1200 subscribers!!! - page 198
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
In May we rejoice, in June we tear our hair out (I didn't save the picture of the plum)
100 subscribers rejoice in August since monitoring, tear their hair out in September
This is all one author, now he is ready to make many happy again.
What's the problem? Provider generates 100-200% every month, and if you withdraw the dough earned every month, the subscriber will be left with a minimum of +300% to the depo at the time of plummeting.
Is the goal to make money or to make nice charts?
What's the problem? Provider generates 100-200% each month, and if you withdraw the dough earned each month, at the moment of plummer the subscriber will have +300% to the depo minimum.
Is the goal to make money or to make nice charts?
If :D
Yes, strange pretensions.
There are no claims there, in my opinion. The archivist simply pulled the man's story out of the archives...
If :D
I didn't take the trouble to find the signal itself, it looks like the account is monitored when these few months of profit are over and there is no way to withdraw profit in the past or subscribe to the signal in the past, so yes - "if" ))
No claims there, in my opinion. The archivist just pulled the man's story out of the archives...
The very phrase"100 subscribers in August since the monitoring is rejoicing, in September tearing their hair" is sort of implied )
I did not lazy, found the signal itself, it seems that the account is monitored when these few months of profit have passed and it is impossible to withdraw profit in the past, or subscribe to the signal in the past, so yes - "if" ))
the very phrase"100 subscribers in August since the monitoring is rejoicing, in September tearing their hair out" kind of implies )
Maybe. But the Arabs have it fair. And they're clear in their work. Besides, you're right - if you're smart, you can make money.
Maybe. But the Arabs have it fair. And they're clear in their work. In addition, you are right - if you are smart, you can make money.
The thing is that the provider connects the signal to the monitoring and trades privately, and makes it public when the signal is about to be naturally and expectedly lost - there is no chance to earn money (most probably). What prevents him from monitoring publicly initially I guess (probably the Prov simply has no idea which account will take off ...).
P.S.: I jumped to my initial conclusions about the ISP, sorry
Z.I.Y.: But it's still worth taking the sensible approach, no change there
That's the thing, the provider connects the signal to the monitoring and trades privately, and makes it public closer to the expected and natural drain, and the subscriber will not be able to earn money (most likely). What prevents him from monitoring publicly initially I guess (probably the Prov simply has no idea which account will take off ...).
P.S.: I jumped to my initial conclusions about this provider, sorry
Speculation and speculation.
I'm basing this on what's in the public domain.
and the public has a locked account with a recorded history, but it only became public the day before yesterday, facts and nothing more
And what does it imply that yesterday?
wrote above, but there may be many opinions on this
What's the catch? Provider generates 100-200% every month, and if you withdraw the dough earned every month, the subscriber will have +300% to depo minimum at the time of sinking.
Is the goal to make money or to make nice charts?
Before monitoring it always runs at a profit, after monitoring it can't do that. It doesn't work that way. It is a cheating scheme, dishonest. We have already written about it many times.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies
1200 subscribers!!!
Vasiliy Pushkaryov, 2019.09.14 20:56
It's simple. If your conscience allows you to cheat others for short-term gain. For example, the man whose screenshot above, let's call him Comrade Kozmin, clearly has an arrangement with a broker. Because when I go to this broker's website I see that he has real accounts at least from $200. But at Kozmin the trade starts with a balance of $5 or more. That's weird.
Also some people wrote that the broker of this server with cent accounts is defined here as usual dollar account.
So, let's take 48 accounts and deposit them for 5 cents each. Here they will be shown as 5 dollars. Then we set 24 accounts to sell and 24 to buy. Naturally, 24 accounts will survive. In the second month to deposit them for 1 dollar and put 12 on sale and 12 to buy. In the second month you can repeat this procedure several times. By the third month we have 3-4 accounts left, and we have to deposit them for about $100. When equity on one of the accounts reaches 250%, we should monitor the account. This is because the account activity will be added to the rating after we connect it to the service. Then, after joining the monitoring, we close trades within several hours before the price rolls back. Thus, our balance is higher than 10 thousand, we have 300% monthly and are already quoted in the rating - everything is very solid at first glance. Now we are waiting for gullible and non-analytical citizens. You can see it all on the first two pages of trading history, the other seven pages are imitation trading to show that the account is active.
This scheme is used by many people here. We have been writing about it for years, but for some reason the administration only takes action on a spot basis. Although simply not taking into account the trading history before monitoring or putting it in a separate tab and not adding to the overall increase, probably, would solve this problem dramatically. Of course, I do not see the whole picture of the service and may be misunderstanding something.Before monitoring it always runs at a profit, after monitoring it cannot do so. It doesn't work that way. It is a cheating scheme, dishonest. It has been written about more than once.
Yes, I have already written about it myself.