As a subscriber, do you invest in Demo Account trading signals? - page 4
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
LOL, it's now you who ask for moderation.
I can formulate it more generally, no problem. There is nothing personal in my remarks.
Why a provider would ask 20 credits/month for a testing signal on a demo account ?
I'm not defending point of view of anyone, but this question is very simple to answer.
Why a provider would ask 20 credits/month for a testing signal on a demo account ?
Because MetaQuotes released this option of businesses. If MetaQuotes not want to be sold signal on demo account, this option would not exist. Buy and sell is who to want , is the law of supply and demand.
Precisely for this reason we are discussing the topic www.mql5.com/en/forum/11531, as the client can select their signals.
So after you, subscribers are stupid and thereby they can be scammed. Very poor philosophy, not mine, or maybe I misunderstood ? Signals are for people who don't have skills/time to trade, they need to be informed correctly about Signals. Most people want to earn money, do not you? But those who are attracted by the forex, beginners, are not aware of the risks. This is why I argue here against the idea of investing in a Demo Account signal.
The probability of any of us making money trading is close enough to zero so that we can approximate it to zero, so we are all stupid trying to do something that we have approximately zero chance of achieving. Lets take the case of signal subscribers in particular, what are they getting in return for their money ? what is given to them in exchange for their cash ? a guarantee of x number of trades per week ? no, a guarantee of a profitable supply of trades ? no, a money back guarantee if they lose money ? no. So they pay their money in the hope of receiving profitable trade signals and if they don't receive what they hoped for they have no recourse whatsoever . . . in a normal buyer - seller scenario this would be considered a crazy situation, but in the signal provider - subscriber situation this is considered OK . . . am I wrong for thinking this is a silly situation for the subscriber ? The subscriber has all the facts placed before him/her and is an adult so can be expected to enter this transaction in knowledge of the full facts . . . yet they still do it, what conclusion should I draw ?
Anyone who expects to make money trading should be glad of the signal subscribers, if many people aren't losing money then there would be no possibility of the few being able to make money, one can not happen without the other, the money has to come from somewhere and it comes from the pockets of the losers and fools.
I'm not suggesting that it is OK for anyone to be scammed but people are subscribing to signals that are just no good . . . . what is the justification for allowing subscribers to subscribe to signals that will obviously not perform as the subscriber hopes they will ? is it reasonable for the subscriber to expect a minimum level of performance from a signal ? what should happen if a signal does not meet a minimum level of performance ? how should the subscriber be compensated ? should all the risk lie with the subscriber ? and no risk at all and no responsibility lie with the signal provider ?
The probability of any of us making money trading is close enough to zero so that we can approximate it to zero, so we are all stupid trying to do something that we have approximately zero chance of achieving. Lets take the case of signal subscribers in particular, what are they getting in return for their money ? what is given to them in exchange for their cash ? a guarantee of x number of trades per week ? no, a guarantee of a profitable supply of trades ? no, a money back guarantee if they lose money ? no. So they pay their money in the hope of receiving profitable trade signals and if they don't receive what they hoped for they have no recourse whatsoever . . . in a normal buyer - seller scenario this would be considered a crazy situation, but in the signal provider - subscriber situation this is considered OK . . . am I wrong for thinking this is a silly situation for the subscriber ? The subscriber has all the facts placed before him/her and is an adult so can be expected to enter this transaction in knowledge of the full facts . . . yet they still do it, what conclusion should I draw ?
Anyone who expects to make money trading should be glad of the signal subscribers, if many people aren't losing money then there would be no possibility of the few being able to make money, one can not happen without the other, the money has to come from somewhere and it comes from the pockets of the losers and fools.
I'm not suggesting that it is OK for anyone to be scammed but people are subscribing to signals that are just no good . . . . what is the justification for allowing subscribers to subscribe to signals that will obviously not perform as the subscriber hopes they will ? is it reasonable for the subscriber to expect a minimum level of performance from a signal ? what should happen if a signal does not meet a minimum level of performance ? how should the subscriber be compensated ? should all the risk lie with the subscriber ? and no risk at all and no responsibility lie with the signal provider ?
The probability of any of us making money trading is close enough to zero so that we can approximate it to zero, so we are all stupid trying to do something that we have approximately zero chance of achieving. Lets take the case of signal subscribers in particular, what are they getting in return for their money ? what is given to them in exchange for their cash ? a guarantee of x number of trades per week ? no, a guarantee of a profitable supply of trades ? no, a money back guarantee if they lose money ? no. So they pay their money in the hope of receiving profitable trade signals and if they don't receive what they hoped for they have no recourse whatsoever . . . in a normal buyer - seller scenario this would be considered a crazy situation, but in the signal provider - subscriber situation this is considered OK . . . am I wrong for thinking this is a silly situation for the subscriber ? The subscriber has all the facts placed before him/her and is an adult so can be expected to enter this transaction in knowledge of the full facts . . . yet they still do it, what conclusion should I draw ?
Anyone who expects to make money trading should be glad of the signal subscribers, if many people aren't losing money then there would be no possibility of the few being able to make money, one can not happen without the other, the money has to come from somewhere and it comes from the pockets of the losers and fools.
I'm not suggesting that it is OK for anyone to be scammed but people are subscribing to signals that are just no good . . . . what is the justification for allowing subscribers to subscribe to signals that will obviously not perform as the subscriber hopes they will ? is it reasonable for the subscriber to expect a minimum level of performance from a signal ? what should happen if a signal does not meet a minimum level of performance ? how should the subscriber be compensated ? should all the risk lie with the subscriber ? and no risk at all and no responsibility lie with the signal provider ?
Não, nem todos os provedores de sinal são aproveitadores, alguns fornecem sinais de graça. Eu não estou dizendo que não há nada de errado com a cobrança de sinais, eu só estou fazendo a pergunta, o que está sendo previsto para o dinheiro que está sendo cobrado? o que é uma expectativa legítima de que o assinante tem? e se essa pergunta não pode ser respondida, em seguida, que tipo de pessoa s que se inscreve em um sinal sem saber o que é uma expectativa legítima?
I'm not defending point of view of anyone, but this question is very simple to answer.
Why a provider would ask 20 credits/month for a testing signal on a demo account ?
Because MetaQuotes released this option of businesses. If MetaQuotes not want to be sold signal on demo account, this option would not exist. Buy and sell is who to want , is the law of supply and demand.
Precisely for this reason we are discussing the topic www.mql5.com/en/forum/11531, as the client can select their signals.
I think this is a hard responsibility for any trading signal marketplace (as MQ, etc.), and all of them ask values in the same way for Real/Demo, as it is complex decide if Demo or Real is the best way.
Another relevant point is that most of Real Account signals are very low values, and people trust as they were great values.
For instance, if you compare this two trading signals below (one Real Account and other Demo Account), what you would choose one week ago?
https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/4470 (30 Subscribers at this moment)
https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/5092 (85 Subscribers at this moment)
I think this is a hard responsibility for any trading signal marketplace (as MQ, etc.), and all of them ask values in the same way for Real/Demo, as it is complex decide if Demo or Real is the best way.
Another relevant point is that most of Real Account signals are very low values, and people trust as they were great values.
For instance, if you compare this two trading signals below (one Real Account and other Demo Account), what you would choose one week ago?
https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/4470 (30 Subscribers at this moment)
https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/5092 (85 Subscribers at this moment)
Another measure that could take the MetaQuotes: ( you has already launched a questioning about this possibility in the post http:https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/11531, where I'll also put this idea below)
Let's take the example of the link www.mql5.com/en/signals/5092
The idea is the Metaquotes that puts a type of option for the customer , a "Trailing Stop" in value percentage about the Growth percentage.
The Subscriber's terminal would determine this option in %, in this exmple I put 20%
In the image above, the Growth percentage is 29,92%, then 20% would be 23,94, in the chart would paint a horizontal line, eu draw in the green color.
If percentage reach and cross this green line to below, the trade is closed in the Subscriber's terminal, and MetaQuotes would send msg to customer. So The customer would authorize new entry in trade in this signal provider
The customer would have profit!
I would not use the red trend line due the example below: