Todd Turney

@miradreaamy 54, (6 x 8) + 6

bunu çözersen, IQ seviyen ortalamanın üstündedir. çözebilir misin?

@sprosay10 16

Almost all will say 6 holes. Only the vigilantes will find the right answer. How many holes do you see?

@CFlanders7 Great analogy Christian. You reminded me of a slightly different version in that when you are not throwing punches, the market is shadow boxing. If not ready to throw a punch or just throwing a jab, learn from the shadow boxing. Sorry I missed you in HK.

Great question. It sounds like you are trying to force trades to stop losing instead of just following your plan...assuming you have a plan or process you follow. Chances are either your timing is off, or the market is hostile to your strategy. Either way, you want to trade much smaller or not at all until you can figure out what is going on. I like the analogy of the market as a boxer in a ring. Any time you want, you can step into the ring and take a swing at him. The market can ONLY counter-punch. In other words, unless you CHOOSE to risk (throw a punch) you cannot be hurt by the market. Many traders will go in and just throw wild haymakers. Some will land, but the ones that don't, they leave yourself exposed to a devastating counter-punch. When you are on a long losing streak its like you keep stepping into the ring, take a swing, miss, get punched, knocked down over and over only to stand back up and keep swinging. You can just sit there, rest and wait. The market will do nothing to you until you are ready to try again.

I still remember the first time I got caught in a blow up trade. The disbelief, frozen in fear. The thought that "this can't possibly be happening to me. I'm a special snowflake. This kind of stuff only happens to other people." Was a punch in the gut. ANY-THING can happen in markets. I am not special. I am just one of tens of millions of market participants.

@CFlanders7 Getting in is easy....clearly its the risk management and stop loss that's the problem.

I can attest that the chinese real estate market is in very bad shape. The area we are staying in, the apartments used to sell for 6mm RMB. Now they are sitting at 3mm RMB unsold (private owners can't sell them at 2.5mm). They are renting for less than 1% yield. Half of them are unsold and they keep building more.

@ms_ny_trader @CFlanders7 Red Pepper closed 2 years ago unfortunately. First restaurant I visited in HK in 1988. Was a great place

@CFlanders7 Have you ever been to Red Pepper? Was a staple when I lived there

Favorite food spot in Hong Kong! Yat Lok!

@CFlanders7 What days are you here (HK)?

Going to be in Hong Kong for a few days. Any traders want to meet up?

@CFlanders7 @NICOLEYUMC What days are you on HK?

@NICOLEYUMC No qualifications, just an interest in trading!

@MarkRitchie_II Great story Mark. Fortunately, by divine sovereignty, i started my career at Salomon Borthers and from the first day of training, it was bps. I have had similar experiences and larger $ magnitude managing other people's money. And you are spot on.

How & why I ended up picking the fighter in the blue trunks...(longer read warning) I may have shared elements of this prior but when I started on my own (Jan 2010), I was nearly 100% a quant. I had some ideas and figured all I needed was discipline and risk management and I’d be a millionaire in no time. I borrowed 50K from my dad in sort of a handshake deal, and he said, “Trade it like it’s 100K, and if you do well I’ll add.” Fast forward a few weeks and nearly all my first trades had been losers, to the tune of about $500–1,200 a piece. I was down a few grand and DYING on the inside. My dad was on the other side of the world in Southeast Asia working with orphans, and I didn’t want to tell him that my new trading adventure, which he had backed, was off to a bumpy start. But who else was I going to call when my confidence was already waning right off the hop? The conversation via skype call (this was 2010) went nearly verbatim like this: “Mac, what’s the problem?” he asked. “Uh, well, nearly all the trades have been losers and I’m losing a bit of confidence,” I said. “Were these within what you expected in terms of percentage drawdown?” he asked. “Yeah,” I said. “Then get back to work and take the next trade. If you can’t stomach the volatility, then cut your size in half.” End of conversation. Fast forward about 2+ years and, through a lot of hard work, I’d managed to run that initial stake up quite a bit and was managing somewhere in the neighborhood of 700K when I had my first six‑figure drawdown. I was up on the year but again dying on the inside and feeling like I’d had my guts ripped out. My pops was stateside when I invited him into the office for a similar chat. “Dad, I’m in the biggest drawdown I’ve ever had and it’s kinda eating me up.” “Why is that?” he asked. We then reviewed the gains and the relative drawdown, and I said, “I think this is normal given the run I’ve had, but it just feels awful. I want to be able to lose 10x this someday and NOT have it feel this bad.” “Now you’re thinking like a pro,” he said. “If you’re going to continue to grow, this is what you signed up for—and you’re thinking about it exactly right.” End of conversation. As luck or divine sovereignty (I always take the latter) would have it, I became friends with @PeterLBrandt shortly thereafter at one of his Trader bootcamps. I heeded his advice to always express risk and trades in terms of basis points and not dollars and never looked back. It felt like a weight was lifted off me. I don’t know how many of our cognitive biases are truly holding us back—and I’m not a psychologist—but for me, telling someone I lost 100 bp does not have the negative emotional pull that telling someone I lost 100K does. Yes, they are two ways of saying the same thing, but for me, one helps me stay grounded while the other leads down a road of emotional volatility that I don’t want to be on. Within a few years (end of 2018), I had the worst drawdown I’ve ever had in a single month and lost nearly 2 million dollars. I only share the dollar amount for illustration. To be clear…it sucked. However, it didn’t have nearly the gut‑wrenching hold that some of the prior periods had, because I was only seeing the BPs from my end and could get back to work knowing that the loss was acceptable (albeit really sucky) relative to how much I was trading and where I was for the year and overall. I wasn’t thinking about losing a house or a boat or all the things we like to attach to the capital we are trading. I think the moral of this story—at least for me (some of this is cathartic)—is that BP vs $ are two ways of saying the same thing, but one gives me much more psychological stability and an edge in my emotional capital and in this business, that can be a really big separator in the long run. Hope this helped someone. MR2

@BillAckman @X An Absolutely agree! Good luck.

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

@markminervini Further to below: if the bulls are making money- why should they care if you are bullish or bearish?

Feedback from my posts can be interesting: Bulls are angry I’m bearish. Bears say I’m not bearish enough. My takeaway: More downside ahead — but a cyclical correction, not a secular bear market.

@markminervini And clearly none of them have learned from you. My guess is you have not decided to be bullish or bearish, but you are just letting stock action tell you to be invested or not. I have max respect for you Mark on multiple levels. If the bulls are making money- why should care?

@haifah_er_abba 042

Only a legend can get it right.

@ThePath2Profit I vote Minervini. While Qullamaggie is good, Minervini is the GOAT for performance over 4 decades!!

The 2025 March Madness Trader Tournament Finals are set! Who will be the champion ?!?🏆 Vote in the comment below! Repost this main post & tag your pick to show your support for them! This is going to be a close match up! Last round both finalist received almost the exact same amount of votes! We have legendary Market Wizard, founder of the SEPA strategy and 2x @USICOfficial @markminervini v. The youngest trader in this whole bracket, a man know for live streaming his swing trading giving viewers the ultimate transparency into his stellar performance, @Qullamaggie Winner will be announced Sunday afternoon!

@fisher4maryland @BillAckman @elonmusk @SpaceX @X @TheDemocrats In fact - China applies a social credit score to its citizens. Democrats/Chinacrats.

@BillAckman @elonmusk @SpaceX @X The California Coastal Commission applied a social credit score to @elonmusk. It’s what @TheDemocrats intend to implement nationwide if given the opportunity. By definition it’s tyrannical & totalitarian.

Yes, but I would like @elonmusk and @SpaceX work to continue unabated by those who don’t like him, note the California Coastal Commission decision on Thursday where the Chairman cited his @X posts on the election, transgender issues and other issues as the reason for denying @spacex application to increase launches. If @KamalaHarris wins, the entire country becomes California.

@Moonlight926091 @Byron_Wan Finally, a man with perspective. HK and China was a 2019 issue. Move on is right.

@Byron_Wan The Hong Kong, China issue has been resolved and there is nothing to talk about. People should talk more about Gaza and Israel; Also discuss how the United States is financing Israel's terrorist genocide.

China’s former “good friend” economist and ex-chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia Stephen Roach was prohibited from discussing Hong Kong in his speech while attending the China Development Forum in Beijing last week. Roach was invited to speak at this year’s forum in his capacity as senior fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs, where he had hoped to raise his concerns about Hong Kong’s future. But he was stopped, as organizers made it clear before, during and after the forum that they did not want to hear sharp questions, only “views constructive to China”. rfa.org/english/news/c…

@Calvin65883332 @markminervini Calvin- show us your returns please.

@markminervini Sorry to tell you. But when it comes to the stock market, most FinTwitters that peddle finance books don’t know what they’re talking about. Fact. I stand by my comment.

For the record, I think Cathie Wood is a super intelligent individual. I also feel that if she were to introduce some intelligent technical analysis and a well-thought out risk plan to her strategy, her funds could compound at a much higher and more consistent rate. The level of volatility they have experienced is simply unnecessary. But this is one of the disadvantages of being highly educated achedemically. You are taught to respect information over markets. The best investors have great research and information, but they also know how to balance their opinions with the real world.

@MinerviniQuote Mark - I am grateful for your sharing of expertise, knowledge and experience. Thank you In your mind, what asset level becomes a larger portfolio?

"Depending on the size of your portfolio and your risk tolerance, you should typically have between 4 and 6 stocks, and for larger portfolios maybe as many as 10 or 12 stocks."

@jdemling @trinitysports @BALampley79 @Ehlelder Coach Lampley was a second father and inspiration to 1,000 of young men. I sit here at age 60 and still put into practice disciplines and a mindset I learned from Dennis. Thank you.

Jeff Brohm called former Trinity coach Dennis Lampley "my best mentor that I’ve had in my entire career." He said Lampley, "is the best and I learned a great deal from him." The two shared a hug as Jeff walked into his press conference. @trinitysports @BALampley79 @Ehlelder

@markminervini Mark, Mark and Bob - much gratitude for the 5 days. Only wish I had learned this years ago. Better than most or all "Wall Street" training programs.

2022 Master Trader Program curriculum has concluded... a long 4 days. Congratulations... you made it through it. See everyone tomorrow for live trading day.

@Tomasiskoo @PeterLBrandt You still believe there is decentralisation? Wake up dude. It is centralised in the largest holders.

@PeterLBrandt You still dont understand Bitcoin. The only way to surpass Bitcoin is to create something that is more decentralized and more secure. But the thing is that you cannot create decentralization. It has to evolve into that state.

#bitcoin I own Bitcoin and accept most of the current bullish narrative However, we go out on a ledge to assume that $BTC will forever represent the pinnacle of human ingenuity and achievement and that humanity will not surpass its essentials