"The 'perfect' trading system - page 7

New comment
 
Urain >> :

I say we are all working on it. Some people are better than others, it would be better for you (imho)

Monitor the signal sellers and work with the best predictors,

If you cannot predict it yourself, it is worth the money.


Prediction is not our method.

Of the signal sellers - our signals are the best/stable on the market, so I don't see the point in working with third-party vendors.

There are others who do it professionally. We have a different specialization - adaptive trading technologies.

I.e. I don't see the point in doing PAMM for the sake of PAMM ("it would be more correct from your side(imho) to monitor signal vendors and work with the best predictors").

However, getting into the niche of a stable PAMM, albeit not the most profitable one, makes sense and there is a market/demand.

 
LeoV >> :

Whatever you call it - it is called trading, scientifically speaking, trading. If you are not a trader, how can you do it? On the assumption that even a housewife can do forex?

If it will actually generate that income.

No matter how low it is, if it brings a loss then not even the lowest percentage for management will save......

It is a shame to invest even 1000 roubles in an unprofitable activity.

Here I agree - the service is excellent.....))))


This is all demagoguery.

If only, but if only...

There is a problem - we solve it.

If we solve it, we will recoup the cost of the project and make a profit.

If we don't solve it, we will solve the next problem.

What is the problem here?

Or do you already worship us so much that we just do not have the right to make a mistake and we have to find a successful solution? :)

So, "Gods do not make pots".

 
VictorArt писал(а) >> it's all demagoguery.

This is not demagoguery - it is the pure truth. Just the truth and nothing but the truth....))

VictorArt wrote >> If only, if only.

I mentioned the word "if" in 2 sentences out of seven, and I didn't mention the prefix "would" at all - so it's not a very correct statement of yours....))))

VictorArt wrote(a) >>

If we decide, we will recoup the cost of the project and make a profit.

If we don't solve it, we'll solve the next problem.

It's understandable as it is.

VictorArt wrote(a) >> What's the problem here?

No problem - I just wonder in connection with the publicity of trade - it's normal. There would be no publicity, there would be no questions. I apologise in advance for prefix "would"...))))

VictorArt wrote(a) >> Or do you already idolise us so much that we simply no longer have the right to make a mistake and must find a successful solution? :)

Well, it's not a pot calling the kettle black.

Of course not Gods and everyone is entitled to make mistakes, but before that you convinced me that you were doing the right thing.....
 
LeoV >>:Конечно не Боги и каждый имеет право на ошибку, но до этого вы меня убеждали что вы делаете всё правильно.....

And what are we doing wrong? :)

You seem to confuse the end result with the process of achieving it.


1. we are moving step by step towards the final goal - we are doing everything right, in our opinion

2. we have not yet reached the final goal and do not know what the result will be - positive or negative

You, for some reason, are mixing these two points into one, as if we have already obtained a negative result.

A drawdown is just a drawdown, not the end of the project.

 
VictorArt писал(а) >> And what are we doing wrong? :)

That's something I can't know. I am merely as a humble observer just pointing out the problem.

VictorArt wrote(a) >> A drawdown is just a drawdown, not the end of the project.
There's no difference between drawdown and drawdown. Judging by your reports, you're trading intraday. A drawdown of half a year and depth of 60%, with a leverage of about 1:4-1:6 on average, is, in my opinion, a problem which is not worth turning a blind eye to and pretending it doesn't exist. This is a real problem. Although I like the idea of this project.....))))
 
LeoV >> :

That's something I can't know. I am merely pointing out the problem as a humble observer.

Drawdown is not the same as drawdown. Judging by your reports, you're trading intraday. The drawdown is half a year and depth of 60%, with the average leverage of about 1:4-1:6, in my opinion, it is a problem which is not worth turning a blind eye and pretend that it does not exist. This is a real problem. Although the idea of this project I like.....))))

I'm sorry, but did you read this?

PAMM


Where did you find "intraday" trading?

Positions are held for as long as necessary - even a few years (although of course that can almost never happen, usually from a few minutes to a few months), if necessary.

There are simply no real problems that need to be taken into account now - everything is working in the normal range, i.e. it is quite possible that the equity will soon go upwards.

Although of course no one knows what may happen in the market.

 
LeoV >>: Half a year long and 60% deep drawdown, with an average leverage of about 1:4-1:6, is in my opinion a problem that should not be ignored and pretend it does not exist. This is a real problem. Although I like the idea of this project.....))))

The drawdown is not a problem at all, because it is not fatal, but on the contrary a good reason to invest - "buy cheaper".

 
LeoV >> :
...

Leonid, you will hardly succeed in convincing Victor. He has his own logic, and the fact that it does not coincide with the logic of investors is of little concern to him.

In his defence I can only say one thing: he is not pouring investors' money into his pocket like Niroba.

Although it does not make investors feel much better.

 
VictorArt >> :

Drawdown is not a problem at all ...

Imagine yourself as an investor who invested $10K in a hyped PAMM when only $4K of that was left.

Not a problem? )))

 
goldtrader >> :

Leonid, you will hardly succeed in convincing Victor. He has his own logic, and the fact that it does not coincide with the logic of investors is of little concern to him.

In his defence, I can only say one thing: he leaks investors' money without malice and not into his pocket like Niroba did.

Although it doesn't make it much easier for investors.

Of course not! It will be much easier for everybody that the money has not been siphoned off, but wasted - it happens, it is a working moment. ("Satisfied citizens go home." O.Bender).

It is true that suspicious ones may think that the Cossack is an envoy of DC as a beneficiary. But this idea must be banned as unbearable! )))

1234567891011121314...146
New comment