User 221172

The Long Case for ThinkorSwim Group

You sound like a pre-merger investools employee. Investools was always nothing more than an info-mercial marketing firm. They NEVER provided quality education, training, or classes. Their instructors were and remain salesmen who upsell. The fact that this industry niche has remained unregulated and outside of sro jurisdiction is maddening. The sec probe was bound to happen. You take a regulated b/d and merge w/ a scrupulous marketing firm run by an idiot and you end up counting your lucky stars you were able to hire legal counsel to bail your ass out. Doesn't take a rocket scientist...


On Jun 11 09:38 PM mephistopholes wrote:

> Solukskorio,
>
> The education business is not a scam and that is not the thesis.
> Investor education is a perfectly legitimate business if conducted
> ethically and we can actually thank Investools for this. Under the
> leadership of many who are now long gone, Investools took a penny
> stock company from a shady seminar business to a legitimate education
> company with many fine instructors and coaches. There are thousands
> of internet postings pertaining to the “Investools scam” and they
> can all be summed up by the words of successful Investools users;
> like any other educational offering, you get out of it what you put
> into it. There is a whole community of Investools die-hards, both
> on and off the payroll who are committed to helping each other become
> educated investors. But the company does not produce these educated
> investors at a healthy enough rate that will sustain those appealing
> metrics you so diligently outlined.
>
> The problem is that once Think or Swim account openings, not student
> success, became the focal point of the operation at the top level
> of the business, this legitimacy of education or concern with student
> success fell quickly by the wayside, not at the hands of the educators
> but at the hands of an amateur management division overseen by a
> very greedy C-level staff wearing rose-colored glasses when it came
> to their own business. As you have so diligently pointed out for
> us, it is far easier to produce metrics on brokerage account openings
> than it is to gauge the success of a student. And thumbing through
> metrics on quality account openings is surely a lot more fun for
> overpaid, overrated CEOs and CFOs than thumbing through student retention
> metrics, which, even with the finest data analysts, are difficult
> to report against to investors and consumers. The Investools CEO
> and his dream team seemed too afraid to get their hands dirty and
> effectively separate from the seminar sales business and instead
> thought they could get away with merging it with legitimate financial
> services business created by the seemingly competent Sosnoff and
> Sheridan. In good financial services business, the two just don’t
> mix. To make matters worse, the education division, which was by
> no means a cash cow, seemed to inflate in headcount, expenditure
> and salary levels at a peculiar rate after the merger compared to
> the streamlined Think or Swim operation leaving investors and consumer
> advocacy groups to wonder who is really in charge of this oversized,
> top heavy organization. At last check it seemed to be a senior vice
> president named Andrew Scott who was closely affiliated with the
> legacy seminar business. Friday’s press release appears to indicate
> that Mr. Scott was demoted and is now teaching seminars again.<br/>
>
> The "thesis" (is this English 101 or something?) is not about the
> legitimacy or quality of the former educational model. The thesis
> is that dishonest business practices and misinformation spewing from
> the mouths of fat and happy upper management, that will ultimately
> leave the Investools "alumni," consumers and investors with a bad
> taste in their mouth, who have bought into the Investools bull via
> national ad campaigns that anyone, regardless of their previous knowledge,
> can become a successful self-guided investor only to have the company
> change its mind mid-course. What happens to all of these people now
> that Think or Swim’s new model caters to the educated options investor?
> Are they going to wait up for the rest of those 275,000 graduates
> to learn how to successfully trade options and become prime Think
> or Swim account holders? They probably won’t and because, again,
> there is no predefined metric to evaluate success at the consumer
> level, that figure of 17 complaints, which we’re assuming are BBB
> complaints, will unfortunately not grow much higher. Disgruntled
> students who can’t find their instructor or who don’t want to stop
> their education mid-strategy to go learn vertical spreads with a
> new instructor under a new model will fall off in droves and most
> will never contact consumer advocacy groups. We encourage these consumers
> to hold Investools accountable for what they paid for and ask for
> their money back if they feel that the new direction of the company
> turns out to be contrary to what they have been promised at Investools
> workshops or via other means of purchasing their educational products
> (online or by calling into a sales call center).
>
> Think or Swim didn’t need to wash its hands clean of investor education
> or the name Investools. It needed to wash its hands clean of bloated
> incompetence and egos (not to mention obscene salaries) at the upper
> echelons of the company, those who have likely never interacted with
> their own customers at any legitimate level and those who have no
> idea how to even define “educated options investor.” The simple law
> of gravity states that what goes up must come down. Despite a good
> run, the stock price today is a good indicator that this company
> is down. If the charts read correctly, down to about the same price
> it was at when the two companies “jumped into bed” with each other.
> Investors and consumers alike should not only be asking questions,
> they should be pissed.

The Long Case for ThinkorSwim Group

You are completely 100% correct!!!

On Jun 11 08:44 AM Dawg wrote:

> All of the above points have valiant merit. The very real problem
> that prevents this company from realizing its potential is the fact
> that the previous inept management and board of directors remains
> intact and in charge. The market is littered with value traps that
> feature wonderful, fast-growing businesses poorly managed and overseen
> by neglectful corporate governance. These stocks tease otherwise
> intelligent investors with their value discrepancies and future promise,
> only to eventually languish or depreciate due to management weakness
> and inability to strategically evolve. This is absolutely the case
> at SWIM.
>
> Investools management led by Lee Barba and governed by a mostly pathetic
> board aligned only to continue their support of entrenched management
> will unequivally hinder this company's ability to realize it's full
> (or even higher) value. Shoddy practices, unecessary financial practices
> (led by a syncophatic and amateur CFO), and unfocused, egotistic
> marketing all more than offset the creativity and executional excellence
> of the ThinkorSwim management team, led by Sosnoff &amp; Sheridan.
> Normally, any talented managment consultant would handily suggest
> an internal shift to the latter managers, but in this case they lack
> the both the DNA to step up and manage a publicly-traded enterprise
> and the spine to force aside Barba, Kane, and the bulk of the Board.
>
>
> This present state of affairs will eventually lead to another bloodbath
> at the operational/growth/cos... allocation level. It's only a matter
> of time with such lame managment and lack-of-talent still at the
> controls. Sadly, TOS remains the best-of-the-breed among electronic
> options brokerages, but that position isn't permanent, nor is it
> easily defensible. TOS ultimately answers to people who plainly are
> so stupid and inept as to ignore the chance to step aside and let
> the value emerge, something their existing stakes would allow for
> a handsome reward, if they let it. Almost tragic, if you ask me!

INVESTools: Swim And Sink

might as well add that tos' decision to merge w/ the likes of investools tells you a lot about the character of their management. They are old floor guys who think the industry revolves around their little order entry desk and italian imported desks...they completely disregard complaince and are only concerned about their russian dolls that prance through the office and the own egos...but what do I know....it's not like the head of finra's chicago district office conducted their last exit interview. Why would she be there if they really gave a shit about the product they are selling you.

INVESTools: Swim And Sink

It's a scam. I work in the industry. I know thinkorswim and investools. It's a hidious scam. It's a scam, it's a scam, it's a scam. Investools was unregulated. Post merger kept the entities separate, but the sec may hold the registered tos accountable...tos is throwing a compliance presence in utah...tos hired a finra lawyer to serve their interests in the sec informal inquiry...non-register... entities aren't held to the same regulations as a registered member, hence, investools and optionetics have sprung up...A registered b/d can't do the type of business as these non-registered entities because the regulators require fair, balances, honest presentations and literature. Associated member's are individually held accountable, etc. It's sad really that many investool clients (complete idiots as they are) have lost their life savings by believing what they were told, that they can be turned into traders w/o discretion. The regulators were established to protect the public's interests. It's sickening that these types of companies are not held to the same standards as they aren't required to be regulated. Same kind of scenario w/ people who create their own website and offer their trading services via a poa in return for a fee... of course it's a scam...someday hopefully the regulators will put an end to it...but who knows when


On Mar 13 12:43 PM darsdesigns wrote:

> I have to disagree with your commentary.
>
> First I want to say that I did not spend anywhere remotely near $10,000.00
> for software or education courses or seminars.
>
> Second, I want to say that your statement "what they actually 'learn'
> is not stock trading, but actually option trading" is wrong as well.
> Stock courses are offered and you must take and pass the "stock"
> final exam before being allowed to take the options courses - giving
> you a sound foundation to learn about and trade options.
>
> Third, I want to say that students are not just thrown into trading
> with real money as you suggest as a paper trading account is included
> and definitely encouraged to use diligently before ever investing
> any real money.
>
> My experience is that is is a great program. Having traded in the
> past but stopping trading I personally bought it to get back into
> trading and to learn and educate myself. I have learned so much in
> such a short time I really think it is invaluable if a person really
> wants to be serious and get into trading. The live webcasts on trading
> (many different subjects) are invaluable.
>
> If one wants to get into trading, learn and make money how would
> you suggest they learn it? They don't really teach this in school
> (sadly - they should). This is a one stop learn everything program
> in one place and all the tools you need are in one place which makes
> it very nice.