Previously you have stated you were a a professional investment manager and mutual and hedge fund manager. You have posted several threads by Martin Armstrong going back to 2013, and defended him on the forum.
Now you admit in post #44, that you actively seek out and pay for his research. You also repeated what you said in what said in post #20 on my "Martin Armstrong's Bad Calls" thread that may people in the industry, which you now claim include the top 10% of SEC registered advisers, pay for and use his research.
In Armstrong's 2009 guilty plea, the SEC permanently barred him from associating with any investment adviser. That ruling has not been overturned. The SEC ruling including his admission of guilt and barred from any future investment advising is her, https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/opinions/2009/ia-2926.pdf.
It is illegal for him to advise any investment advisor, like yourself. In turn, it is illegal, and completely against professional ethics, for a investment adviser to solicit and pay for advice from who can not legally advise them. In the real world, no professional client wealthy enough to seek the skills of the top 10% of SEC registered investment advisers would knowingly use anyone relying on the advice of a convicted felon the SEC barred from the profession.
So which is it? Are you just a forum troll, or are you breaking the law and betraying your client's trust?
—> It is illegal for him to advise any investment advisor, like yourself. In turn, it is illegal, and completely against professional ethics, for a investment adviser to solicit and pay for advice from who can not legally advise them
I will try to be as kind as I can while telling you the truth.
1. Martin does not “advise” anyone.
And here again, you demonstrate you have no clue about the meaning of “research.” In short, you are so far over your head, you don’t know what you don’t know. And those who do instantly see you are a blowhard.
2. This also means I do not pay Martin for advice, but purchase research. But since you do not apprehend the difference, the distinction is lost on you.
So yes, you are completely wrong yet again.
3. I am no longer working, so you are wrong again.
Seriously, you are a fool at best, who is writing about things you cannot remotely understand.
For this reason I will follow Scripture and leave you to your folly.
In Armstrong’s 2009 guilty plea, the SEC permanently barred him from associating with any investment adviser. That ruling has not been overturned. The SEC ruling including his admission of guilt and barred from any future investment advising
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/opinions/2009/ia-2926.pdf.
WOW! Thanks