whom are willingly cognizant of their own capacity for self deceit are usually the people least likely to succumb?!



craft said:


> Maybe I’m just unbalanced.
> 
> Certainly didn’t have the balance Pav demonstrates in his opening post – for example I burnt every bridge I possibly could when getting into the markets full time. No safety net was/is  a reverse objective I guess.




Whilst I can understand how the burning of one's bridges can serve to motivate one into concerted effort (i.e. failure is no longer an option!) , you've always struck me as someone whom is sufficiently driven by your personal passion for the business and analytical aspects of trading. 
Could it be that you were simply seeking to test yourself by increasing the level of challenge?



Country Lad said:


> I wouldn't worry about that pav, he isn't singling you out, he does it regularly to others as well.  My notes have him as naturally negative and not to bother debating him on any topic.
> 
> Cheers
> Country Lad



You've done it now CL! 
Now that you've let the cat out of the bag by giving GB his report card, we're all going to want ours too!


----------



## So_Cynical (21 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> Lol why the heck would you want to say that to people? Got a chip on your shoulder?
> 
> I want money to have freedom and enjoy life and help others enjoy it too. I've got nothing against anyone else, just want to help as many as I can!




I don't have anything against anyone, i have simply spent my life saying yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir...being told what to do usually by idiots and incompetents and people who have mostly found themselves in positions of authority simply because they stayed in the job.

**** you money isn't about saying **** you to everyone but being able to say **** you to anyone...having enough money to have the choice....the worst thing in life for ordinary people as far as im concerned is having to sit there and take the crap simply because you cant afford not to.


----------



## merlinnn (21 October 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I don't have anything against anyone, i have simply spent my life saying yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir...being told what to do usually by idiots and incompetents and people who have mostly found themselves in positions of authority simply because they stayed in the job.




I couldn't agree more, success through longevity is rubbish, success through competence is the only way as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## pavilion103 (21 October 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I don't have anything against anyone, i have simply spent my life saying yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir...being told what to do usually by idiots and incompetents and people who have mostly found themselves in positions of authority simply because they stayed in the job.  **** you money isn't about saying **** you to everyone but being able to say **** you to anyone...having enough money to have the choice....the worst thing in life for ordinary people as far as im concerned is having to sit there and take the crap simply because you cant afford not to.




Yeh I agree.


----------



## Julia (21 October 2013)

cynic said:


> You've done it now CL!
> Now that you've let the cat out of the bag by giving GB his report card, we're all going to want ours too!




I don't think so.  We can well do without any further personal opinions about individuals imo.


----------



## craft (22 October 2013)

cynic said:


> Whilst I can understand how the burning of one's bridges can serve to motivate one into concerted effort (i.e. failure is no longer an option!) , you've always struck me as someone whom is sufficiently driven by your personal passion for the business and analytical aspects of trading.
> Could it be that you were simply seeking to test yourself by increasing the level of challenge?





Sounds better than the reality – should just go with your version.

But the truth is I didn’t just burn my bridges – I blew them up.

F you, stuff this job blah blah blah.... type stuff.

When it came to work I was always arrogantly of the opinion that you can’t fly like an Eagle when you work with Turkeys.

I didn't enjoy being an employee when I didn’t have respect for my superiors and in my opinion many of them didn’t deserve respect.

To me the market is the ultimate meritocracy and I never doubted when burning my bridges that I would be successful. Actually as motivations go this is probably my most powerful.  If I can’t make it in the market I’m truly a loser – Its the most even playing field a person with my upbringing is going to get.  

Materially - Failure no longer an option – is not really the case in Aus. Even our dole probably puts you in the top 10% globally.

Mentally though – Failure was not an option – because what I would have thought about myself if I failed in the fairest playing field I could identify.   I never doubted I would succeed – even when at times the evidence clearly pointed the other way.  

If you exchange money for the ‘means to make money’  then SC **** you money sums up where I was at when I burnt the bridges.

I only have a sample of one (in real life) of people that I know who make a living from the market. But when I look at Pav’s(and others)  objectives and safety nets and my own experience I wonder if they have  got the mongrel/belief to ever go full time.  But like I say I’m a sample of one and probably quite unbalanced so I don’t want to question others objectives based on my experience but just throwing out some things to get people to really examine their own objectives and if they are committed enough to get through the hard times, do the work and make the sacrifices.  Money, freedom, helping others are a bit wishy washy motherhood objectives to really carry you through a crisis and unless you are demanding very low returns from the market or have ample spare capital you are probably going to uncover yourself some serious grief along the journey.  

Anyrate the 'objectives' topic (and motivations in general) is endlessly fascinating for me – I just don’t have many answers and what I do have seem to change as life progresses and family comes along etc. 

To me why you do something is more important then how you do it - If the why is strong enough you will work out the how.


----------



## peter2 (22 October 2013)

Another great post craft. 
I think your term "mongrel" is the right word.  90% fail at trading because 90% don't have enough mongrel in them. The all too familiar goals and objectives that have been listed in this thread don't provide the level of motivation that is required. The dogged determination, persistence and tenacity has to come from within. Our personal objectives should be selected to motivate the mongrel in all of us.


----------



## waza1960 (22 October 2013)

> I only have a sample of one (in real life) of people that I know who make a living from the market. But when I look at Pav’s(and others) objectives and safety nets and my own experience I wonder if they have got the mongrel/belief to ever go full time. But like I say I’m a sample of one and probably quite unbalanced so I don’t want to question others objectives based on my experience but just throwing out some things to get people to really examine their own objectives and if they are committed enough to get through the hard times, do the work and make the sacrifices. Money, freedom, helping others are a bit wishy washy motherhood objectives to really carry you through a crisis and unless you are demanding very low returns from the market or have ample spare capital you are probably going to uncover yourself some serious grief along the journey.



 I can really identify with what your saying here craft from another somewhat "unbalanced" individual.
 I also put myself in a position where I have no alternative but to be successful at trading.

 This means putting all my spare money and time into trading.
 I have no safety net , no super, no other savings........
 Years ago when I attended a few weekend courses the presenter would invariably come up with the old chestnut
 how only 5% of traders would be successful. I was always confident that I would be in that 5% not because of arrogance or that I was smarter than everyone else but because I could see that the other traders weren't really motivated.
 I have only worked for a wage for about 8yrs of my working life the rest of the time I had my own business so perhaps it was easier for me to make the leap not being used to the security of a salary earner.

 I think a thread on " How you are achieving your Trading objectives " would be just as interesting if not more so.
 Or perhaps we would discuss that here?


----------



## waza1960 (22 October 2013)

So my Trading Objective is :
*To be the Best Full Time Trader I can be *

  To me this means .............
  Achieve increasingly profitable and consistent returns.(anybody can trade well in a short period).
  To  know as much as possible about trading (not because it makes me more profitable but I enjoy the learning process).

  The money, success , possible recognition & freedom ( I'm already free doing what I love) are not Objectives they
  will simply be the result of my primary Objective.


----------



## Julia (22 October 2013)

peter2 said:


> Another great post craft.
> I think your term "mongrel" is the right word.  90% fail at trading because 90% don't have enough mongrel in them. The all too familiar goals and objectives that have been listed in this thread don't provide the level of motivation that is required. The dogged determination, persistence and tenacity has to come from within. Our personal objectives should be selected to motivate the mongrel in all of us.



That might be right for you.  Craft has decided what's right for him.
It doesn't mean all other people are similarly inclined.  Plenty of people can achieve their goals without being mongrels.  Can in fact do it quite calmly and methodically.


----------



## CanOz (22 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> I know where I am going. I WILL get there. There is not even a doubt. I already am 'getting there.'
> 
> Because I choose not to walk out on my job means nothing. Look at all the morons who quit their job to become full time traders and ultimately ended up going back to work (because they leave prematurely).
> 
> ...




Don't know where this came from Pav....i don't think anyone was questioning you or anyone else about if they have what it takes. Just some different view points expressed.

I fall into the same boat as Craft and Waza. Although i didn't burn any bridges...yet. I was primarily salary so i don't have Waza's entrepreneurial attitude completely either.

I sort of forced myself into this so that i would have no choice but to succeed. That works for me, generally.

What we often lose site of, me included at times, is that people are all different. What motivates us is different to us all. None of us are the same. Tech and you both continue to work or run business's and yet you can still hammer up a good record trading the way you trade. That's great, i respect that. Some of us need the to do this full time and have some pressure to succeed to keep us focused. 

Some are doing this with a fundamental approach, some with a technical, some with intuition...What ever works, is whatever works.

I think we all have a few things in common, the desire to draw an income from the market, to be good at what we do and maybe even (i suspect more than some would admit) achieve a level of respect from our peers.

Anyway, its a great topic, lets enjoy it!


----------



## nulla nulla (22 October 2013)

Julia said:


> That might be right for you.  Craft has decided what's right for him.
> It doesn't mean all other people are similarly inclined.  Plenty of people can achieve their goals without being mongrels.  Can in fact do it quite calmly and methodically.




+1. Being a "mongrel" is not a key criteria to successful trading. Being emotionaly detached, recognising entry points, setting realistic targets, exiting when you hit your targets and being able to do it regularly is a far better approach.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (22 October 2013)

nulla nulla said:


> +1. Being a "mongrel" is not a key criteria to successful trading. *Being emotionally detached,* recognising entry points, setting realistic targets, exiting when you hit your targets and being able to do it regularly is a far better approach.




I think that's what he meant when he used the word 'mongrel' - emotional toughness.  And I'd have to agree.


----------



## pavilion103 (22 October 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> I think that's what he meant when he used the word 'mongrel' - emotional toughness.  And I'd have to agree.




+1 agree with that too. Definitely need emotional fortitude.


----------



## barney (22 October 2013)

Pav above has "apologised" to Craft pre my post which is good, but just to clarify my reading of some of the thread (which is a good thread) ....

Nulla Nulla (agree totally with the gist of your comments a couple of posts back) and Julia (lady of integrity) have both misconstrued Craft's statements as you "need to be a mongrel"......  are way off the mark in regards to what Craft was saying

Its not about *being* a mongrel; its about *having* the mongrel in you (belief/desire/motivation etc. etc.)  ...... to achieve what you know you can  ...... BIG difference in meaning and interpretation .... Just wanted to clear that up cause it is sometimes frustrating to have your point of view distorted by the lack of verbal clarity that a Forum often highlights ..... cheers all


Edit ..... GB highlighted what I said in one sentence before I posted ..... maybe I'm becoming verbose lol ...


----------



## So_Cynical (22 October 2013)

Emotional fortitude, Mongrel, Tenacity, Emotional detachment...different personality types need and benefit form these different traits and quality's.

Personally i think that's its a good thing to be emotional about money, you should be pissed off when you lose it and you should be happy when you make it, i can recognize a bit of Mongrel in me when im making decisions, some emotions, fear, greed, Apprehension and Tenacity.

I don't think we can take conscious risks without a bit of Mongrel.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (22 October 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Personally i think that's its a good thing to be emotional about money, you should be pissed off when you lose it and you should be happy when you make it




Research doesn't support this:

Fear and Greed in Financial Markets: A Clinical Study of Day-Traders
MIT Sloan School of Management, Working Paper No. 4534-05 
Abstract: 
   We investigate several possible links between psychological factors and trading performance in a sample of 80 anonymous day-traders. Using daily emotional-state surveys over a five-week period as well as personality inventory surveys, we construct measures of personality traits and emotional states for each subject and correlate these measures with daily normalized profits-and-losses records. *We find that subjects whose emotional reaction to monetary gains and losses was more intense on both the positive and negative side exhibited significantly worse trading performance.* Psychological traits derived from a standardized personality inventory survey do not reveal any specific "trader personality profile", raising the possibility that trading skills may not necessarily be innate, and that different personality types may be able to perform trading functions equally well after proper instruction and practice.


however...

Emotions have been shown to positively influence decision making, so long as they are not out of control.  This study investigates.

The Psychophysiology of Real-Time Financial Risk Processing
MIT Sloan School of Management Working Paper No. 4223-01; MIT Laboratory for Financial Engineering Working Paper No. LFE-1039-01 
 Abstract:     
A longstanding controversy in economics and finance is whether financial markets are governed by rational forces or by emotional responses. We study the importance of emotion in the decisionmaking process of professional securities traders by measuring their physiological characteristics, e.g., skin conductance, blood volume pulse, etc., during live trading sessions while simultaneously capturing real-time prices from which market events can be detected. In a sample of 10 traders, we find statistically significant differences in mean electrodermal responses during transient market events relative to no-event control periods, and statistically significant mean changes in cardiovascular variables during periods of heightened market volatility relative to normal-volatility control periods. We also observe significant differences in these physiological response across the 10 traders which may be systematically related to the traders' levels of experience.


Also, the Somatic Marker Hypothesis is a must read for any trader:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatic_marker_hypothesis


----------



## Julia (22 October 2013)

barney said:


> Pav above has "apologised" to Craft pre my post which is good, but just to clarify my reading of some of the thread (which is a good thread) ....
> 
> Nulla Nulla (agree totally with the gist of your comments a couple of posts back) and Julia (lady of integrity) have both misconstrued Craft's statements as you "need to be a mongrel"......  are way off the mark in regards to what Craft was saying
> 
> ...



barney, accepting that the spirit of the above post is to be helpful, it might be useful for craft, as the initiator of the term 'mongrel' to define what this means to him.
The definition is usually applied to a mixed breed dog, the resulting animal usually being tougher than pure bred animals, and presumably that's the basis of the word being applied to human behaviour.

Perhaps males and females have different interpretations of attitudes.  Despite having worked hard to achieve my goals and being immensely thankful to have been able to do so, I wouldn't at any stage have categorised my attitude as 'the mongrel in me'.  Rather, it has been a patient and determined, well planned process, where the resilience probably learned in many unrelated emotional setbacks, has been carried over into the financial planning and perseverance.

Might be nothing more than an aversion to the terminology.  However, I don't believe that to achieve personal goals it should ever be necessary to cheat or misrepresent, or in any other way trespass on the rights of any other individual.


----------



## barney (23 October 2013)

Julia said:


> barney, accepting that the spirit of the above post is to be helpful, it might be useful for craft, as the initiator of the term 'mongrel' to define what this means to him




I was certainly trying to be helpful, thank you Julia.

I hope Craft does respond as I enjoy reading what he has to say.  



Julia said:


> Perhaps males and females have different interpretations of attitudes.




Possibly so, although in this instance, I just wanted to point out that Craft never said you have to *be* a mongrel.  I would agree with you that being a mongrel is not a good quality. Having the mongrel in you is more a personal determination to succeed/not give in when the going gets rough ...... that quality does not need to be directed at another person/persons, rather it is an internal strength .... that is my interpretation anyway





Julia said:


> Might be nothing more than an aversion to the terminology.  However, I don't believe that to achieve personal goals it should ever be necessary to cheat or misrepresent, or in any other way trespass on the rights of any other individual.




I'm sure the majority would agree 100% that cheating or misrepresenting to gain an advantage is poor form, but having the mongrel in you (in my interpretation) does not have to include cheating etc. 

A mongrel *is* and will tend to always *be* a mongrel, whereas, the kindest gentlest person in the world may get the mongrel in them to overcome a difficult circumstance.

As you say, probably just our different interpretations of the word so no big deal. Cheers.


----------



## craft (23 October 2013)

To try and make it a bit more explicit (or confuse you further with my crap communication)
I was talking about an inner mongrel – the bit of you that just keeps getting up and going again when you have no earthly right to do so and is cocky enough to still crack a smile in the process.  

External Objectives are fine for the good times. Primeval objectives that your inner mongrel responds to is what gets you through the hard times.

If you can’t get what I’m talking about in a trading sense – think about it in terms of what would get you through if you lost the person you love the most at the worst possible time.

I don’t want to judge Pav or anybody – But I was trying to prompt people to be brutally honest with themselves and find their true primitive objectives. 

Play with the market long enough and it will eventually expose your inner weaknesses.  These are the spots you have to pass to continue on.


Trying to expand it a bit further still.

Lets take what I consider an external objective that has been discussed in this thread and one I assume PAV has.

To help others.

You could achieve this

Mother Teresa style.

By distributing your surplus time and money as it becomes available.  (ie no wealth accumulation)

By accumulating wealth and bequeathing it.

All three seem equal fulfilment of the objective to me. Which is the right path for each individual comes down not to the external objective (all three accomplish it) but to a more basic and self oriented internal objective – what truly drives and fulfils me?


----------



## CanOz (23 October 2013)

> Play with the market long enough and it will eventually expose your inner weaknesses.  These are the spots you have to pass to continue on.




This is very good, so true....


----------



## pavilion103 (23 October 2013)

Craft, I think one thing that all people need is a strong sense of thriving on the intellectual gamesmanship of trading. I think this is where the 'mongrel' can often come in. It is a brutal desire to achieve and not letting any obstacles or setbacks deter you from achieving success in the markets.

I think someone is far more likely to achieve in the markets if they are a highly competitive person, who see the markets as a game and who thrive on succeeding at this game. Combine this with characteristics such as diligence, patience and emotional fortitude and the chance of success is very high!


----------



## Julia (23 October 2013)

craft said:


> Julia – You always misinterpret or recast my posts in a negative light.



Alternatively, you could believe that I simply have a different view for what motivates me.  I got what you meant, craft.  I was just explaining that personally I achieve my objectives differently.  Not sure why that's something to object to .  


> In your case it’s probably safest if you just assume I mean the exact reverse of what you think I’m saying.



 Is the sarcasm really necessary?  I wasn't applying any criticism to your approach, nor was I misunderstanding it, just saying I don't have that somewhat aggressive approach.  



> To try and make it a bit more explicit (or confuse you further with my crap communication)
> I was talking about an inner mongrel – the bit of you that just keeps getting up and going again when you have no earthly right to do so and is cocky enough to still crack a smile in the process.



I understand mongrel behaviour.  Doesn't mean it's what works for everyone.
Some of us are instead flattened for a while, then gradually work out a modified approach, and the resilience more slowly returns.



> External Objectives are fine for the good times. Primeval objectives that your inner mongrel responds to is what gets you through the hard times.



For you.   We all function differently.



> If you can’t get what I’m talking about in a trading sense – think about it in terms of what would get you through if you lost the person you love the most at the worst possible time.



I don't have to imagine it.  It has happened several times.  It provokes grief and sadness, prior to acceptance that it is what it is and there is always something worthwhile in life.  

I suggested earlier that this discussion has become about different interpretations of different word choices.
You are convinced that everyone must have some sort of primeval drive to fight aggressively for what they want (and if that wording is not perfect, it's the best I can do), while others will take a more gradual, calmer approach.
I am not trying to be obstructive, just don't understand why you don't seem to accept that.  Obviously my powers of communication must also be crap.



> I don’t want to judge Pav or anybody – But I was trying to prompt people to be brutally honest with themselves and find their true primitive objectives.



Sounds to me as though Pav has worked out a fairly methodical route to get where he wants to be.  If he's happy with that, I'd be disposed to just congratulate him, wish him the best, hoping he doesn't get too bogged down in the religious stuff, and not insist that he's being less than honest about his 'primitive objectives'.

I'm not in the least wanting to engage in any sort of non-constructive bickering with you, craft.  I could equally suggest, referring back to your initial comment, that you seem to be intent on finding any disagreement I express a measure of personal attack on you.  It's not at all.  In this instance, you find value in pursuing objectives in what sounds like an aggressive, fighting, competitive way.  I'm not especially competitive and have had enough aggression in my life to put me off such an attitude forever.

Hopefully we have now both tried to explain ourselves as best we can, so it might be good to let the issue go.
I wish you well.


----------



## McLovin (23 October 2013)

I don't really have any grand objectives. I just do what I do because I like to do it. I love being right, it gives me a kick. I love doing the research, taking a position and then having my thesis proven correct. Doubly so when every "expert" is on the other side of me. Don't get me wrong, I do like the money that comes from being proven correct. But I'm not sure money in itself creates a passion for something.

I understand the point that craft is making. There are times, for me at least, when I'm sure I'm correct and the market is wrong even though I might be 30%, 40%, 50% down on an investment. At that point it is very easy to start double guessing your own thinking. We are, afterall, humans, and it's in our nature to "follow the crowd". I'm sure every successful trader or investor has a way of dealing with that stress.


----------



## Country Lad (23 October 2013)

pavilion103 said:


> What's that got to do with trading objectives sorry?




What has most of the post in this thread to do with trading objectives.  Some people will find any reason to start an off topic criticism of what others say.  Main reason why I do not participate in these type of threads, someone will start an argument about 2 words in what I have said, regardless of what I have said.


----------



## CanOz (23 October 2013)

Country Lad said:


> What has most of the post in this thread to do with trading objectives.  Some people will find any reason to start an off topic criticism of what others say.  Main reason why I do not participate in these type of threads, someone will start an argument about 2 words in what I have said, regardless of what I have said.




Yeah, this is true unfortuntely. Honestly we could moderate the fourms hard like some overseas forums, but this is not the culture here. We tend to let the discussion evolve back to the topic.

Speaking of, please get back on topic. 

I'll do some cleanup....

Please don't be offended if i delete off topic posts...


----------



## Ves (23 October 2013)

craft said:


> To try and make it a bit more explicit (or confuse you further with my crap communication)
> I was talking about an inner mongrel – the bit of you that just keeps getting up and going again when you have no earthly right to do so and is cocky enough to still crack a smile in the process.



I think your first post was fantastic by the way and I wouldn't say it was poorly communicated,  however,  if you made a mistake it was choosing a word such as "mongrel" which has multiple uses in different contexts (both with positive and negative inferences).  It's not so much it was the wrong word to use,   and it certainly did convey the meaning of what you were trying to say when read in the appropriate context.  But words such as this can easily be taken out of context and used to frame debate / discussion in ways that were obviously not intended.   It's not really a reflection on you as such,  but it probably reflects more on the audience if they choose the path of semantics.

I like Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay called _Self-reliance._  Resolve is also a good word choice.... but may not quite fit into your post.

The word "mongrel" in itself does not need to be mutually inclusive with terms such as "aggression"  (at least not in the sense of _action_) and neither does it have to be mutually exclusive with mental states such as "calmness" and it certainly does not mean that you cannot follow a methodical route.  As I understand it,  in the heat of the moment and in the face of adversity / undesirable results,  it's what lets you focus,  because you have the inherent belief in the path that you are undertaking.

Steve Waugh used the word "mongrel" a lot to describe how he succeeded when the externalities were full of chaos and how his internal philosophical approach was able to be maintained and kept in complete contrast with what was going on around him.

It is a shame that it is possible for excellent insights into how successful people keep their temperament in check to be misrepresented / misconstrued because of word choice.   CL's post above me hits the nail on the head.

Thanks again for the post(s),   a breathe of fresh air to have someone trying to teach others, even if they don't have complete confidence in their ability to communicate or pass on their knowledge / wisdom.


----------



## Ves (23 October 2013)

McLovin said:


> I don't really have any grand objectives. I just do what I do because I like to do it. I love being right, it gives me a kick. I love doing the research, taking a position and then having my thesis proven correct. Doubly so when every "expert" is on the other side of me. Don't get me wrong, I do like the money that comes from being proven correct. But I'm not sure money in itself creates a passion for something.
> 
> I understand the point that craft is making. There are times, for me at least, when I'm sure I'm correct and the market is wrong even though I might be 30%, 40%, 50% down on an investment. At that point it is very easy to start double guessing your own thinking. We are, afterall, humans, and it's in our nature to "follow the crowd". I'm sure every successful trader or investor has a way of dealing with that stress.



+1 I've been thinking about this recently.   Valuation / investment is a bit of an arcane art form for me at the best of times,   it's a good way of expressing myself in ways that match my personality.   I really enjoy the challenge, despite the work being hard at times.  I've met some like minded people along the way too,  for which I am ever grateful.


----------

