What, again? - page 7

New comment
 
So at the moment it's better than the others (if it's in the top) . Everything is learned by comparison. That's what ranking and popularity is all about.
Yes, there have been "fly-aways", but they've never stayed in the top for more than a couple of days.
 

Ideally, for EAs, make it possible to download the EA directly from the Market.

Make a filter in the market, or better yet, leave only those EAs that have monitoring.

The authors will have the desire to do better, not more.

 
Volha Loyeva:
So at the moment it is better than others (if it is in the top) . Everything is learned by comparison. That's what ranking and popularity is all about.
Yes, there have been some "fly-aways", but they have never stayed in the top for more than a couple of days.

I observe one Expert Advisor, a lot of "5" reviews, one buyer writes that in the tester the Expert Advisor opens trades, but during the same period in the real one does not, that one account has a stop out.

And he doesn't even give negative feedback, because the problem is not with the author, he has a lot of stars, but the problem is with the client.

 
Arkadii Zagorulko:

I am watching one Expert Advisor, a bunch of "5" reviews, one buyer writes that in the tester the Expert Advisor opens trades, during the same period in real life it does not, that on one account a stop out.

And he does not even give negative feedback because the problem is not with the author, he has a lot of stars, but the problem is with the client.

You can test in different ways and there are a lot of nuances.
There are a lot of similar situations. There are a lot of newbies here who can't upload a set file. I know a lot of similar situations. Timeweaver, a video or a manual solved these issues at once. There are a lot of negative stars in the marketplace due to inexperience of the buyer, but also a lot of deserved ones. Kudos to that customer who first decided to understand the cause before giving a bad rating
 

The aim of the MC is to maximise ALL sales, not yours.

Any rating for this will be better than random. Although it is clear that ranking and categorisation are not ideal.

If you want sales, do your marketing, if your product is worth something, you will inevitably make it to the top or near the top. Or the top will fall away as a goal altogether, as the main traffic will come from outside.

 
Volha Loyeva:
You can test in different ways and there are a lot of nuances.
There are many similar situations. There are many newcomers here who set a file they can't upload. I know a lot of similar situations. Timeweaver, a video or a manual solved these issues at once. There are a lot of negative stars in the marketplace due to inexperience of the buyer, but also a lot of deserved ones. Kudos to that buyer who first decided to understand the reason before giving a bad rating

You see what you want to see and read as well.

I meant that the same buyer would give 1 star to a product without stars without thinking twice.

Although it probably will not come to this, he will only download something that has a lot of stars.

 
TheXpert:

The aim of the MC is to maximise ALL sales, not yours.

Any rating for this will be better than random. Although it is clear that ranking and categorisation is not ideal.

...

Apparently MQL's goals are a bit different, or the method is not the same if this kind of change is taking place.

... If you want sales, do your marketing, if your product is worth something, you'll inevitably end up at or near the top.


There are a lot of products in the marketplace that rely only on marketing.

 
Arkadii Zagorulko:

Watching one advisor, heaps of "5" reviews,

+ seconded.

Friends, rating in the financial services market reflects nothing, and is of no benefit to the buyer. For sellers, yes: there is an opportunity to adapt to the rating, build into it and consolidate their status quo. The talk of benefit to the customer is a noble cover for the desire to make money. I do not feel sorry, earn the more the better. Only there's no need to talk about universal justice.


TheXpert:

The MC's aim is to maximise ALL sales, not yours.

Any rating for that will be better than random.

Why? Random with filters seems to be good. Just not those filters: "Do you have trends, channels or oscillators?", but detailed ones: what do they do, what principle, what patterns are they trying to find, etc. Isn't that kind of randomness the best order?

 

Marketing - what have we done to get our products to the top?

  1. We have created websites, advertised, posted on blogs and forums - the result is the popularity of our programmes.
  2. We bought additional tools to implement the programs (video, audio programs, translators........... means technical support.........).
  3. A lot of money was invested in both software and hardware.....

There was a lot of effort to do all this! Very much effort. Those who are engaged in promotion of their programme will understand me.


The result: The program hit the top! Choice of users, feedback from users.

Not everyone did it. Many put the product thinking that it would take off at the top! And users will love it!

But no. You have to spend a lot of effort and time and money to please the user. This is the work on your product.

A product is a complete result. The product is not just a picture from a tester and a one-megabyte code.

You must take into account that the product is a complex!




Look at other companies and their products. Only a product which is comprehensively finished sells.

Everything else is GGGGGG - not for sale.

And yes, user choice - herd instinct is also a work in progress/.

IMHO,

Rotation in the marketplace is necessary! But it needs to be built properly! Based on the integrated work of the programmer and the seller.

After all, there are programmers in marketing, and there are salespeople.

And there is the complex work, where there is a programmer (full stack), a designer, a marketer, technical support, .............


And don't forget that there are many kinds of programs in the marketplace!!!! Not just the ones that "automatically scoop the dough"

 
Arkadii Zagorulko:

Apparently, MQLs have slightly different goals or the method is not the same if this kind of change is taking place.

First of all, everything has settled down.

secondly, AB-testing is in progress, which means that your output on the Market may be different from mine.

market is flooded with pure garbage. random basically means that the top listing shows pure garbage, which is products taken from God knows where or written in the unknown and dumped onto the market for the free money.

any rating allows you to reduce the proportion of outright slag, although it will always be

12345678910
New comment