Who is prepared to pay how much for a really profitable signal? - page 18

 
St.Vitaliy:
And the turnover (number of subscriptions sold) is already on quality

This one https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/1218

well... without adjusting for sellability.... he's been selling mostly in the summer, maybe it's a system.

Торговые сигналы: E4EX
Торговые сигналы: E4EX
  • reviews: 61
  • 20.00 USD
  • 2012.11.13
  • Elaheh Sameni
  • www.mql5.com
Торговый Сигнал E4EX для MetaTrader 4: копирование сделок, мониторинг счета, автоматическое исполнение сигналов и социальный трейдинг
 

Reading the title of the topic again, I was reminded of the joke about violists (that's the musicians' chukchi):

Идешь по пустыне, видишь 2-х альтистов - один играет хорошо, а второй плохо, у какого попросишь воды?

The one that's bad. Because a violist who plays well is an illusion =)

So it is with signals - if the account is locked, it does not fit the category of "really profitable": either cheating (pipsing the demo), or random (in the future the curve turns over), or both of them together.

 
Would signal buyers be interested in analytical confirmation of entries?
 
The price of the signal depends primarily on the customer. Let's say a client has 100 quid in his account. Signals cost 50 quid, profit per month is 20%. The recommended ratio is 100/0.01 lots. It turns out that a client will earn 20 rubles per month and pay 50 rubles for the signals. If a client has $10000 on his/her account, $50 will not make a difference.
 
Murad.odeev:
The price of the signal depends primarily on the customer. Let's say a client has 100 quid in his account. Signals cost 50 quid, profit per month is 20%. The recommended ratio is 100/0.01 lots. It turns out that a client will earn 20 rubles per month and pay 50 rubles for the signals. If a client has $10000 on his/her account, $50 will not make a difference.
That's my point exactly. It's easier to put these 100 quid into PAMM. At least they don't take commission on losses there.
 
pronych:
That's my point exactly. It's easier to put those 100 quid into a PAMM. I would have thought it would be better to put that 100 bucks into a PAMM.
The essence is the same) only the mechanism is different and the signals are much more transparent!
 
Signals, on the contrary, are more profitable for subscribers with a depo of more than 3000 c.u. For example, there is a Provider with a 10,000-crore deposit making 25% on average per month. He has 100 subscribers. The price of the signal is 100 dollars. Average deposit of one subscriber is 5000 c.u. (Someone has 3000, 5000, 10 000, so I have called the average deposit). Provider gets 10 000 per month for signals. I.e. 100% of own deposit. A subscriber will receive 1250 profit and pay 100 for the signal, the total profit is 1150. What will happen in pamm? With a 50/50 contract, subscriber will receive 1250/50 = 625. What will the provider receive? 100*1250=125000/50=62500. Now who benefits more? I think it's obvious. But let's say I like only one broker for many reasons (spread, execution, regulation) and they have pams only from 100000. What to do if I do not have that kind of money?
 
Rugyi_cool:
It is the same essence) Only the mechanism is different and much more transparent in signals!

Nah. The point is completely different.

PAMMs do not withdraw commission for losses, while signals do - it is bad for buyers.

In PAMMs commission is composed of percents, while in case of signals it is fixed - bad for sellers.

I wonder who is oriented on the service to satisfy both sides.

 
pronych:

Nah. The point is completely different.

PAMMs do not withdraw commission for losses, while signals do - it is bad for buyers.

In PAMMs commission is composed of percents, while in case of signals it is fixed - bad for sellers.

I wonder who is oriented on the service to satisfy both sides.

The seller has fewer problems using the signals and the signal price may not be large due to the n-th number of subscribers, which is profitable for the subscriber!
 
Rugyi_cool:
The cost of the signal is less of a problem for the seller, and due to the n-th number of subscribers the cost of the signal may not be large, which is profitable for the subscriber!
I do not mind. We will see.