Advanced Income (defunct)

If you’ve subscribed to Advanced Income (defunct), please click the stars below to indicate your rating for this newsletter, and please share any other feedback about your experience using the comment box below.

Investment Performance

No votes yet... cast yours!
No votes yet.
Please wait...
Your vote

Quality Of Writing/Analysis

No votes yet... cast yours!
No votes yet.
Please wait...
Your vote

Value For Price

Rating from 1 votes
Rating: 5.0/5. From 1 vote.
Please wait...
Your vote
  • 5 Stars 1 Votes
  • 4 Stars 0 Votes
  • 3 Stars 0 Votes
  • 2 Stars 0 Votes
  • 1 Stars 0 Votes

Customer Service

No votes yet... cast yours!
No votes yet.
Please wait...
Your vote
guest

12345

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
cot
Guest
cot
March 27, 2009 10:07 pm

When I subscribed last year a couple of his covered call picks bombed so it was not good time to follow his advice of selling puts.

paulmerk
Irregular
paulmerk
March 29, 2009 1:18 am

About 30% of the recommended trades could not be executed at the recommended limit levels; the price of the options had changed over night substantially, which is not Mr. Clarks fault.However I do not like that he then treats these recommendations in following issues of the Advanced Income letter as if they had been executed at the limit level and therefore naturally show a considerable gain. Generally speaking, I have lost a lot of money on the underlaying stock which could not possibly go any lower but of course it did.This is not Mr. Clark’s fault of course since the market is chaotic by definition. Sincerely Paul Merk

Add a Topic
570
Add a Topic
19
Add a Topic
996
johnK
Guest
johnK
April 1, 2009 6:49 pm

I have been a subscriber for almost a year. My rule with any newsletter is to follow along for a year before I spend my money on ‘picks’. There’s been some losers and there have been some winners. Not GIANT gains, but small gains over the course of a few months.

I almost broke my one year rule with a small company picked. I couldn’t sell the covered call reco, but there was an interesting call one year out. The stock was $2.97 a share and one year out there was a covered call for $3.00 a share. The way I read this, the maximum downside potential would amount to the cost of comissions. My broker also charges the pre-contract fee, but on-line these costs are not significant.

Today the share price is around 2.65. The biggest risk to your money is that the stock goes to zero. (in this specific case) The biggest risk to wealth building is the stock is called away at the strike price and continues up to say $6.00 or higher.

The plus side is that when you buy the stock today and receive more for the covered call sale than you paid. It all happens in one day. JC refers to this as net cost which in this case is less than zero. I have to say loud and clear JC DID NOT reco this trade. I found it on the options page at my on line broker. I never would have found this trade if I didn’t read Adv. Inc. I didn’t break my one year waiting period.

The year waiting period gives a person the opportunity to learn about these trades and how they work. I can only afford this learning period because I subscribe to one of S&A’s Alliance packages. The renewal this year was $69. I get about five newsletters and I am very happy with S&A’s products.

I am especially pleased with the customer service. I cancelled Short report and next credit card statement there was my 100% refund as S&A advertised. They may tease hard, but you can take them at their word! Not so with some other newletters.

Add a Topic
5971
Add a Topic
5971
Add a Topic
5971
Parry laird
Guest
April 2, 2009 9:36 am

Most of the trades were more than I could afford on a consistant basis. Therefore, I just watched from the sidelines…..not a good use of the $99 a paid. As it turned out, there were a lot of trades that went upside down!

Add a Topic
1278
Dave
Guest
Dave
April 9, 2009 10:57 am

Has anybody heard of Jeff Clarks “The Velocity Strategy”, that deals with the e-mini future contracts? Good, bad?? Anybody????

glenn
Guest
glenn
September 19, 2009 9:16 am

I have been a subscriber since April to Jeff Clark’s Advanced Income. SA has a very clever interesting to read daily rotation of teasers that go out under their umbrella of newsletters written each day by one of their newsletter writers. Jeff Clark is one of them. He looks for technical patterns that are unique in time that allow him (supposedly) to profit by seeing them early. He did correctly call the March bottom and went long which persuaded me to become a subscriber. BUT that was his one brilliant insight. He quickly went bearish and has fiddled around with his wording of why the market is wrong and ridiculous as he continues to be wrong. Even historically he has been pretty wrong. He has had his investors buying UNG three times in over a year (some at more than 3 times the current price) and they still hold it. Advanced income is supposed to be more conservative call selling but in this case, Jeff Clark’s calls have been best described as very wrong. IF he had just not gone bearish in MAY and had not sold all the stocks (some I selected) my stock portfolio would have been up 40% instead of being down 4%. Not a good newsletter for this year for sure.
The real reason I write this review is for one thing, I hate liars. I hate newsletter writers who try to spin the historical facts to make them self look less wrong or right as it may apply, but the worst of all, I hate Newsletter writers that ignore their own stop loss instruction if in the future it comes back up above their strike point. IN the Case if Jeff Clark. HE came out with another sure easy money play last month (august 2009) and said that we were going sell puts for 28 strike on SKF (double bear financials) but put a stop loss on if at anytime while we hold the puts, we close at below $26.60.
Well, it did close a few times below that stop loss. I bought back the put took a 66% loss. But Jeff issued no alert about it. I brought penned an email detailing the verbatim passage from his letter and the dates that SFK fell below his stop loss but got no response from him just some placating boiler plate remark from customer service. He should have responded but he is set on being right again and is not interested in seeing about anything to the contrary. If he had made an alert he would have saved his subscribers who never did cover some money. In fact, he did not. Yesterday, (Sept 21 options expiration day) he told subscribers all still had their positions and so he suggested rolling it to October 28. Now a put that was sold for $1.40 closed Sept 21 at $3.60 (157% loss)(bad for newsletter archiving I guess) now he continues on with an increased liability to subscribers at $4.20 (almost 4 dollars underwater with no stop loss discussed). I am a fair investor that knows each newsletter is going to have their share of good and bad calls, but there is no discipline here. There is no way should this be considered a conservative income generating newsletter – More like Advanced Loss. Caveat Emptor.

Add a Topic
19
Add a Topic
996
Add a Topic
5916
Jim H
Guest
Jim H
June 7, 2010 12:52 pm

Thanks for a solid explanation of Jeff Clark/Stansberry report “$1,667 A Year, etc.”

Stock Gumshoe is a godsend! Keep up the good work.

Jim
Greenville, SC

Add a Topic
5971
Ran
Guest
Ran
June 20, 2010 7:54 am

One thing thats missing in this process is the marketing strategy being used to generate income. While most focus on the covered call options to generate a sustained income stream, Jeff and his company seemed to be focussed on marketing this strategy at a premium of either $1000 or $750 for new comers. The story of numbers plays a huge role in this process. A higher number of subscribers will always benefit the person behind the recommendations, especially if you’re not schooled in options anc is unable to pickup their supposed methods for early gains. The bottom line is simple, don’t fall prey to these tactics until you do your own research and understand the risks involved in the product being marketed.

Add a Topic
996
Add a Topic
570
Add a Topic
996
realfactchecker
Member
realfactchecker
September 12, 2011 8:57 am

The current open trades from this newsletter portfolio show the following gains and losses as of Sept 8, 2011.

Amounts shown are percentages.

-37, -52, -50, +4, -3, -282, +6, -2, -3, -121, +16, and -46.

Ouch!

richard bartels
Member
richard bartels
February 12, 2012 10:20 am

I just stumbled across stockgumshoe,while researching Amssterdam secret.I suscribe to stansberrys news letter a year now.Always trying to sell a deal(disguised options).I felt this wasnt for me(too good to be true system)Thanks for proving my gut feeling was correct.

patrickw9
Member
patrickw9
June 2, 2012 4:01 am

When one buys an option, the risk is limited to the cost of the option (which can lose 100%), but the potential gain is essentially unlimited.

When one sells an option, the gain can never be more than the cost of the option, but the potential loss is essentially unlimited.

This proposed strategy (selling uncovered options) is occasionally used very cautiously by top experts with advanced degrees in finance and years of experience; what do you think is the likelihood that you or I will routinely profit from it? To use a term from science and statistics, the probability is “vanishingly small.”

Add a Topic
570