The advantages of trading signals and the disadvantages of payment. - page 3
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
Andrei, can you guarantee that you will open, for example, seven items tomorrow?
If you don't give a damn about the market and what's going on in the world, just to fulfil your commitment to your subscribers in terms of the number of positions, then I personally will not subscribe to your signal.
Every product has a use case. If it meets or fails to meet its application properties, it is of high quality or poor quality. A faulty product can be returned
In our case it is very difficult to predict.
But when a supplier puts his signal on the market -- he has to promise something -- or indicate the consumer properties of his signal in some way.
For example, maybe the strategy is a long-term one and the vendor can guarantee a profit only for a year, which makes no sense if the signal is for a week or a month.
Another Provider counts on the monthly profit. The third one is counting on the weekly profit. So on.
A subscriber subscribing to the signal must count on something.
If vendor promised him something - and it turned out to be nothing - the signal fee should be returned.
There are only two consumer properties of a signal - profit percentage and amount of trades for a period of time.
Specification of these properties makes the subscription meaningful both for the Provider and Subscriber and provides liability and warranty in case of non-delivery.
In addition, the control over the fulfilment of these obligations is easy to automate.
Every product has consumer properties. If these consumer properties are fulfilled or not fulfilled, the product is either of good quality or of poor quality. A defective product must be returned
In our case it is very difficult to predict.
But when a supplier puts his signal on the market -- he has to promise something -- or indicate the consumer properties of his signal in some way.
For example, maybe the strategy is a long-term one and the vendor can guarantee a profit only for a year, which makes no sense if the signal is for a week or a month.
Another Provider counts on the monthly profit. The third one is counting on the weekly profit. And so on.
A subscriber subscribing to the signal must count on something.
If vendor promised them something - and it turned out to be nothing - the signal fee should be returned.
There are only two consumer properties of a signal - profit percentage and amount of trades for a period of time.
Specification of these properties makes the subscription meaningful both for the Provider and Subscriber and provides liability and warranty in case of non-delivery.
In addition, it is easy to automate the monitoring of the fulfilment of these obligations.
I didn't just say that, but based on real-world experiments over 8 months. Here at first I opened a demo for $40 and got 500% profit in 8 months.
Since my drawdown was big, I thought this was the reason of no subscribers.
I opened 2nd signal on real for $40, and for 3 months got 64% of profit and came 9th in MT5 real list. The drawdown was 23%, and I thought that if I show a good result, there will be subscribers. In the description of this signal I specified account type, spread size, execution speed requirements, % profitability per month, drawdown size, etc. But there were no subscribers.
As soon as I opened 3rd signal on real account, which was "Free", I got new subscribers at once. And despite the fact that this signal is valid until September 25th, the number of subscribers has increased and now there are 12 of them. The age of this signal is less than 2 months.
And when I transferred the other two signals to "Free", there were 4 subscribers at once. I can explain why they do not want to buy the signal even for $20. But there is a lot to write about it.
If the fee for the signal make % of profit, then all these questions are solved.
If you consider the legal terms of operation and behaviour in the financial markets, per cent 90 per cent of ideas and arguments will die before they reach the public.
No one has the right to guarantee returns in the financial markets and even the opposite must "legally" repeatedly state "this is not financial advice and past returns are no guarantee of future results". Persons/companies with financial advisor licences have the right to advise and give advice, but are still being taxed by documents.
Here you promised me 15 profitable signals a week. You got 14 good profits and one loss. I earned one hundred percent of profit for the week on your signal, but you have not fulfilled your promise - you have not delivered me a single profitable signal. I'll sue you. I will also charge you for the moral damage, and you will not get any money for your horrible mistakes. How's that?
don't exaggerate.
But if that's how the supplier described his signal -- a week's supply of 15 deals -- at the end of the week there were 14 deals -- the payment is refunded.
next time, the supplier will be more careful in assessing his capabilities and not promise too much.
on the other hand -- the Provider should not be guided by the number of trades -- but evaluate the signal in terms of profit.
for example, 10% profit a month -- subscription for such a signal is impossible for a week -- in a month of subscription 9% profit is returned.
etc.
If you do not specify the characteristics of the signal -- then it is not a signal delivery -- but the provider says: "I deal here, pay for viewing" -- but if the provider has something to show, it is one thing -- but if he bluffs or his results are random, then there should be no payment.
If the fee for the signal makes a % of profit, then all of these issues are solved.
They are solved by creating a problem that is a couple of orders of magnitude more complicated and dangerous than the original one. Getting into someone else's account at someone else's broker to take a share of the profits?
Do you have any idea how much paperwork, legal, accounting and licensing work that is? Yes, and with constant conflicts over the collection of money. In this case, half of the profit will be taken by the operator just to cover expenses. And this will still not be enough.
We are now releasing a new rewritten version of signals, where real accounts will no longer be free. The free demo accounts for demo testing will remain.
don't exaggerate.
But if that's how the supplier described his signal -- a week's supply of 15 deals -- at the end of the week there were 14 deals -- the payment is refunded.
next time, the supplier will be more careful in assessing his capabilities and not promise too much.
on the other hand -- the Provider should not be guided by the number of trades -- but evaluate the signal in terms of profit.
for example, 10% profit a month -- subscription for such a signal is impossible for a week -- in a month of subscription 9% profit is returned.
etc.
If you do not specify characteristics of the signal -- then it is not a signal delivery -- but provider says: "I deal here, pay for viewing" -- but if the provider has something to show, it is one thing -- but if he bluffs or his results are random, then there should be no payment.
Andrey, I do not agree with you. I have nothing more to say.
I was exaggerating to make you understand the whole point of the signal provider's possible problems.
And you... When you're in America, don't look at the women, they'll lock you up. There are already precedents, so they'll look into your promises, too. They will, even though you'll make them rich not to pay, and they'll break you.
You have to warn them about the risks, but to promise them the exact number in grams... in the currency market... sorry... you have to be crazy.
...
We are now releasing a new rewritten version of signals, where real accounts will no longer be free. The free demo accounts for demo testing will remain.
We have a good idea to do away with free signals altogether.
It's strange that we made them at all.
Hello, Renat.
Maybe this will also be relevant after you do away with the free signals?
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/12657
Solved by creating a problem that is a couple of orders of magnitude more complicated and dangerous than the original one. Getting into someone else's account at someone else's broker to take a cut of the profits?
Do you have any idea how much paperwork, legal, accounting and licensing work that is? Yes, and with constant conflicts over the collection of money. In this case, half of the profit will be taken by the operator just to cover expenses. And this will still not be enough.
We are now releasing a new rewritten version of signals, where real accounts will no longer be free. The free demo accounts for demo testing will remain.
At the beginning of this thread, I already pointed out that interest payments, it's hard to implement.
It turns out that anyone can open a $100,000 account, buy signals for $50, and make 5-10% profit every month.
It turns out that the trader works day and night, providing profits, while the buyer turns on his computer, has fun, rests or sleeps and gets from 5 to 10 thousand.
And all for $50. As they say: "The soldier sleeps, but the service goes on". This is a violation of the law of karma.
And if it is, I have no doubt you have good intentions.