Jay:  This week’s show guest is Jack D. Schwager. Jack is a legend in the finance world, a very well-known author, fun manager, and industry expert in futures and hedge funds. He’s famously known for his bestselling series of interviews with the greatest hedge fund managers of the last two decades called The Market Wizards. Jack’s first book, A Complete Guide to the Futures Market is considered to be one of the classic reference works in the field and was one of the first five investing books I personally purchased when I started my investing journey over 20 years ago.

Please enjoy my thought-provoking conversation with Jack Schwager.

Jay:  Hi, Jack. Then you so much for joining us. You are quite a legend in the trading and investing world, so we’re extremely excited to have you on.

Jack:  Thank you. Appreciate it.

Jay:  Maybe for those, the very few minority, that are tuning in of our audience that don’t know who you are, maybe you could give us a quick background.

Jack:  So basically, claim to fame with most of the world is having written the series of books on great traders, the Market Wizard Series. So that’s how most people know me.

I’ve also written analytical books. In fact, I just redid the first one I ever did, which was A Complete Guide to the Futures Market. And that’s kind of a bit of a different audience. It’s more analytical.

I’ve done a lot of different things in my career. I’m old enough that I’ve done a lot of different things. That includes 22 years as a research director in derivative markets or futures for various firms like Prudential and Paine Webber, etc.

I spent 10 years as a partner in a hedge fund advisory firm, and the last couple of years, I’ve been involved with a startup called FundSeeder, which I guess we’ll talk about. So that’s kind of a very short synopsis.

Jay:  Two things quickly. First of all, your books, the Market Wizard books, this is probably the case for a lot of people. It was like, of the first 10 books on investing that I’ve ever bought were two of them. So thank you for helping me so early on in my career. I just wanted to say that.

Jack:  Appreciate it.

Jay:  Secondly, you’re almost like a very early version of what a lot of people are doing. And what this is is interviewing successful trainers and trying to gain insights of it. And that was your model, except you were decades earlier, so you were somewhat of a pioneer in that regard.

Thanks for the introduction. Let’s get into a little bit more of your background. Your latest book, I guess it’s an updated version of some of your old work, but you start off in a very interesting way, because you have an introduction that says, “The great debate between fundamental and technical analysis.” It’s almost like religion or politics. There’s heavy opinions on both sides. People get very into this sort of thing.

Interestingly enough, I believe you began on the fundamental side in that camp. But then at some point, you switched over to the technical side. So maybe you could share with the audience a little bit.

Jack:  You could think of it as extreme Democrat and extreme Republican. So it’s that much of a transition. In today’s world, that’s a big transition.

I come from an economics background. Back when I went to college, graduate school, they didn’t teach markets at all, and stuff like trading or futures markets, that was unheard of.

I came into it strictly from just a basic economics background. And that biases you to think… You look at the world. You look at any price-forecasting situation, and you think of it as an economist in terms of fundamental inputs. You would never think of anything in the whole realm of technical analysis as a potential solution and, as far as you would even consider it or know other people doing it, you would, most like myself probably, start out from bias saying, “That’s a lot of mumbo jumbo. I gotta look at a price chart? That’s not analysis.” Right?

Jay:  Yeah.

Jack:  So it was like reading entrails or something like that. That’s kind of the bias I came into.

But as I was in the industry and I tried fundamentals, there were a lot of problems that I had personally with fundamental analysis. There’s a couple of big ones.

One is that you can’t collapse into a small enough time frame. Really, fundamental analysis lends itself best in analyzing on an annual basis. Maybe quarterly if you push it but not monthly, certainly not… Months’ time markets — my god. I mean, a market could have a giant move in a month’s time. If you’re forecasting that, it’s in a time frame which doesn’t match that, it makes it difficult.

So you may have a bias. This market is overpriced or whatever. But from a trading standpoint, it’s hard to use this as an effective tool.

The biggest problem I have with fundamental analysis is that intrinsic to fundamentals, the basic approach is the idea that the economics dictate a certain equilibrium of value. And so if the market is above that value, then it’s potentially you short. If it’s below that value, it’s a buy.

Now what happens if you’re initially wrong? I believe market X is underpriced. It should go up by fundamentals. I’ve got all these other years. I have these relevant economics where the price would say, from that experience, the price should be higher next year.

So I go long. Now what happens if the market goes down and there hasn’t been any dramatic shift in fundamentals? And fundamentals said not to shift suddenly unless that’s some hurricane or whatever or crop or some major event. But barring any sudden event, fundamentals changed more slowly over time.

So if the market goes against me, now what am I to conclude as a fundamental analyst? It was a buy before. It’s an even better buy now.

So ironically, inherent in fundamental analysis is not only an approach which is not complimentary to risk management but is, in its very bones, opposed to risk management, because it would tell you, the more the market goes against you, the better the opportunity. So that’s the logic there.

So that’s very difficult. As I was long hours in the business, I learned that if you don’t have risk management, you’ll always fail.

When I learned technical analysis, and I learned — and I should give credit here to someone who became a very close friend and, unfortunately, passed away a year and a half or so ago, a fellow by the name of Steve Kronowitz. He was an analyst. I told you I was research director, and so I had a lot of analysts working for me, and he was the only technical analyst. And we actually shared an office. He was a really good guy. We used to joke all day long and really got along great.

But I saw of all the analysts I had working for me, the only one who was more right than wrong, the only one who was actually making money on his recommendations, was Steve. But he was the only one who was using technical analysis. So I would like to think that I’m an open-minded person. “Steve, what’s the story? How do you…?”

By sitting next to him, I kind of learned what he was doing and how he looked at markets. And I understood the reason why… There is a reason why technical analysis can work. It’s a very logical reason. And that is if you have a price chart or you have a price series, everything that anybody does in the world in that market is in there.

Now drawing information from that is a different story. But the price itself reflects everybody’s actions. And therefore, it’s not unreasonable to believe that if you’re looking at something that reflects everybody’s actions, that you could draw some conclusions. But physicists doing particle physics, they draw conclusions from the pathways. It’s not that you see the actual event of the particle, but for the pathway and interactions, they can draw conclusions.

So it would seem logical, in a similar way, you could draw conclusions from seeing the repercussions of everybody’s actions on price. And so that’s the logic.

So once I saw there was logic, and I saw that it worked, and, most importantly — and this is the most important thing about the whole question — technical analysis is quite the opposite of fundamentals, is naturally into risk management, because unless you’re a counter trend trader, the more the market goes against you, the worse your analysis has been and the more your approach should say “You’re wrong. Get out.”

That’s what eventually transformed me from someone who started out 100% fundamental and ended up being basically 100% technical.

Now there are two places, I would say, where I personally find fundamentals have potential value. One is in a broad, broad picture sense. And it’s not even doing any analysis. Not even the back of the envelope. It’s just a simple, simple concept.

So we take something like 2008. Markets are crashing. They go down tremendously. Not markets like emerging markets. This is an Asian conference, so this is totally relevant. For emerging markets in 2008, even though they weren’t the source of the problem, they ironically — maybe not ironically — got in much harder than the developed world economies and stock markets.

So the US’s stock market may have gone down 50%, at least based on the S&P. Many emerging markets went down a lot more than that.

So you have these markets going down a tremendous amount. And the other thing is commodities. Basic commodities — copper, oil, whatever — all we have to say is these things are… It’s not like the world will stop using commodities. We’ll still need to eat. Whatever is going on in the economy, these things are not going away.

They’ve gone down 70, 80%. And the emerging markets which are going down 70 to 80%, it’s not like they’ve gone back to the stone age. This is like a tremendous overreaction. So in that sense, you can think… Well, this has to have value. The copper market, if it’s down 80% or metals or whatever, maybe it will go down 90%. But if you hold that for some time, it’s hard to think how the intrinsic value doesn’t win out in the end.

So in that type of situation, we get extreme circumstances. And you could see amazing overvalue or undervalue. It’s easier to do the under value because the overvalue, there’s no limit to how high the market can go, so that makes it difficult. But particularly when you’ve got panics and markets get depressed and you’re dealing with things that have tangible value, I would say, in that sense, having a fundamental concept…

I was there. I didn’t go long ETFs in China and metals in late 2008 because of any technical analysis. Technical is for terrible. I did use technical analysis by looking at very long-term charts and looking where are the extreme bottoms, where are the extreme supports of these things. So I may have used that to kind of pick a zone to go long in, but ultimately, the idea was really a matter of values. So that’s one place where fundamentals are important.

And ironically — and this is, again, my perspective — the second place I consider fundamentals potentially more important is in a totally contrarian way. Fundamentals can be effective but, to me, what I’ve written and experienced is they’re most effective when the market doesn’t respond the way the fundamentals would apply and to respond.

So if you have a situation where we have an event and the market should go down, and instead, an event comes out, it barely budges, and then starts going up, that can be important information.

So it’s from a contrarian perspective that I think fundamentals can be of value. I’ve met many people who use fundamentals in a more traditional sense, and they’ve done great. So I certainly don’t mean applying the fundamentals can’t work, but they have certain difficulties which I couldn’t surmount. But there have been people that have interviewed who have become phenomenally wealthy on the fundamentals and not technical.

Jay:  That’s a great point. To the point of fundamentals and risk management… When you look at the value-investing camp, like you said, there’s plenty of people that have made an enormous amount of money. Their method of risk management usually is by banking in, a margin of safety, this sort of thing, and then taking advantage of 2008 when there’s market dislocation. They’ve done their work, and they’re like “Okay, I can buy this on the cheap.”

However, like you said earlier in the talk, the time frame is drawn out. As an investor, if you are looking for anything shorter than an annual return, it’s very difficult, because you literally have to sit on cash. If cash is your method of risk management for being a fundamental investor, then you could go years with just cash sitting around waiting for those opportunities. Whereas, I feel like if you are a technician and you are able to reduce that time frame investment horizon, then you’re able to trade a little bit more actively.

I think it’s also a personality thing. A lot of people don’t have the stomach or the inoculation for fundamental and value investing, whereas technical analysis, it seems like it’s almost rule-based. So risk management, a lot of famous macro-traders, they’ll just cut losses at 20% down get out. So for basic human psychology, I think it tends to work better.

For technical analysis, maybe you could give a very, very brief 101, because I’ve looked at charts before, but I think a lot of people don’t do it properly. Again, timeline, how long are you supposed to…different assets. How do you know how long the chart is? Something that forms a pattern in a short amount of time on that scale can be completely different when you expand the timeline.

Jack:  Absolutely. The picture cliché, the blind men with the elephant — one touching the trunk… It depends on which part of the elephant. You’ll get a totally different picture. So talking about traditional chart analysis, you’re looking at a three month chart versus looking at a three-year chart versus looking at a 30-year chart. Pictures can that totally, totally different.

I come more from an old classical chart approach. My feeling is — “If I want to try chart analysis, how should I do it?” One piece of advice is start with very long-term charts and then work your way down in time frame. As people who just work or trade intraday use — I don’t know — 60 minute charts or 15 minute charts. And somehow make that work. But I believe it’s important to start the longer perspective so you know where you are in basing… Are we near an area where the market has held multiple times in the past? Are we near an upper end of the a range? How far have we gone from without some sort of a reaction? Just to get the big picture.

So I would go for a 15 year chart down to maybe five years, down to one year. Some then, only then down to three months — maybe.

So that time frame, I think they’re all important, and I’d go from long to short. And the best trades, I think, occur when everything works out. Well, if the long-term chart says “This is an area to watch. You should be holding” and you get similar messages, and then on the shorter-term chart, you see the market has held and is starting to turn up and has got a certain pattern where you can get in for a reasonable risk. So when everything works together, that’s usually the best approach.

Also, there are things such things that support the resistance. And a lot of times, multiple time frame charts could give you a zone where each of the charts is giving you a support level, let’s say, in the same area. That adds, in my mind, more reliability to that type of interpretation.

So time frame, I’d say across the board.

Jay:  There’s a bunch of commonly used, technical tools or patterns when you’re looking at charts. That are a handful that were your go-to ones? There’s tons — right? — of different patterns and formations that you can see. What are some of the top, a handful that you’ve used successfully in the past?

Jack:  My personal bias is to various types of consolidation patterns and what they imply, which way should the market come out of it and stuff like that. They’re good also because you could definite waiting it out based on that without having a huge risk.

But the most important thing for me — I need to make this clear — it’s not that chart analysis has a great percentage of accuracy and if you use it… Of course, everybody is going to have a different interpretation. But it’s not that charts are that reliable. Chart patterns are not that reliable, particularly so many people are using them. What’s really important is not the pattern but how you interpret it.

And I have a chapter, in fact, in the analytical book. I have a chapter which I call, I think, something along the line “The most important rule of chart analysis.” And the most rule of chart analysis, if you have a pattern and you get the market going in a direction where the pattern, let’s say, is bullish, and then the market fails, that failure pattern is more reliable as an indication of where the market is likely to go than the pattern itself.

So that is a very important understanding. I think people who do use charts successful probably exploit that idea. And it’s not so much a pattern. But yes, you could use the pattern and get an initial bias, but you always have to remember that the failure of a pattern is potentially more significant than the pattern itself.

Jay:  That’s really interesting. In a way, investing in general, whether it’s fundamental or technical — whichever side you’re on — it’s a constant reviewing of assumptions and building conviction one way or another. So all these pieces, data points out there, patterns, charts, it kind of has to add into your bottom line view, your interpretation. Again, like you said, you need to know when the red flags pop up. And potentially, you could be wrong. And the sooner that happens, you could employ risk management metrics to get in or out of the trade.

Jack: A failure has a psychological implication too. If you think about it, what a failure means is most people using the charts, now one direction of the market, you know two things. You’re in one side of the market, and two, they’re losing money. There’s a reason why failures should be more important than the actual pattern itself.

Jay:  Absolutely. When you were trading in the past, you did a lot of work mostly with futures. And you also write one of the most prolific books on trading futures back in the day. Can you give us a quick futures 101, if you will, and what the differences are between trading in the future versus trading the underlying. There’s also, again, different camps there and why you chose to express your investing via futures versus, say, an underlying security.

Jack:  Well, the futures was not so much a choice. It just happened. My first job out of graduate school happened to be as an analyst and futures markets. So if it happened to be as an analyst in the equity market, I would probably be trading and writing about equities.

The thing about futures, those people that trade in it don’t need me to tell them anything. But for those you who don’t maybe know what futures are or haven’t traded them or whatever, there’s a couple of big things about futures. One is they’re extremely liquid. These are the key items that I would say. One is they’re extremely liquid. So it’s very easy to get in and get out.

Second is that it’s as easy to go short as to go long, which is not true of equities, by any means. So the thing is, insofar as markets and go-to directions, it’s kind of nice to have an instrument that’s not biased one side or the other.

And also, for those people who don’t know futures, there’s always an equal number of contracts — long or short — by definition. So you always know in any futures market you’re going into, half the money is at your side, and half the money is in the other side. But what that means, though, it explains why it makes a difference. Whether you’re buying or selling, it’s equally easy to go in both directions.

And the third thing I would emphasize about futures is they are all the markets because if you’re trading equities, it’s equity markets. If you’re trading bonds, it’s bonds. If you’re trading currency, it’s currencies. But the thing about futures, you could trade equity indexes. You could trade bond, interest rate markets all over the world. You could trade all different types of currencies. You could trade commodities like metal type commodities, energy commodities, agricultural commodities.

So there’s just basically a range of all assets, almost all assets, are reflected — at least liquid assets — are reflected in the futures market. So there’s a big range of markets you could be involved in, more so than in any single market.

Jay:  For the average investor, let’s say the non-institution-grade investor, maybe a high-net-worth guy or maybe just an enthusiast that wants to get into the futures market, your book that you revised is a pretty good complete guide, so to speak. You also include some trading systems in there. Is that right?

Jack:  Yeah, I did include some trading systems. They were more included… The whole subject of technical analysis, we talked about charts. Technical analysis really involves two broad categories — chart analysis and trading system or rule-based trading. It’s not that you’re being rule-based. It could be computerized because it’s more efficient.

To explain, there are a lot of things that go into that. How do you test this? How do you avoid misleading yourself about…testing systems? People go wrong all the time and don’t understand the proper methodology of testing. They have hindsight, and their results don’t realize it. So the whole thing then goes into that.

 

But also, the idea of how do you build a system?. So what I did is kind of, in the book, I kind of provide a few systems to show examples. Here’s a pattern. Let’s take this pattern and see how you might build a trading system out of it. And so that’s what it’s like. It’s not done, and I go out of my way to say, here’s a system, go trade it till [inaudible 0:27:01]. In fact, I go out of my way and say, I don’t even know what it’s going to do. That’s not my point. My point is to show you a logical way of how to construct the system, and hopefully you’ll have your own ideas that then you could use the same type of methodology to construct and test the system.

But I’m not trying to kind of sell or promote any particular system. I want to provide people with the tools and understanding of how to develop their own system.

Jay:  Right. Which is the most important thing, I think, for any investor.

For the audience, I highly recommend you hope over to Amazon or whatever your favorite book retailer is and pick up a copy. It’s like 700 pages, and it’s a complete, complete guide. It’s very, very thorough. I encourage everyone to go and pick that up now.

Jack, you’re working on something pretty exciting called FundSeeder. So I want to switch gears and talk about your exciting new project. I guess it’s not new. You’ve been at it for a couple of years now. But maybe you could share with the audience what you’re working on.

Jack:  Sure. FundSeeder, first of all, I’ll give credit where its due. The person behind the idea is my partner, Emanuel Balarie. I actually know him from… I was a portfolio consultant for his firm, and that’s how we know each other. Anyway, he got this idea and pitched it to me. This is what FundSeeder is. His idea was the way the asset management world has developed, all the big hedge funds are managed by 90% of the assets. If you were a talented trader somewhere, you’re chances of getting money are zilch, particularly if you’re not in the US or Britain or whatever, and you’re in some emerging market or a second-tier market. There’s not a financial market developed. There’s no investor base. You could develop a great system and be making money and nobody will pay any attention to you.

Let’s say you’re a mathematician somewhere in Eastern Europe, and you come up with some mythology that is consistently making money with reasonable control, and you’re actually building up your own account, and you’re doing well. If you try going to somebody, some asset allocator and saying, “I’ve got this great system…”

“Yeah, you and 500 people who email me.”

So zilch. No chance. So the idea was to take the power of the web, develop a central place where people — wherever they are on the globe — as long as they could trade, if they did have any trading talent, click the link, link their account to the site, and that site would daily update it. Basically, one of the key things about the site is it getting results. Not from the traders but directly from the broker.

And so you could develop a real-time track record. And also, we provide the traders with all sorts of analysis. Of course, they could chart your equity curve. You could do stuff like underwater chart analysis, all sorts of stats on your performance, rolling indicators on your performance compared to benchmarks. You could even apply technical analysis to your equity curve and see if you’re getting out, when you get a technical signal would make your equity curve look better. Stuff like that. So there’s all sorts of tools on there which entice traders to link up to the site.

What we’re trying to do is to discover undiscovered trade talent. That’s what our goal is.

On a separate sister site which we’re developing now will be the investors’ side. We will use the trader’s database we’re developing on FundSeeder to… We have already partnered with… In fact, since this is an Asia conference, I should give a shout-out to one of our partners who is not only an investment partner by having invested in our company but actually will be using our product for investment product, is OPIN, Oriental Patron. So they’re now an integral component, but they’re one of the major ones. But we’ve also partnered with other investment partners.

And so ultimately, the trading talent that’s found at FundSeeder.com will have an outlet for worldwide investors who are looking to allocate new trading talent. So that’s the idea — to act as a connection between undiscovered trading talent and allocators looking to find the talent.

Jay:  That’s pretty exciting. But the platform, just to be clear, the platform is not a broker.

Jack:  No. It’s not a broker. First of all, we don’t charge any subscription fee. We are not connected… We’re broker agnostic in that respect. There’s no brokerage connection whatsoever. In fact, FundSeeder.com is just a technology site. It’s an analytical platform that traders can have their data updated daily. They can run analysis of their data and so forth. But, because we have this ability, they could know that if they want to manage money and they are good, that that data will be looked at by people looking for new talent.

Jay:  So let’s say I’m a scientist in some obscure, emerging market, that I’m sitting there trading my own portfolio, and I’m using, say, a company like Interactive Brokers or something just to do my trades. Would I have to mimic that portfolio and the trades on FundSeeder to do the portfolio there?

Jack:  What you would actually do… Let’s say you have an Interactive Broker, who is one of the brokers that we integrate with. So let’s so you have an Interactive Broker account. You basically just go on to FundSeeder. You set up an account. Fill in the steps. For every broker, there’s going to be different instructions. If you’ve indicated “My broker is Interactive Brokers,” then you’ll get a set of instructions. Interactive — here’s what you do. It will generate, in most cases, like I believe for Interactive Brokers, some sort of message to your broker saying that you want to authorize the linkage and, depending on the broker, over a few days or a week, whatever, the account gets linked.

Once it’s linked, it depends on the broker how much past data. Interactive Broker is good about this, I think. The past data gets uploaded as well. But every day thereafter, the data gets updated. And then you can login, you can see your account, you can do analysis on your account. There’s also a leaderboard. So accounts are ranked by performance. You can see how you compare to other people. There are also indexes that we’ve constructed that use the best performing accounts to construct an index.

Interestingly, those indexes have been instructed not to use hindsight. So the index is based upon the algorithm we use to pick the best performers as of the end of one month are then used to generate the performance of the next month. So I’ve gone out of my way when I designed this. I say “I” it’s the analytical…or the index is kind of my role.

There’s three partners in FundSeeder, three founding partners. Emanuel was the one whose idea. He’s the big business guy and the promoting guy. He’s found our partners and so forth. James Bibbings is our compliance and does all sorts of things related to the business side. I’m the analytical person.

So anyway, the indexes were deliberately constructed not to use any hindsight. So that’s performance of month one then become the performance of month two, and then that’s redone at the end of every month.

Those indexes have been really doing quite well, better than the world market. At least so far, it seems like traders who have done well up to any given point, have, as a group, continued to do better than indexes going forward, empirically now. That’s been the case so far.

Jay:  I think it’s a brilliant idea because I think any investor, no matter how big or small, at some point in their investing career has thought, “Hey, I want to go out on my own. I want to start building my track record.” Probably the second hardest thing after consistent returns and building your track record and performance is marketing your fund, raising AUM. So it’s funny. You said, “Unless you’re a hedge fund…” Even for hedge funds it’s hard to raise AUM, let alone…

Jack:  Marketing is one. Raising the money is a tremendous obstacle. But for many cases, another big obstacle is just the cost of setting up a business. Just the basic costs. No matter how good you are, for many people, they just have the capital to do that.

Another thing, our FundSeeder Investments will be structured… In fact, James Bibbings, our partner, he had a company, Turnkey, where his whole business was helping people set up new funds, new trading businesses. So he has that line of experience. And one of the things that, once the investments we’ll be doing will be actually helping people. “Hey, I just want to trade. I don’t want to set up a business. I don’t want the raise. I just want to trade.” So one of the great things will be that we find people who are really good traders. The opportunity is there. If that’s all they want to do, then we can structure… FundSeeder Investments, which is a separate company from FundSeeder Technologies. For legal reasons, we need to keep those separate. But FundSeeder Investments then can structure the business, out-gig the money, and of course, there’s a fee split, but that’s the business idea.

So it’s very possible that people who have a trading methodology that works can just focus on that. In fact, we believe that’s the best way to go.

Jay:  Sure, sure. If you can outsource the backend of it and all the legal and compliance, essentially, it sounds like you’re stripping out… It’s like the prime brokerage platform, but you’re just stripping out the cap intro and marketing piece, which is a big portion of it, and you would never have access to that sort of thing.

Jack:  You could up the analogy. You could think of it as a web-based prop firm, in a way.

Jay:  So the site is live. You guys are officially launched and live now?

Jack:  FundSeeder Technology, which is FundSeeder.com. The trader side has been in place. We still have other tools we add all the time. But now we’re developing the investor site now.

So the investor site, FundSeeder Invest is basically a landing page. The platform isn’t there yet. So the analogous platform on the trader side, which will provide all the analytics and managers which allow allocators to put their own managers into the database as well so that they can compare them to our managers, to be able to put together portfolios using either our managers or their managers or both. That platform is currently being developed. So hopefully within the next deck that comes out, the whole team, a few months ago, our technology team is in the Ukraine. So we were there kind of going over our design — what the platform is going to look like. So now they’re translating that into gold. So that’s being done now. Hopeful that in the next four to six months, the investor platform will be there.

So, yes, it’s there. The trader side has been there, is there, and the investor side is there as a landing page you could go in. They could say they’re interested in finding traders. We’re kind of doing that in a non-computerized way right now. But the actual platform as a working platform should be there in less than half a year.

Jay:  That’s exciting. So hopefully there will be your first funding transaction by Q1 next year. Right?

Jack:  Our window is we’re really looking to gear up. We have to get the basic ingredients, which are traders, trading before we build. So it made all the sense in the world to just focus entirely on the trader side first.

But now it makes sense. Of course, the revenue model depends on the investor side. So now we’re turning to that. So within the next six to 12 months, we should be begin in earnest, getting through investment partners, beginning to allocate to people through the FundSeeder technology site.

Jay:  Very exciting. And I love the leaderboard because investors, traders are intrinsically very competitive by nature. So that’s very smart that you put that on there.

Jack, it’s been such a pleasure having you on. And thank you again for your time. Other than FundSeeder.com where we can learn about your new venture, where are some other places that our audience can find you or follow you or connect with you and learn about what you’re working on?

Jack:  I have a personal site that I, frankly, don’t do much with anymore called JackSchwager.com. But FundSeeder.com is my main interest and focus right now. For things like books or whatever, probably just as easy, just put my name into Amazon and go from there. That’s probably the easiest way.

Jay:  Alright. Sounds good. Thanks again for your time. We’re looking forward to the exciting FundSeeder project. I can’t wait to hear when one of the traders gets funded for the first time.

Jack:  Yeah, we’ve had some small fundings, like I say, without the major site being in place. So we’ve already begun that process, but it hasn’t begun in earnest. Like I say, my guess is 6 to 12 months out from now is when we’ll start gearing up.

Jay:  Awesome. Thanks, Jack. Take care.

Jack:  Thank you very much. Enjoyed it.