Eh, not really.

And I'll reiterate MaaMaw's statement about your blythe assumption that the rules of the board don't apply to you.

> of the retail/wholesale industry. My response was to the fact that it
> seemed the norm to accuse anyone new to this website/dicsussion as a
> scammer if they didn't post on a regular basis or had a idea that counters

And that's why you need to participate and read a board before leaping in. In fact, we don't accuse folks of that -- but niether do we allow recruiting here except as a tagline in the sigfile.

> There is the wealthy that know to utilize leverage so their money works
> for them instead of the opposite. This means using OPE & OPM. If you
> consider this to be false I would aks "why does 2% of the population
> own 65% of the wealth in the USA?"

Because they inherited wealth, started out with wealth, and (more often than not) invested in the stock market. The ones who made it big had novel ideas and had backers and formed fairly standard corporations.

> Wealth building MUST follow those same success laws no matter what field
> your in. Team building is utilized in every facet of life.

Depends on what you mean by "team." Having a team is not tantamount to success. Furthermore, a team approach can be extremely inefficient (ala the "camel design" joke) and costly. "Team" is a term often poorly employed by managers and usually means either "you guys do all the work" OR it means "I'm the head honcho and you need to run around and fill my orders."

A properly constructed team is like an organism... it doesn't have 60 brains or 120 mouths. There's a limited number of people and each has an assigned function and territory.

> Any successful law office knows that the ONLY way to increase their
> profits is to BUILD A TEAM of competent legal advisors that then share in
> the overall income of that business.

Uhm... worked in any law offices lately? My cousin's a lawyer and what I know of his business is most definately not a "team." Most of them seem to be corporate dictatorships with a dog-eat-lawyer mentality.

> Any successful investor knows that the ONLY way to minimize the risk of
> investing and increase the ROI is to diversify their investments into a
> number of different stock options while utilizing a NETWORK of soucres
> that have a good knowledge of the market and BUILD A TEAM between others
> in the filed that share info with each other as to what is HOT and what is
> not.

Well, no. You don't need a "team" to be a good investor, as investment clubs have long proved. A few rash team members can wreck a lot of good investing, even if they do have a good "network of sources" and "team affiliation." The more successful model is for you to work individually (and not as a "team") with the parameters that work for you (risk taking level, investment ability, sector knowledge, etc, etc.) And while a good financial manager can be an essential part of your plan, they also have their own agendas.

THAT is the key issue with most teams. The leader has an agenda, and it may not always be apparent to the leader himself or herself (for instance, in MLMs the leaders genuinely try to help folks because their own income depends on the others running out and selling product and it takes a large and stable downline to support the manager. HOWEVER... the results are inimical to the poor guy on the bottom of the chain.)

The manager's agenda may be wrong for you. It may be wrong, period. It could also be right but not right for you.

> So as you state that team builing is just another MLM or downline I state
> you have went through life with your eyes closed!

The link in my previous sig should have given you some clue that I've been through the "team building" exerices and fads in corporate America and in government for a very long time. As it happens, I know quite a bit about teams, from the "Japanese management style" through iterations of "Six Sigma" and Prometheus and so on and so forth -- as well as clubs and social organizations. I've seen 'em fall apart spectacularly.

> My comments are here for close examination to anybody with GOOD JUDGEMENT!

There's a huge logical flaw here: it's "anyone who agrees with me has GOOD JUDGEMENT. Anyone who questions me is (in your words) a fool, incompetant, walks through life with their eyes closed, etc, etc."

So far, all you've done is recite what sounds like a typical MLM type ad -- the "we have a team and we're taking successful people to the top." We still haven't seen any advice from you or discussions or details that indicates you actually know what components make up an efficient team (and for which environment) and how the management and structure works.