is trading magic for mass traders?

the stock market world
is full of experts
and their clients.

those not lucky enough
to have a "god father analyst"
are half experts themselves.

rest all
are either devotees of powerful gods
or lucky guys.

when all are out there to win
who will lose?

and since trading is an almost zero sum game
the absence of losers
or the presence of difficult losers
will create a stalemate.

somebody has to lose
for somebody to be a winner!

a stalemate is deathwish for the market.

and since the market is not only alive
but kicking
and kicking hard
the losers have to be there.

and fortunately
there are losers
enough of them to make trading worth
for the pro-winners!

going by the statistics available
the number of losers are atleast 20 times
the number of winners.

this is a big skew
in the favour of winners
in the world full of experts and difficult losers!

how does this happen?

simple,
the minority winners
have money and tricks
to beat everyone else.

what if the losers too join hands
and come up with money and tricks?

there will be an underground invisible fight.

the habitual, compulsive and smart winners
will again come out with
amazingly cunning ways
to beat the losers again!

the ways of the professional winners
are magical.

and like magic
pro-winners don't let the audience have even a clue
of what really is happening.

as clarke's third law says
"any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

the trading game has always been won by magicians
and will always be.

no amount of technical knowledge can make you a winner
if you are not on the side of the winner.

and the zeroth law of robotics

zeroth law of robotics (this law was added later on to the series) : A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.


adaptation of the law to trading system :  A trading system may not harm operators, or, by inaction, allow operators to come to harm.




.....thus underlining the supremacy of the "deep pockets"

trading with three laws of robotics

i was reading 

Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"

it has occured to me that if a trading system is like a robot

it must obey these 3 laws meant for robotics.

here are the adaptations of the three laws of robotics

to the trading system

law one of robotics : a robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

adaptation of the law to trading system : a trading system may not cause substantial loss to a trader or, through inaction, allow a trader to come to loss.

law two of robotics : a robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the first law.

adaptation of the law to trading system : a trading system must NOT obey any orders given to it by the trader in the heat of the trading - it should trade strictly as per its defined rules, except where such disobedience would conflict with the first law.

law three of robotics : a robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law.

adaptation of the law to trading system : a trading system must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law.

when to invest in upcoming-technology stocks?

buy the "cutting edge" technology stocks
only after their first major retracement.

by that time
they have distinguished themselves,
still qualify to be a multibagger
and are ready for the big flight!

by technology i don't mean I.T..
i am refering to the emerging technologies in any field.
e.g. biocon (biotech)
sintex industries (MDF : medium-density fibreboard)
mahindra reva (electric automobiles)
--
according to
amara's law
"we tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run
and underestimate the effect in the long run."

are "the rich" really happier?

why are richer people
overall less happy?

first lets agree
that being rich
is itself a relative term.

the one who has more than the other
is considered "rich".

and the group
which has more than the average people on the planet
are "the rich".

had "rich" being an absolute term
even a satisfied comfortable beggar would have qualified for the term.

-

now we turn towards the question
"why are richer people
overall less happy?"

being "rich" is being "infected with the virus of comparison"

being "rich" puts you "at the permanent risk of not being rich"

comparative "rich'ness'" is more of a punishment than a reward!

the moment anyone feels
that he is "rich"
he sub-consciously "switches on"
a pressure to stay "above" others
and stay "rich".

the fear of not remaining rich
turns real!

the "rich" counter this fear
by building the "Safety cushion"
of "reserve riches"

this leads to the next fear
"how much cushion is enough"

thus, as if the fear of not remaining rich was not enough
it gets compounded by
the fear of the cushion being not enough.

this leads to an unending chase
of the "rich" by the hounds of fear!

this breathless chase, inadvertently leads the poor "rich"
into many one-way traps they find impossible to come out!

as if this was not enough
they find unexpected threats
from the winds of change!

--

so where does this lead us to?

should we not be "rich"?
are all "rich" unhappy?
are "poor" happy?

all three questions are traps!

till you use the word "rich" or "poor"
you are in a race
driven by outside factors....

relatives instead of absolutes!

happiness by absolutes has a chance
happiness by relativity has none!

the secret of getting real rich!

u don't get rich by earning MORE.
u don't get rich even by saving more.

strange statements?
not really!

lets see why.

when you earn more
you spend more.

according to the corollary of parkinson's law

"spending will increase to match the increase in income."

try not spending more
while trying to earn more.

there is strong chance that
so much of negative energy will accumulate inside you
that you will blow it all up in one shot.

the mentality or motivation of "earning more"
is basically an emotionally driven state.

"earn more" is a "feel good state"

so, u r not "earning more"
if you are not "feeling like earning more"!

therein lies the paradox.

you don't and won't consider yourself rich
even if you become one
till you feel rich.

and how to feel rich after gaining the riches?
simple....by spending!

to feel equivalent rich
you have to spend
and wrap yourself
in equivalent comfort and luxury.

and the moment you do that
you slip back to the earlier financial state.

only difference,
this time you may be worse
having gathered debt!

so, it is pretty clear
- you don't get rich by "earning more"

but why do i say that
you can't get rich by saving more?

even this is simple.
the psychology of "saving more"
is rooted in the mentality of "starving"

mind is a dog which is most dangerous
if "starved"!

it is most obedient
if "tricked, trained and befooled!"

the more you "starve" your ego by "saving more"
the more the "feel good" state deteriorates.

and it all collapses
at the wrong time
burying you under!

so?

what's the way to become rich?
real rich?

keep doing what you do.
keep earning what you earn.
consciously keep improving and keep looking for opportunities to grow
but don't de desperate!

don't be conscious to "earn more" or "save more"

just ensure
that you don't waste anything.
all wastage in life
translates into money.

as you eliminate waste
you will realise your real needs.
this will surprise you further
when you will realise that you are much more satisfied and in abundance
than you always felt!
and when this feeling of abundance comes
you will feel better and better.

when this happens
you would have automatically
acquired the state of
feeling rich without having to spend
or without having to possess.

--

u don't get rich by earning MORE.
u don't get rich even by saving more.
u get rich
by wasting less and less
and in the process
unshackling and relieving
your income
from the drags of reckless consuming.

from here on
whatever you earn
will multiply!

and the funny part is
you won't feel the g-force
of becoming rich!

retired before 40

i once attended a seminar
where i was hypnotised and asked

"what are your big dreams in life?"

with a little effort
i listed them

big house
big car
world tour
fat bank balance
freedom to buy anything
long vacations
no need to be in a job
retirement at 40

--

i came back
and as hypnotised
wore the eye-blinders like a horse
and entered the rat race!

while i was moving forward
i met some rats
returning from where i was heading!

the look on their faces were not so inspiring.

i slowed down
and eventually stopped.

"how's the place u r returning from?"

the rat i talked to
didn't reply.

he handed me his walkman

i put on the headphones.

it was jagjit singh's voice

"patthar ke Khudaa patthar ke sanam
patthar ke hii insaaN paaye haiN
tum shahar-e-mohabbat kahate ho
ham jaan bachchaakar aaye haiN

but-khaanaa samajhate ho jisako
puuchcho na vahaaN kyaa haalat hai
ham log vahiiN se lauTe haiN
bas shukr karo lauT aaye haiN"

i quickly handed him back his walkman
and i became a runman
back!

back home
i took out that dream list
and made some changes.

house in place of big house
car in place of big car
mental balance in place of bank balance
'wisdom to buy what i need' in place of 'freedom to buy anything'
'living as if on vacations' in place of 'long vacations'
'loving and enjoying my job' instead of 'no need to be in a job'
'google earth and earthtv.com' in place of 'world tour'

i am yet to turn 40
and i am
truely retired!