Hmmm his brief description of his system sounds a lot like the system I used when I won $5,000 on powerball with $2.00. I had went back over the past 6 months and cameup with the most frequent numbers and powerball numbers that hit. back then the bonus  # that was most frequent was 26. Then I came up with the other 5 numbers from a selection of 6 and rotated one number off and played just two dollars. I probably would have won more if I would have played all 6 combinations with the 6 numbers. I gave it up after I won that because I figured that was as close as I was ever gonna come to winning the jackpot and resorted to playing 2 quick picks per draw.

It sounds like you took that 230% as an annual return instead of the return over a bit more than a year and a half. If he could continue to  get an annual return of 62%, after 9 years each dollar he invested would  grow to almost $77 if no taxes or fees had to be paid in the meantime. Investing $130 million for 9 years at  62% would result in about $9.99 billion.

Bill Gates may be a decent investor, but he got rich by sticking with his own stoc and being extremely lucky. Buffet, OTOH is one of the best investors, but despite starting 1980 with a net worth of more than half a billion, he didn't quite reach 50 billion in 27 years. The chances of Duke  making $10 billion in the next 10 or 15 years is only slightly better than his chances of winning PB again.

$130 million: Net ROI(Return on investment after taxes)=230% every 1.5 years.

                      Net gains                     Total

1.5 years           $299,000,000              $429,000,000

3.0 years           $986,000,000              $1,415,700,000

4.5 years          $3,256,110,000             $4,671,810,000

6.0 years       $10,745,163,000           $15,416,973,000

7.5 years        $35,459,037,000          $50,876,010,000

9.0 years      $117,014,820,000        $167,890,830,000

By all accounts, we both know this is a rediculous number. I was merely pointing out just how delusional Mr. Duke is with his net worth growing to $130 million after just a year and a half

As this article was published in Fortune Magazine and written by a staff writer from Fortune, don't you think either the writer or editor of the story should have looked into this claim just a bit?  It seems like quite a few folks on this site very quickly came to the conclusion that growing $80 million to $128 to $130 million in 18 months is a bit suspect.  Heck if it is true far more readers of Fortune would rather know how that was accomplished versus how well a lottery winner is doing and year and a half after hitting the jackpot.

While I have no doubt that most of us here are happy for Mr. Duke, it would have been nice of Fortune Magazine detailing how he grew his assets instead of how he is "allegedly' doing.

I don't think anyone here poses a threat to his wealth making "secrets" so I am also dumbfounded as to why the writers simply wrote a story with no substance.

I've heard several times of people investing 75K and getting around 225K in less than 2 years...So if you invest 35 million in 2 years taking the rate of how much your money multiplies, you should have 105 million dollars..You take those 105 million dollars and invest it for 2 years and you should have 315 million in 4 years...YOu take that 315MIllion dollars and do the same for 2 years and you should have (notice i am saying you should have) 945 million...You take those 945 million and invest it for 2 years and you should have 2 billion 835Million dollars...YOU then take those 2Billion 835 million dollars and invest it for 2 year and you should have 5 billion 670 million dollars...You then take those 5 billion dollar 670 million dollars and invest it for 2 more years (total so far of 12 years) and you should have 17 billion dollars with 10 million dollars...But that's before taxes...YOu take those 17 billion dollars and 10 million dollars and divide it by 2 and you should have 8 billion dollars and 5 million dollars...

Don't know if is possible all i am saying is who knows it could happen...

"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich..."                  "She is so rare..."

Thanks for the info justxploring 

pumpi76...let me know how the people took $75k and turned it into $225k in less than 2 years and I'll take whatever I play in the lottery and follow that plan!  Tripiling your money every two years is too good to be true!!!!

sorry it was "trading" not investing....I've even heard it on MSNBC...i read the stories also...I got one article by Marjory Abrams, Publisher...The subtitle is: "Wall Street Insider reveals how he did it...."

It got to do with something called "Relative Strenght Ranking" of stocks...On the article the author encourages you to read a book titled: Money Secrets of the Rich & Well-connected"....In the article the author points out how a wall street insider turns a few thousands into 200K in less than 26 months..

That's just one of the many examples i heard on tv or read on magazines of people turning 75K into 200K, even 50K into 200K, or 10K into 25K, etc, they got different examples...If you read stock market articles on magazines and some newspapers, you should hear about them...

"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich..."        "She is so rare...."

He claims to have started with 45 million in conservative investments, which we both agree might have become about 50 million. That means  he's claiming  he started with 35 million in aggressive investments, and in about 18 months he gained 45 million to a total of 80 million. That's a gain of  128% to a total of 228% of his starting principal. Your numbers represent again of 230% to a total of 330%.

Getting the same results with 130 million would  give him a gain of  166.4 million to a total of 296.4 million over the next year and half.

The following  year and a half would turn the  296.4 into 675 million at the 3 year mark.

675 x 2.28 =  1.539 billion at 4.5 years

1.539 X 2.28 = 3.509 billion at 6 years

3.509 X 2.28 = 8 billion at 7.5 years

8 X 2.28 = 18.24 billion at 9 years

Everyone also seems to be overlooking the real amount of time it took to reach 130 million. He won at the end of May 2005, which was 21 months ago, so my previous numbers were based on that instead of 18 months for the supposed gains.

I wouldn't characterize a claim of getting an annual return of 62% for 18 months as delusional. It's entirely possible.  With a lot of risk and a couple of very lucky choices he could have turned 35 million into 250 million or more. Doing it for one 18 month period is unlikely. Doing it for the next 9 years is a virtual impossibility with an excellent chance to lose much of his previous gain. Interestingly, if his claims were true and he continued to earn 62% for another 9 years the 80 million he supposedly has in aggresive investments would grow to more than 6 billion. I'd love to hear how he reconciles that with a claim of being on track to reach 1 billion in  10 years.

You could always buy Cisco in the early 90's and hold it until it peaks. IIRC, an initial investment  of $1000  could have grown to about a million in about 10 years. Doing that in 10 years would require your investment to nearly double every year. 

Earning huge returns happens all the time.  Somewhere in the next 3 to 10 days somebody is going to turn a risky investment of $1 or $100 into between $75 and $350 millon. Whether it's picking stocks or  lottery numbers, there's always a choice that will produce exceptional returns, and a lot more choices that will produce modest returns or modest losses.

Floyd,

I used the 230% number as that was what he would had to gain(before paying Fed/State taxes) on his aggressive investments to reach his current net worth of $128-$130 million. Your figure of 128% doesn't take into account the taxes.

I am also assuming that he has closed his positions and taken his gains. Your figure of 128% would indeed be correct if he has yet to close out his position and not paid any taxes.

$35 million with gains of 230% would be $80.5 million but I also factored in Fed and State taxes.

$80.5 million -35% fed tax($28.18 million) -7.7 state tax(6.19 million) = NET return of $46.13 million

$45 million in Muni bonds growing at 3% annually would be worth $48 million tops.

$46.13 million net gains AFTER taxes from $80.5 million pre-tax

$48 million total value of conservative investment.

$35 million original basis of aggressive investment.

$129.13 million would be the current net worth after all taxes are paid.

Arguably, his "net worth" couldn't really be 130 million if he had 130 million but still owed tax, but  I ran my numbers based on no taxes or fees being taken out. I did that mostly because it's the simple approach, but also because we have no way of knowing what his future taxes would be or when he would pay them. I would assume that returns as high as he claims would be from appreciation and he would therefore pay some of his taxes at the capital gains rate. Of course some gains would be from dividends, and he'd probably have to sell some holdings too soon to qualify for the capital gains rate.

Your numbers for future gains aren't accounting for taxes, so assuming he would have to pay taxes during the 9 year period that's one of many reasons those numbers are wildly inflated.

In theory his investments could all accumulate tax free and then he could give most of it away to tax-deductible causes, which is why I said  it's arguable that his net worth couldn't really be 130 million. His chances of  accumulating a billion dollars would be better if he didn't have to pay taxes,except that he's not likely to see huge gains for very long without  some of the money becoming taxable. The article in Fortne is all well and good, but until Forbes says he's a billionaire I'll remain just a little bit skeptical.

"Your numbers for future gains aren't accounting for taxes"

You're right, I guest I got lost once these numbers soared onto unchartered territory yet to be realized by any private individual.

Perhaps Forbes or Fortune will provide an update next year so we can concur if his previous investments were indeed factual

In this article he stated that it was an unoffical amount of net worth. It is probably all precieved as fairmarket value of realestate development. From my experience in realestate development those guys can purchase a burn and turn for huge gains before they even sell it. Same with oil and gas industry. That is probably why his time frame does not match his claim, it is unrealized and also tax consideration. I would say his time frame is still aggressive but defintely within his reach.