Average advisor cost - page 3

New comment
 
drknn >>:
Спасибо, что откликнулись, друзья-соратники :)
Возможно я не правильно поставил вопрос. Хотелось бы получить всё же какую-то среднестатистическую точку отсчёта. Давайте смоделируем ситуацию так:
- требуется советник, который тупо открывает/закрывает/переворачивает позы по пересечению двух мувингов. Ни какого трала, ни какого МаниМенеджмента. Тупо открытие/закрытие/переворот поз.
Как по вашему сколько нужно взять за такую работу?
Для сравнения. Мой друг когда-то на Альпари у кого-то заказал такого советника. Ему сделали за 35 баксов. Я чуть не застонал когда он рассказал мне об этом. Он перекинул мне полученный код и я отыскал в нём какие-то серёзные недостатки.
Я считаю, что за советника такого уровня сложности брать более 5 или 10 баксов - это вообще грех. А тут цена в 35 долларов и при том недоработанный код...

Короче, сколько по-вашему стОит такая работа? Или скажем так, сколько каждый из вас взял бы за написание такого простого советника?

For such codes I will not undertake, but the completion of the complexity of my written EA I do for free (so to speak service and after-sales service).

As for cost, the last adviser cost the customer $50, 435 lines.

Although I put the price is not on the length of the EA, but on the length (complexity) of TOR.

Well, and then the lottery is sometimes the complexity is higher than the initial estimate is lower,

But the word is not a sparrow. If I say I'll do it for 50, then I must do it, no matter how long it takes.

On average, I take the job for $50 other fail,

If I think that the TOR is more complicated than 50, the customer usually does not know what he wants,

If it's cheaper, the time spent just to understand it is not worth it.

 
Urain >>:


Ну а дальше лотерея бывает что сложность выше чем первоначальная оценка бывает ниже, но слово не воробей сказал сделаю за 50 значит должен сколькоб времени не заняло.

100% right. very often it is not possible to immediately understand the required workload.
And correspondence and finding out the terms of reference - there's no way around it.
 
It's really difficult... Everything is very individual... Of course, such elements as opening/closing orders by the signal from a ready-made indicator, such as a wopper, should not be worth anything... Because you need zero intelligence here. And the time, with some skill, should not take more than half an hour... In order to get a good idea, you need to know how to do it. Even a 10-year-old child can write such a thing, tell him what commands should be used, and it's done ...

But any non-standard things that require non-standard way of thinking is another question...
There are a lot of examples - for example, calculation of 1-2-3 pattern by fractals... Just recently I was doing something similar - that's why I remembered... It seems easy... ...and with my eyes such patterns can be drawn automatically and elementary, but no way... If you try to formalize it and put it into MQL - it's not so easy:) And there are a lot of such examples... So to evaluate in any specific indicators - rows, number of functions, or anything else - is wrong, IMHO. Everyone should evaluate their work - based on their own self-worth and the complexity of formalizing the algorithm.
 
But I'm more interested in how arbitrage operations will be handled on the ICL5 site and how programmers will be evaluated, because, as they say, everyone is different :)
 
sergeev писал(а) >>
I'm more interested in how arbitrage operations will be handled at MKL5 site and how programmers' work will be evaluated, because as they say, everyone is different :)

I guess everybody will be evaluating himself, while arbitration... We can already feel pity for future arbitrators. More interesting is how arbitration will be paid. Expert Advisor is $20, arbitrage is 10%, but not less than $50 :)) - for example
 

It is more likely that the arbitrator will act as a judge. The programmer prepares his speech to justify his terms of reference and the client prepares his speech to justify his terms of reference. That is, the arbitrator does not read the terms of reference, but only looks at the references of the programmer or the customer to the text of the terms of reference and the actions of the advisor. I wonder how all this will actually work. We can expect a new service in the EA market - a prosecutor and an advocate).

 
zhuki >>: Написание советников, скриптов,индикаторов за деньги, это всего лишь оплата за потраченное время,но не за знания и разработку алгоритмов. Да и деньги в основном платят лентяи.

Yes, an EA for crossing two wipes without much filtering costs almost nothing: you don't need much experience, because the EA is already in the standard Metakvot package.

But non-standard tasks still have to be solved. You should charge money for solving such tasks, not kopecks. This is where the coder's experience helps. Even if he just transfers the ready-made code in 10 minutes, this work is worth quite different money - simply because he once had to spend a lot of time to implement it.

 

What is needed: just an advisor or an advisor that pours the dough? If just an advisor, a specific amount is reasonable. If an EA that pours, then it is reasonable to take a share of the profits. So, which one of you only takes a share of the profits, gentlemen programmers?

 
Integer >>:

Несказнно интересно, как все это на самом деле будет происходить.


Me too :)
 
Richie >>:

Что нужно: просто советник или советник, который наливает бабло? Если просто советник, то разумна конкретная сумма. Если советник, который наливает, то разумно брать долю от прибыли. Так, кто из вас берёт только долю от прибыли, господа программисты?

Any programmer is left with the source code, and if he's pouring it in, here's your share of the profits (bet on the real and you'll have it).

12345678910
New comment