Criteria for getting signals to the top - page 28
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
.... that the provider is going to leak the signal and paying more for it is also unreasonable.
Is there any way to tell?
Yes, he's deposited 500-1000 and is in a hurry to dump it out of spite!
Exactly! It all makes sense now.
If there are VIP traders on this forum and are willing/maybe able to spend $10,000 or more on their signals, then I bet very few of them - especially if you compare them to ordinary people who are in the majority here, especially in the Russian segment.
And now, if a man poured $100 on his trading account and put a $30 subscription - to shoot him? To deprive him of even the slightest chance to be among those people who can afford to put in 10K?
It's horrible how bloodthirsty they are.
Where are they? The ones who pour $10K on the signal? One, two, and counting.
I don't get "if a man pours $100 and subscribes to $30, I don't get it... Why shoot him? Let him put in even $1000 ! You have to shear the sheep !
Just paying him more than $1 a month for such a signal is stupid. But if we have a lot of money and we don't mind taking risks - why not pay as much as he wants ?
What's "bloodiness" got to do with it?
Is there any way to tell?
Yeah, he's deposited 500 to 1,000 and he's in a hurry to drain it out of spite!
Yeah, that's it! It all makes sense now.
Again, the definition is very simple. The more real money is deposited, the more the Provider is sure of his signal. If the signal has an unfortunate $100 - it means that the provider is sure of his signal for no more than $1. That's all.
Let him set any subscription price - if someone wants to support him it's quite possible ! But just don't charge more for his signal.
Is it really worth judging the reliability of a signal by its deposit volume?
If a person poured 10K into an account, it most likely indicates that he intends to use a smaller % of the deposit, because the return on the trade is higher. Naturally, the trading risk decreases due to lower percentage return.
And if a person has invested $100, it most probably means that he or she intends to use a larger% of securities to increase the return on trade. Naturally, the risk of trading increases at the expense of a higher percentage return.
But in both the first and second cases, it is likely that both people do not want to lose money. Because they are both likely to have poured as much money as they can afford to trade.
Far more important is another point.
If a subscriber wants to invest an amount of 10K, he is more likely to sign up with a person who manages a similar amount, in our case it is a 10K person. After all, they have a similar ROI goal.
If a subscriber wants to invest an amount of $100, they are more likely to sign up with a person who manages a similar amount, in our case it's a person with an amount of $100. After all, they have a similar payback target.
Otherwise, what is the point of a person with 10K to sign up for a signal with 100$, or vice versa?
Where are they? The ones who pour $10K per signal? One, two, and counting.
I don't get the "if a man pours $100 and puts in a $30 subscription, I don't get it... Why shoot him? Let him put in even $1000 ! You have to shear the sheep !
Just paying him more than $1 a month for such a signal is stupid. But if we have a lot of money and we do not mind taking risks - why not pay as much as he wants?
What does "bloodiness" have to do with it?
$100 is a signal. $1000 is a pamm. Take away the possibility of displaying cents as $. Why the speculation about the 1 $ - the minimum is 30 $. We will not start to argue about rams from the Stone Age, there is a service (casino option) with parameters, that's all.
$100 is a signal. $1,000 is already a pamm. Eliminate the possibility of displaying cents as $. Why speculate about $1 - the minimum is $30. About rams reasoning from the Stone Age, there is a service (casino option) with parameters and all.
Why 100 is a signal and 1000 PAMM?
So far, I see very well that the owners of signals with small deposits misuse leverage, martingale, averaging and other doubtful techniques. That is why a small deposit on the signal is a clear sign that it does not make sense to pay much for it.
But, when people have a lot of money - why not? The "reasoning about sheep" is very relevant.
Took the incoherent nonsense down. I'll have you banned for a long time if you do it again.
What's that supposed to mean? You don't have the courage to admit that the system is failing and "manual intervention" is required ?
What's that supposed to mean? You don't have the courage to admit that the system is failing and "manual intervention" is required ?
Useless :D)))
You, my dear friend, forget about the psychology of a trader. For instance, when I was holding 1.5 million in my hands I felt excitement and slight trembling in my chest (25,000 dollars approximately).
Remembering it, I realise that trading with such amount would be uncomfortable for me and I would make mistakes in trading (due to excitement). For example 10000 thousand dollars is a reasonable amount.
A man gets used to everything, even a trader. And even for a lot of money in hand. Later this amount will grow(the account balance ). And let's not forget about brokerage companies that may limit the withdrawal.
I heard it somewhere. Like they will not let you withdraw hundreds of thousands at once.