Would you invest in a PAMM account that does not drain at all? - page 12
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
Just E bans anyone who complains. And there's a lot of them.
On the forum? Who knows, I myself have many times berated them for crap server, created a separate thread and collected "union" to unsubscribe. Well, after about two months is still lowered the ping from 150 to 15 ms, breaks communications have become less than three or four times. Often I scold them, I have a representative there Maria and Alina can unsubscribe / deny when they do not know the answer, but to ban... Neither me, nor my acquaintances, who also often complain, have been banned so far. There are regulars there as well as here, also berating the "authorities" for stagnation and poor conditions. I'm sure there are those you're talking about who get banned, but not everyone for sure).
I get banned more often than not by the "A" people's broker on his forum for nothing, just because he doesn't like me, while not breaking any rules. And tamosheskie moderators can not stick me adequate article and openly write the reason "hidden advertising adviser", would not believe it, in the theme "Advertising". And I will not say a word about those gaps. Especially on the news. If the broker with letter "I" cannot trade news because they openly write in the offer about correction of such transactions, then the broker with letter "A" uses more artful and impudent methods. Both are good.
And recently one manager, the account of which I cited (the second one, neuronet with entry from correction, lifetime - 4 years), with total investor capital of several millions dollars on tens of pams, received a "joy" letter from the broker, where the latter, or more exactly his representative kindly asked to close his pam accounts and make the access to them closed (somehow so), so his accounts would not appear in the rating, because he receives complaints from the top about what is starting to take investors away from them. As a result, twenty FINTRADE accounts became closed and now LuckyPound and other 10 TOPs sleep in peace. The market is divided.
Everyone is good, both the yellow A's and the red E's.
Why are you afraid to name names, at least the first one? Are they too famous to be named?
A strange goal. Create a pool of well-functioning plum TS. )))
I've told you many times that there is no such thing as a "non-drainable" TS. The goal is not to have a "non-salary" system, but to have a "non-salary" system, and to have a "non-salary" system.
So what systems to make a pool - no difference. The main thing is that they should be based on different, better - opposite principles, and thus there would always be those TS that are still "in good shape". The TC league is quite good at this.
And recently one manager, the account of which I have cited (second neuronet with entry from correction, lifetime - 4 years), with the total investor capital of several millions dollars on dozens of PAMM accounts has received a letter of happiness from the broker, where the latter, or rather his representative kindly asked to cover his PAMM accounts and close the access to them (somehow so), so his accounts will not appear in the rankings, because he has received complaints from the top about the fact that he is taking away investors from them. As a result, twenty FINTRADE accounts became closed and now LuckyPound and other 10 TOPs sleep in peace. The market is divided.
Everyone is good, both the yellow A's and the red E's.
What the hell are you talking about?
He didn't get anything! It's a known sucker. He's been scamming the naive and the gullible in all sorts of ways for ten years now.
He lost 1.6 million of investor money and quickly "hid" by closing off access to his PAMM accounts.
And it turns out he made up such a crazy story. )))
P.S. 23 accounts.If the broker at the letter "I" cannot trade news because in the offer they write about correction of such trades, the broker at the letter "A" uses more cunning and impudent methods. Both are good.
Well, it seems that no one has gone so far as to change the points of the Offerta without the agreement of the traders. So I am categorically against the "I" broker, even though I used to trade there.
It was funny when in the independent forums their representatives tried to prove that the "A" broker did not violate any conditions - and I totally agree, and moreover I pointed out that the "A" broker completely screwed everybody according to point 2.And I totally agreed to it, and I stressed that DS cheated everybody in full conformity with point 2.5 of the Offer, which allows changing Offer without confirmation by the Client. And the representatives - there was simply nothing to reply to.
What the hell are you talking about?
He didn't get anything! He's a known sucker. He has been "scamming" the naïve and the gullible in all sorts of ways for about ten years now.
He emptied 1.6 million of investor money and quickly "hid" by closing off access to his PAMM accounts.
And now he has made up such a delusional story. )))
P.S. 23 accounts.But there must have been something.
Please excuse the hasty withdrawal.
In non-public accounts were transferred to before the plum.
I have been transferred to non-public accounts before they were taken out of business.
But the manager is very murky nonetheless. But then again, it's possible that he was partly helped to leak.
What the hell are you talking about?
He didn't get anything! He is a known sucker. For ten years he has been using all kinds of tricks on the naive and gullible.
He emptied 1.6 million of investor's money and quickly "hid" by closing his PAMM accounts.
And it turns out that he made up such a ridiculous story. )))
P.S. 23 accounts.You are definitely talking nonsense) For nothing he did not plummet, it is called a declared drawdown under half a ton, it is not on the entire deposit. People have deposited at the peak of the profit, they have lost max, their nerves, patience and willpower failed and they took their money, fixing the drawdown loss. All the accounts are sitting on one Expert Advisor and the oldest accounts have been living for a long time, monitoring confirms it, at the very time when he closed the fintech.
This is what they usually say due to the fact that they are subject to the emotion of partial losses. If you go into a drawdown, that's it, you're a loser. There are many such examples, look at the signal service! In every signal there is one who will say that he lost money, and the signals without drawdowns.
I traded with his Expert Advisor for half a year and lost nothing, finished at 50% and switched to more risky projects.
He has a very large client base, so any slippage of some investors in monetary terms will be a huge loss figure, which can be freely interpreted in negative terms a la "He lost 1.6 million investor money". Sounds like.
There was something, though, apparently.
I apologise for the hasty conclusion.
The non-public accounts were transferred to before the drain.
Indeed, something's fishy.
But the manager is very murky nonetheless. But then again, it's possible that he was partly helped to leak.
Didn't immediately notice this post and replied to the other one
Yeah, there was a lot of hassle with re-filling
He has a very large client base, so any slippage of some investors in monetary terms will be a huge loss figure, which can be freely interpreted as a negative "He lost 1.6 million of investor's money. Sounds like.
The bounce of some investors has no effect on the real losses of 1.6m.
What is lost is lost.
Even if it is within the declared drawdown.
It looks like lousy trading to me. They should not have entered the market at the beginning of January. It's just the height of carelessness.
I took a look at his monikers. His stops are just a fiction.) If he hadn't closed sooner, he would've sunk it all.
The bounce of some investors has no effect on the real losses of 1.6m.
What is lost is lost.
Even if it is within the declared drawdown.
It looks like lousy trading to me. You shouldn't have entered the market on January 3. That's just the height of carelessness.
I agree about the fresh drawdown. Three trades on the same instrument right before the news, what kind of neural network is that. And I warned him that it was a big risk when they allowed the owl to open several trades in a row, while before it was impossible, until one trade closed, another would not open. That is, in the days when they were still giving their robot (weighed under 5 megabytes) with some wild protection in the form of a separate program (reminiscent of ancient StarForce on game discs) to use.
Now they are going to change everything.