As a subscriber, do you invest in Demo Account trading signals? - page 10
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
@KenMcCormick:
Why bother trying to understand a Billion_Dollar Funds Manager. Imo, undertaking something like trading is a journey of understanding yourself. A fund_manager trades for different reasons than you and I. As you've stated, he's not interested in trying to return %850 for his members. He's mostly interested in keeping his job, beating inflation and staying above the required draw-down.
If you've given up on trading and believe in system selling instead then "yes to all men his own". But at what point does selling something which doesn't deliver become fraud. If your goose really lay golden-eggs would you sell the goose. These are the types of soul searching questions everyone turning tides must answer.
I have a cousin who never wants to take any risks. He always comes up with these brilliant ideas but want my money placed on the line. This bothers me given the fact that we both have about the same amount of assets. I believe a partnership works best when all parties have something to lose. But then again thats just me :)
No one said that, you can manipulate words at your advantage and after that refute what you invented. What I said (and others) is that a provider who run a strategy on a demo account is not dependable.
This is simply ridiculous. There are obviously always people who wins, and wins a lot in trading, even and mainly on crisis period. More amateurs in the game more money to catch. The big players are banks, they opened the forex market to have more capital to win and they obviously want that people trade on real account. Anyway all of that has nothing to do with the topic.
You are totally off-topic. This one is "as a subscriber do you invest in a demo account..." and not "as a provider do you try to catch money from the naive investors". It's now very clear what's your point of view, a provider takes less risk with the money of others, obviously. I guess we will soon see your signal provided on a demo account.
I invite all potential subscribers to read your post, it's very instructive.
Ok, you are right, I was off topic, for clarity, because you seem to have miss understood my statement, A strategy is always run in back test, then demo, before it goes live, even in big funds, and banks. They test it then put it live. They would be foolish not to. The same risk applies, because there is never a guarantee it will perform in the live market. Even strategies that have worked in real accounts in the past, may not work the same, in the future. That is why some funds go broke, even after performing well for years before. It is true, investors will move funds from managers who start losing money, no matter how well they did in the past. Every day is a new day.
Traders who trade other peoples money are not subject to the same level of stress caused by (fear of loss), as someone trading their own money. Many people at retirement will pick a non-family member to manage the money for that reason..... Ask any trader.... I would rather have a trader who is fearless to trade, because fear will cloud the mind, and cause losses. A trader can not be afraid of the market. I want to sell products, simply because of the income opportunity, same as money managers want more investors to manage investments for, besides his own money, and it is a lower risk. When I provide trading strategies for others to benefit, I am doing something good for others. I think living a good life, includes helping others when possible. I risk my time spent building strategies, and AEs, But my time is well spent for good cause. The more people I do good for, the better life I have lived. If I can enrich someone, I will. I can help more people by concentrating on providing profitable products, than I can watching trades. I will use my own product as well, but I need the ability to set it and let it auto trade, freeing my time up to develop signals, which this platform does not have yet. Fund managers who manage billions could use my strategies. I will not be able to show them the billions of dollars that I traded with it, but it does not mean it is undependable. A provider can be dependable with demos, live signals, and back tests, as long as they are tested, profitable, and the provider will backup the product with support. What if you thought to make computers available to the average person all over the world, but had no proven model, and needed some money to do it? Should you give it up because you have no proof it would be successful. I am glad Bill Gates took the risk on the idea, and made it happen. He has been well rewarded, as we all have. There are many investors willing to venture. The first to take the plunge usually gets the greatest rewards. When I have the best performing strategy in the world, I might make it exclusive to the first investor willing to give it a test, and when it produces, that investor will have the most valuable product in the world, and could become the top performing fund in the world. That is a multi trillion dollar potential. Think big, and make it happen. Dreams can become reality when a person dares to dream, plans the process forward, and acts on the plan. By the way, I mean no personal criticism toward you. Just sharing my thoughts and ideas. Be at Peace...:-)
If I'm confident of my system which produces 850% per-year, I would find the 10_thousand dollars for my small account. Should that mean working 3-jobs as a Janitor | taking the loan from the credit card companies | borrowing the money from family members and friends | selling my car, house, and dog in the process | pitching my system to every or anyone who'll listen and willing to invest. I'll do anything in my power [except commit a crime] because I'm confident in my system. I wouldn't be upset at someone else because they wouldn't purchase my holy-grail. But thats just me.
@figurelli:
Given your experience with signals, I'll like to ask some questions.
Per your heading "As a subscriber, do you invest in Demo Account trading signals?". Looking at your "comparative analysis" did you factor subscribers who are looking for freebie_signals? By "invest in Demo" were you including the freebies? I wonder how your "comparative analysis" would look if freebies were excluded? [thats if you haven't already].
With so_many people offering signals free which produces performances comparable with those of paid signals; what's your recommendation for a provider looking to profit off the service? How would this provider differentiate himself? [ apart from running heavy ads ].
@KenMcCormick:
I choose $10,000 because I believe that $85,000 the first year would be worth_if for most people. Anyways, you've made your points. You may have the last words on this topic and lets leave it there.
I disagree. What if you were capable of writing a signal that could turn $1,000,000 in to $100,000,000 in one year. But you could not lease it unless you have the $1Mil to test for real first, and for one year. Then you and the millionaire investors miss out on a valuable opportunity. Talent wasted. Therefore, test it in demo, if it works there, offer it out. If it does terrible, fix it and/or remove it. Investors take risk, with risk funds. What if you knew how to build a space shuttle, but could not get funding because you had not built one and flown it to the moon? How would you learn about the moon and space flight. You draw up plans, test, build and then deploy. That is the way forward.
It's a fact that demo accounts, or free signal are popular and have a lot of subscribers. But it's also a fact that most people who subscribes to a signal don't know anything about risk, they are attracted by big numbers for growth percentage. I can't probably blame someone (a provider) who want to win money relatively easily taking advantage of the ignorance of subscribers.
Still I don't understand why Metaquotes allow in his Signals service to subscribe with real account to a provider with demo account. I am probably very naive.
angevoyageur: I can't probably blame someone (a provider) who want to win money relatively easily taking advantage of the ignorance of subscribers.
Yeah, the subscribers have_to take some responsibility too. But how lucrative is this business model anyway?
My Guess: it was probably trying to model after what other Signals_Services look like.
Yeah, join the naive club. I don't think you and I would be making money off ignorance anytime soon ;)
Yeah, the subscribers have_to take some responsibility too. But how lucrative is this business model anyway?
My Guess: it was probably trying to model after what other Signals_Services look like.
Yeah, join the naive club. I don't think you and I would be making money off ignorance anytime soon ;)
Thanks, seems I am not alone, it's a comfort.
From what I can see, it's very profitable for some providers who benefits from the system : open a lot of demo accounts, try all sort of strategies, take big risk, after a while some survivors accounts should have the growth percentage required to attract subscriber. Then reduce your risk, you can then hope the signal will persist sufficient time to attract more subscribers.