I almost landed a career in research.
Got offered a PhD seat, but turned it down, since I was homesick.
Upon returning home, I started teaching, but after eight years of doing so, it was time to move on.
Ultimately, I landed up in the markets.
Was this a better place?
It was actually quite cut-throat.
Ruthless was its other name.
Amidst the many negatives, there was one solid positive, though.
This positive made up for everything, and then some.
Recognition, or lack of it, was instant.
And, you knew it.
Furthermore, recognition, or lack of it, came directly from the market itself.
The feedback loop was such, that you reported to the market, and the market reported back to you, and it told you immediately, that it was recognizing you, or if it was not.
The language of the market…
…and you knew where you stood.
In research, recognition was abstract.
It came from academia.
Academia had other issues, and some of these issues were pretty ugly.
Furthermore, academia had a huge ego.
In academia, one didn’t really know where one stood, until something exceptionally huge came along. Mostly, it doesn’t.
In academia, one was left hanging, mostly.
I didn’t like being left hanging. I was actually quite happy about not being in academia.
Teaching at school level was a different form of academia.
Recognition came from students. I got my share, and it felt good.
Bottom-line didn’t look that happening, however. Teacher salaries were okayish.
For some reason, I wanted to be elsewhere.
I wanted action, challenge and knowledge about where I stood.
Entry into the markets became an ideal option for me.
In the markets, I didn’t have to look to anyone.
It was just me, and the market.
Face to face.
If I listened well, and followed accordingly, we were friends. If not, well, my account statement reflected this.
I liked straight-forwardness.
I liked being in the markets.
It thus became a long-term thing.