1200 subscribers!!! - page 18
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I.e. for a signal to be at the top, it's not enough to publish a signal - you have to work on it as a signal.
That's what I created another thread about how to work on the signal (I wanted to get information like "how to properly make a logo"). But, I was misunderstood and started about the problems of cheating :-D)
What I do not believe, here with all my soul I want to believe in honesty, but today for 60 subscribers. I can't believe it, but I want to believe it with all my heart, but today I have 60 subscribers.
I'll probably be wrong, but it seems to me that the author of this signal is a man working in the brokerage house, and his job is to make a REAL report and lead clients of his brokerage house to this signal.
I think the aim and the ending are clear to everyone. Although it will probably be a new trend for brokerage companies to earn more from subscribers...
So I created another topic-branch about it, how to properly work on the signal (I wanted to get information on the type of "how to properly make a logo"). But, I was misunderstood and started to talk about the problems of fraud :-D)
The point is that in the signals service there are no Signals as such products - i.e. they monitor their trading and are "full of joy".
And now there was a "smart" signal, which they began to work on as a product - because it is visible and indicated above in my posts.
p.s. So we are not working on a signal as a "trading signal", but on a signal as a "product".
The problem is much bigger.
Question one, is the idea and the service itself good, for the trader, for the investor? Many will say yes, we do too.
We want to attract new investors, we provide a link to our signals, it is better than a rate. But the investor says no. Sorry, there is a signal with 1200 subscribers, and you have 60 times less. And all the investor is lost. We have not shown our products to potential investors for six months. It's a dead end.
We go back to the question of why this is so, because there is no competitive environment. Kapitaliz, other lines from management, let's say these are clear arguments in their favor, but there are also such concepts as supporting young signals, undervalued signals, contrary to market uncontrollable conjecture.
The point is that in the signals service there are no Signals as such products - i.e. they monitor their trading and are "full of joy".
And now there was a "smart" signal, which they began to work on as a product - because it is visible and indicated above in my posts.
p.s. I.e. we are not working on the signal as a "trading signal", but on the signal as a "product".
However, the man is steadily earning, for 1.5 years. There were already enough opportunities to "lose". So not only work on the signal as a "product".
My thoughts about dealer attraction. Probably he is connected with some brokerage company. Or maybe this is a "new trend" in the attraction of brokerage companies' clients. The main thing for them is that the client will come.
Only we are all trading here and have been for more than a year. And what is "steadily earning 1.5 years". -- is also well known.
1.5 years of history is just "can pay attention" -- but it is not an indicator of "stability".
His first year of trading is a 44% drawdown.
The last six months only (since August) reduced risk -- and I watched his drawdowns during this period -- only a miracle saved him from alarger drawdown every once in a while.
Is it a stable trade to say that martin-limit set without stops?
The popularity of his signal is pure marketing, which is superimposed on a relatively successful trading in a relatively short period.
And all this is very easy to see, because everything is available on the signal: indicators, statistics, trading history with charts - overlay it on the chart and it's easy to understand.
You are not the only one who watches the signals.
His first year of trading was a 44% drawdown.
Somehow you are silent about the results.
There were much more reckless signals with 600+ subscribers that provided more income. And these 600 subscribers appeared after a few months of "luck". And it was just the luck, because the trading was done on "everything".
Lastsix monthsonly(since August) the risks were reduced - and I watched the drawdowns during this period - only a miracle saved him from thelarger drawdowns.
So by that time the goal had already been achieved. There were already subscribers, there was already some history and every month there was a good surplus. All quite logical! Reduce the risk and make money on subscriptions. And then an avalanche of growth in subscribers on subscribers, not signal quality. The reasoning is simple -- a bunch of people can't be wrong.
The popularity of his signal is pure marketing, which is superimposed on relatively successful trading in a relatively short period.
I've already said about marketing: there are examples where a large average monthly profit is followed by a rapid increase in subscribers. It's even a question of who did more advertising to whom: the signal advertising to DC or vice versa.
And all this is very easy to see, because everything is available in the signal: indicators, statistics, trading history with charts.
I agree, but I think not everyone does it. And the first one is your work for the signal, and then the signal is yours.
... The reasoning is simple - a bunch of people can't be wrong.
... first you work for the signal, then the signal works for you.
Two points are noted:
1. "a bunch of people" -- it's always the "incompetent majority" who always go where the crowd goes -- i.e., "a bunch of people" can't be wrong just because they don't have an opinion.
2. the typical mindless thesis of the "successful" -- which carries nothing in itself and is repeated for some reason like a mantra.
This signal in August, when it was advertised, had 180 subscribers. There is this advertising in the Internet and you can see it. And further, if some brokerage company suddenly calls its clients and suggests them to subscribe to this particular signal, even Dale Carnegie wrote about the effectiveness of spot advertising.
Just other signal providers do not have such a resource as DC -- that's why they are out of luck -- and you were right in the post above, saying that if you bring a subscriber, and he looks at this signal and says, so there are more subscribers, I will subscribe to it too -- pure crowd effect.
p.s. Basically, everyone sees only what he wants to see. Some see this signal as a role model. But if the measure's son-in-law says he made his millions selling pies -- that doesn't mean that every pie-selling grandmother is just a loser and does a bad job on pies.
p.s. You can read: Taleb, "Fooled by Randomness," 2011 -- or an earlier edition: Taleb, "The Black Swan. Under the Sign of Unpredictability," 2009.
For "sustained success" see Lowenstein, "When Genius Fails...", 2006
Two points are noted:
1. A "bunch of people" is always an "incompetent majority" who always go where the crowd goes -- i.e., a "bunch of people" cannot be wrong just because they have no opinion of their own.
2. the typical mindless thesis of the "successful" -- which carries nothing in itself and is repeated for some reason like a mantra.
This signal in August, when it was advertised, had 180 subscribers. There is this advertising in the Internet and you can see it. And further, if some brokerage company suddenly calls its clients and suggests them to subscribe to this particular signal, even Dale Carnegie wrote about the effectiveness of spot advertising.
Just other signal providers do not have such a resource as DC -- that's why they are out of luck -- and you were right in the post above, saying that if you bring a subscriber, and he looks at this signal and says, so there are more subscribers, I will subscribe to it too -- pure crowd effect.
p.s. Basically, everyone sees only what he wants to see. Some see this signal as a role model. But if the mayor's son-in-law says that he made his millions selling pies -- that doesn't mean that every pie-selling grandma is just a loser and doesn't work well for pies.
That's where the honesty lies.
What a headache for beginners, they will have to study the indicators, ask on the forum, spend time on it, compare and decide which indicator is more important for you, decide "profit or drawdown?", take responsibility for their calculations and make their own choice. Do not discount it on the number of the crowd.
I myself am new to mql, and I understand them better than anyone, wanting to connect with Taras D)) But, I will try to lead the signal myself, maybe it will come out "people's success".
1. 1. "A bunch of people" is always the "incompetent majority" who always go where the crowd goes...