Multiple recall updates - page 8
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
They will surely do something with the trials, but deducting only the first month's rent from the total cost would be an easy way out, as the buyer will have to choose between refusing to buy or further renting or buying, as there is already a discount. Extending the lease will not be interesting and sales will increase, if the price and the ratio of the lease to the total price is adequate.
Let's say the price of the product is $100.
Seller determines the period - say 10 months, for $10 per month
Let's say the buyer leases the product for $10 a month.
The month has passed, the buyer is satisfied and leases it for a month and so on for 10 months. If he likes it, then on the 11th month, he gives it a credit = $0
So the buyer has paid 10 months of the product for $10 a month. This is similar to leasing.
And the risk of buying is no longer as high.
And how do you imagine this to happen?
Who will be the owner of the real accounts?
It has all the resources you need for that: There is a marketplace, there are signals, there is a VPS server and a demo account from MQ.
It remains to open a demo account on the VPS server, put the robot in default mode, open the appropriate signal and give access to the market and the signal.
P.S. And it will be the only place on the Internet, where they can buy real robots !
Now that's a good idea!
Let's say the price of a product is $100.
The seller determines the period - let's say 10 months at $10 per month.
Let's say the buyer leases the product for $10 a month.
the month has passed, the buyer is satisfied and leases it for a month and so on for 10 months. If he likes it, then on the 11th month, he gives it a credit = $0
So the buyer has paid 10 months of the product for $10 a month. This is similar to leasing.
And the risk of buying is no longer as high.
The point of a full purchase is lost in the process! Because its point is to make a profit at once "a lot".Rent is like a place in the market, if you do not have money to buy a square meter in full, then rent until the money is not enough to buy the full price assigned and this rent will not be taken into account when buying a place otherwise the meaning of rent. And according to your post it turns out the seller is giving 0% credit for 11 months.
Perhaps, but the number of sales in this situation will clearly increase.
If you lower the entry threshold, sales will go up. It's like in the market, advisers are made, but no one can buy, everyone walk barefoot.
- (We were told honestly last year - NO MONEY - and it is true, as you can see by the situation in the country).
A tolerant, polite attitude towards customers is definitely needed. Only to resolve the issue amicably. This is the case in 99% of cases, thanks to more than 1,000 users I talked to during the last year. But this case is unique. That is the whole problem that people do not accept it. It is quite logical - just show me the article and I will check the transactions and the behavior of the expert. Let us find out what is the matter. The answer: why? I am not interested in all of this. I traded from mid-December to January. The Expert Advisor made about 30 trades with a spread in the balance - 5% ...+5% . Give me my money back or feedback. Intelligible and super correct to explain that this is the market and this drawdown is nothing. I have also got a negative feedback. I also have a drawdown on the monitoring even more. But in the end it is +30%. Not interested. Your +30% is nothing. I need a lot more. Give me the money back and that's it. I asked, but you have seen the monitoring and the result. I says I did not look at it before buying(!) As a result, writes a review. Well, well you wrote. I updated 1, the next day 2, then 3... 4 and 5... In a week 5 times, adding bullshit like the author needs a doctor, then writes a fake account, reviews - fake, someone communicates with him from country Z(!) also a fake ... and so on every day, colleagues. Last update was at 5 am this morning...
It has all the resources you need for that: There is a marketplace, there are signals, there is a VPS server and a demo account from MQ.
It remains to open a demo account on the VPS server, put the robot in default mode, open an appropriate signal and give access to the market and to the signal.
P.S. And it will be the only place on the Internet, where they can buy real robots !
This is an interesting idea. The main thing here is that the seller does not have access to the account for manual intervention.
Refreshed 1, the next day 2, then 3... 4 and 5 times... Five times in one week, adding...
Two things -- one question and one thought.
1. Question: tell me, if some customer updates his positive review every day -- would you also raise the issue of getting him banned for spamming and call him inadequate?
2. Thought: The problem detected -- it's purely a technical problem of Marketplace -- you should raise the issue with the servicedesk so that:
a) the review can't be put and then removed (at least without contacting servicedesk) and
b) the review can be placed and then updated as much as you like, but the review does not "pop up" in the list and remains at its first date.
p.s. As of today -- your buyer was banned on your initiative (directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter). If the term of his ban is a week, it's not critical, let it cool down. But if it is more than a month, you should "die" and persuade Service Desk to unban him. He basically bought a product from you and left a review. A week's ban for "mischief" is enough.
..and it's like this every day, colleagues. The last update was at 5:00 this morning...
Forget it. If your EA is good, you don't need any buyers at all. It was rightly said here that the seller of EAs is, in a sense, a cheater.
And if you get in touch with buyers, be prepared for inadequate ones.
Here, you got one of them.
That's an interesting idea. The main thing here is that the seller should not have access to the account, for manual intervention.
And it's not surprising that no one supports my suggestion.
Once upon a time, there was opposition on this resource to real ticks being applied on the tester. And that, they've been on MT5 for over a year now and there's no harm done.
So it will be with my suggestion, if not today, then tomorrow it will be.
And it's no surprise that no one supports my proposal.
Once upon a time, there was opposition on this resource to real ticks being applied on the tester. And that, they have been on MT5 for over a year now and there is no harm done.
So it will be with my suggestion, if not today, then tomorrow it will be.
Real ticks have been talked about for a long time, I remember in 2005 2006