Trader Monthly Shut Down, But This Isn't The End, There's Possible Fraud Involved Too! - Timothy Sykes

Trader Monthly Shut Down, But This Isn’t The End, There’s Possible Fraud Involved Too!

After several months of barely existing on fumes, we learn today from a leaked internal memo that as of now Doubledown Media aka Trader Monthly has officially shut down.

This is the editor-in-chief’s memo explaining the closure:

“These are unprecedented times,” president Randall Lane wrote in an e-mail to staffers late Monday. “The combination of the media depression, the Wall Street implosion and the credit slowdown were collectively too much for our company—probably any company in our shoes—to overcome.”

Remember, their editor-in-chief, now proud publisher of not just one but two bankrupt publishing companies, Randall Lane is one sick twisted son of a bitch and as I wrote they were flat broke in the summer of 2008, long before any difficult market environment, so the above memo is a blatant lie.

You can see in another leaked memo, the company lost $3 million on $12 million in revenues in 2008, after similar losses in 2007…verry Digg-like, verrrry pathetic! (how is it that it’s only taken me a 1.5 years to be nearing $1 million in annual profits and these guys had all this funding/time and failed so miserably?!?!)

And from a few sources, I’m hearing the story is actually worse because Doubledown apparently sold the advertising for the December-January issue that was never shipped out to some factoring company…uhhhh, factoring company might be a little mad…as in that’s fraud mad. As in “have fun in jail, don’t drop the soap Randy” FRAUD.

Who knows if that last part is true or not–given Randy’s consistently shady business dealings, I wouldn’t be surprised. I’m guessing some newspapers and courthouses will decide what’s true and what’s not in the very near future.

As New York Magaine noted in an article today, I am pretty joyous about this bigtime breakdown, it’s always fun when I can say with a smile “ding, dong the witchtwisted son of a bitch is dead, the witchtwisted son of a bitch is dead!’

And as Dealbreaker quoted me:

Randy’s memo about the environment being “too much to overcome” smacks of the same kind of BS that got him in trouble in the first place…I–the Ryan Leaf of trading–somehow have “overcome” and built a million dollar publishing business in less than a year…if only he would grow up, maybe one day, maybe one day…

Randy, this sack of shit, is a classic penny stock CEO–too bad they never went public or I’d have shorted the entire company and banked. Mainly because, yes, once upon a time in 2006 I actually believed in a penny stock company and that ignorance killed my hedge fund.

So, I speak, not out of personal spite–well, not only that–but to show you the exact kind of lying/manipulation and incompetence that goes on with tiny crappy companies aka pretty much ALL the companies I trade.

With that I give you who really loses in situations like this, the people who do business with such crappy companies. Freelancers like this guy:

I am a freelance designer / web developer that was working in NYC until last week when I moved to Wellington, New Zealand.

I have done three projects for doubledown. The first was an intro for Lenny Dykstra’s site before that whole fiasco. The next was a interactive map for trader monthly. Doubledown was giving me the run around on payment for the Dykstra project so I told them I would not deliver the map with out payment. They sent me an unsigned check, so then I told them I wouldn’t deliver the map without payment for both projects. Their interactive manager, Todd Tarpley, came out personally to brooklyn to give me my payment. At this point I had decided to not work for Doubledown, but when Todd contacted me with a new project he offered to let me bill before the project started so the money would be due upon completion. Todd seemed competent and was actually a good manager. I was still skeptical about Doubledown, but in the end decided to take the offer. I delivered the files before I got payment which was a mistake. Doubledown is now overdue almost four months with the payment. I contacted them repeatedly and was ignored, so I bought the domain doubledown-media.com and posted a warning to freelancers. I sent the link to all the higher ups and their financial officer, who contacted me and said my invoice was in the que.

At this point I don’t really have any hope of getting paid.

Posted in Breakdowns, Stock Obituaries

Become a Millionaire

I Turned $12,415 into $4,601,000 Trading Penny Stocks. Now it's your turn.

Apply To Work With Me

27 comments

Timothy Sykes

Hey Everyone,

As many of you already know I grew up in a middle class family and didn't have many luxuries. But through trading I was able to change my circumstances --not just for me -- but for my parents as well. I now want to help you and thousands of other people from all around the world achieve similar results!

Which is why I've launched my millionaire challenge. I’m extremely determined to create a millionaire trader out of one my students and hopefully it will be you.

So when you get a chance make sure you check it out.

PS: Don't forget to check out my free Penny Stock Guide, it will teach you everything you need to know about trading. :)

  1. baconator

    Haha keep losing money you fool, funny how these people follow you and your lame strategies for miniscule profits, while you go away on vacation treating this as a joke or something.

    Do you people/subscribers realize what you are doing? You’re feeding this fag bag $$$ so he can milk all of you and go have fun, while you earn a measly 6% return on ur 2k portfolios every month.

    Tim isnt a trader, hes more like a scam.

  2. baconator

    Haha keep losing money you fool, funny how these people follow you and your lame strategies for miniscule profits, while you go away on vacation treating this as a joke or something.

    Do you people/subscribers realize what you are doing? You’re feeding this fag bag $$$ so he can milk all of you and go have fun, while you earn a measly 6% return on ur 2k portfolios every month.

    Tim isnt a trader, hes more like a scam.

  3. Mark

    Hey, Tim, long time reader your masterpiece of a blog here.

    I especially enjoy your no nonsense, snarky style.

    The only complaint that I have about your place is that on a LOT of your trades, I have noticed that you use a LARGE percentage of your account on each trade.

    Is there a reason for that?

    The reason I bring this is up because a lot of the other trader’s that I speak with have always told me “never bet more than 2% of your account on a play, because anything greater than 2% would bring your risk of ruin to 100%.”

    Now granted, it is up to the person following TIM alerts to use their own brain and their own discretion on how much risk is too much, but I am just curious about why you bet so much on your trades?

    /REALLY curious dude

  4. Mark

    Hey, Tim, long time reader your masterpiece of a blog here.

    I especially enjoy your no nonsense, snarky style.

    The only complaint that I have about your place is that on a LOT of your trades, I have noticed that you use a LARGE percentage of your account on each trade.

    Is there a reason for that?

    The reason I bring this is up because a lot of the other trader’s that I speak with have always told me “never bet more than 2% of your account on a play, because anything greater than 2% would bring your risk of ruin to 100%.”

    Now granted, it is up to the person following TIM alerts to use their own brain and their own discretion on how much risk is too much, but I am just curious about why you bet so much on your trades?

    /REALLY curious dude

  5. John

    Mark,

    The 2% rule means that if you’re down on a trade, you can put in however much money you want but you MUST cut losses if they hit 2% of your account value.

  6. John

    Mark,

    The 2% rule means that if you’re down on a trade, you can put in however much money you want but you MUST cut losses if they hit 2% of your account value.

  7. LP

    John,

    The 6% rule means that if you are down more than 6% of your account value in 30 days, you need to stop trading for 30 days. Tim needs to go on probation!

  8. LP

    John,

    The 6% rule means that if you are down more than 6% of your account value in 30 days, you need to stop trading for 30 days. Tim needs to go on probation!

  9. Amark

    I am still learning about Tim’s Approach so don’t lump me in one camp or another on that basis.

    Some of you out there are not very good with numbers. So you seem to be focusing on the wrong things. If I make one bet of one hundred thousand dollars or 100 bets of one thousand dollars, if I am stopped out at 2% of the amount I bet (you can call it an investment or call it a trade) then assuming that I acutally will be stopped at that level (sufficent liquididty and reasonable spreads allowing this) then I have risked 2% of my total funds.

    Next if in my trades my average loss is x and my average gain is 3x I can be wrong 3 out of four times and still break even. If I make more than 3x then things are even better. With a system like I just mentioned if I am right in my trades half the time I am making money.

    I do not know Tim’s ahem, batting average but I suspect over a given time period, he is doing better than 50/50.

    Risk of ruin. How many times in a row or if you prefer a clump of trades is Tim likley to be incorrect? Or the converse how many times right? So if a bad string of luck occours how likely is it that he is wiped out? These things happen and one should make the bets of a size that you survive such an event. If a string of good luck occours , the size of a bet can be adjusted to increase or decrease risk because you now have more funds. If you bet the same size per trade with the same size stop your risk goes down.

    What about trends?

    Hypotheticly (for this example I am not using a day trade) Lets say I am blessed and I buy a stock at the begining of a long run such as we saw with Microsoft when it’s price exploded as it grew. Lets say I have made a usual bet of x size then it goes up 4%, if I double my bet but keep the percentage stop at 2% (of the price I paid of the second bet) in my belief that I have caught a trend, then the potential gain to my portfolio is doubled for each move up (from my orig. position) but my risk of a lose has been reduced. Take a look at the books on the Turtle Traders. Their rules had them pile on when right which can result in large gains. This is about math and not about Tim! If Tim is not adjusting where he gets out when having gains then there is a potential problem in his keeping gains.

    Tim is (sort of ) trying to replicate his earlier trading results to prove the point that his apporach works (and therefore you should send $ to him for goods and or services). This is putting yourself on the line. I am interested in how any other accounts he has are doing, but in the long run that may not be my business.

    As far as number of trades that is irrelevant. Results matter. If I make one trade in 10 years in a stock or one thousand trades a week if at the end of the 10 years I have after all costs have been subtracted have the same increase in my money the result is the same. Of course there are going to be ups and downs along the way. In fact the rapid trading approach might have less drawdowns. Since it is being activly managed.

    There is a hedge fund headed by the mathmatician Thorpe (he invented card counting). It is a black box system where a computer makes about 3k trades a day. They make about 30% a year. It is done by having an edge in terms of the odds. On a sufficent number of trades they make money. it is like the casino in Las Vegas. The operators know that sometimes they will have a string of good or bad luck, but over time with enough bets placed, they will make a percentage of the total as profit.

    So the real question is “Is Tim making his $ by luck or because his approach causes him to have an edge?

    PErhaps we should look at his large bets and determine how often he looses $ on those and how much as a % of his portfolio he gains, in order to determine if he is a a chump depending on luck on those outsized trades or if he is taking a viable approach.

    My wife once worked at a company where the delivery person was a retired perosn who wnet to the tracks and actually did well. He tended to bet on jocky /horse combinations. People made fun of him. But his little side hobby paid for his Buick and his RV. I saw him once in action at a company party party at the tracks, sure enough overall he made money. Why? He had an edge and knew how to bet with it.

  10. Amark

    I am still learning about Tim’s Approach so don’t lump me in one camp or another on that basis.

    Some of you out there are not very good with numbers. So you seem to be focusing on the wrong things. If I make one bet of one hundred thousand dollars or 100 bets of one thousand dollars, if I am stopped out at 2% of the amount I bet (you can call it an investment or call it a trade) then assuming that I acutally will be stopped at that level (sufficent liquididty and reasonable spreads allowing this) then I have risked 2% of my total funds.

    Next if in my trades my average loss is x and my average gain is 3x I can be wrong 3 out of four times and still break even. If I make more than 3x then things are even better. With a system like I just mentioned if I am right in my trades half the time I am making money.

    I do not know Tim’s ahem, batting average but I suspect over a given time period, he is doing better than 50/50.

    Risk of ruin. How many times in a row or if you prefer a clump of trades is Tim likley to be incorrect? Or the converse how many times right? So if a bad string of luck occours how likely is it that he is wiped out? These things happen and one should make the bets of a size that you survive such an event. If a string of good luck occours , the size of a bet can be adjusted to increase or decrease risk because you now have more funds. If you bet the same size per trade with the same size stop your risk goes down.

    What about trends?

    Hypotheticly (for this example I am not using a day trade) Lets say I am blessed and I buy a stock at the begining of a long run such as we saw with Microsoft when it’s price exploded as it grew. Lets say I have made a usual bet of x size then it goes up 4%, if I double my bet but keep the percentage stop at 2% (of the price I paid of the second bet) in my belief that I have caught a trend, then the potential gain to my portfolio is doubled for each move up (from my orig. position) but my risk of a lose has been reduced. Take a look at the books on the Turtle Traders. Their rules had them pile on when right which can result in large gains. This is about math and not about Tim! If Tim is not adjusting where he gets out when having gains then there is a potential problem in his keeping gains.

    Tim is (sort of ) trying to replicate his earlier trading results to prove the point that his apporach works (and therefore you should send $ to him for goods and or services). This is putting yourself on the line. I am interested in how any other accounts he has are doing, but in the long run that may not be my business.

    As far as number of trades that is irrelevant. Results matter. If I make one trade in 10 years in a stock or one thousand trades a week if at the end of the 10 years I have after all costs have been subtracted have the same increase in my money the result is the same. Of course there are going to be ups and downs along the way. In fact the rapid trading approach might have less drawdowns. Since it is being activly managed.

    There is a hedge fund headed by the mathmatician Thorpe (he invented card counting). It is a black box system where a computer makes about 3k trades a day. They make about 30% a year. It is done by having an edge in terms of the odds. On a sufficent number of trades they make money. it is like the casino in Las Vegas. The operators know that sometimes they will have a string of good or bad luck, but over time with enough bets placed, they will make a percentage of the total as profit.

    So the real question is “Is Tim making his $ by luck or because his approach causes him to have an edge?

    PErhaps we should look at his large bets and determine how often he looses $ on those and how much as a % of his portfolio he gains, in order to determine if he is a a chump depending on luck on those outsized trades or if he is taking a viable approach.

    My wife once worked at a company where the delivery person was a retired perosn who wnet to the tracks and actually did well. He tended to bet on jocky /horse combinations. People made fun of him. But his little side hobby paid for his Buick and his RV. I saw him once in action at a company party party at the tracks, sure enough overall he made money. Why? He had an edge and knew how to bet with it.

  11. Pingback: Motley Fool Launches A Mutual Fund, Forgets Being Hypocritical / Manipulative Aren’t Selling Points | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  12. Pingback: Motley Fool Launches A Mutual Fund, Forgets Being Hypocritical / Manipulative Aren’t Selling Points | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  13. Pingback: Trader Monthly Leaves Behind More People They Screwed Over: | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  14. Pingback: Trader Monthly Leaves Behind More People They Screwed Over: | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  15. Pingback: Who Is the Real Lenny Dykstra? | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  16. Pingback: Who Is the Real Lenny Dykstra? | TIM - Timothy Sykes

  17. Jonathan Kent

    Trader Monthly magazine was written by d-bags for d-bags.  It was like watching a circle jerk of d-bags in love with themselves.  I pity anyone who ever thought it was to be taken seriously.

  18. Pingback: $590,689 Spent On Booze Means Brands Should Value Traders More [CRAZY PHOTOS] - Timothy Sykes

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Click here if you want to become a millionaire!

Close