1200 subscribers!!! - page 82
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
(1) This means that the topic reveals some techniques for making money. (I'm not talking about good or bad, it's about business).
Do you know what you're talking about now?
You are now saying, bluntly and directly, that encouraging thousands of subscribers to take a guaranteed plum signal is a "commercially promising topic" in the style of "cutting dough".
(2) Isn't the number of subscribers one of the strong indicators of the quality (and even more so, the marketability) of the signal. Or do you think all people are idiots? (just like sheep, thoughtlessly following the crowd).
No, "number of subscribers" is not a valid indicator of quality. It can be subsumed under an indicator like "peer review" -- but an expert can't be "every subscriber". An expert is an expert who reaches an opinion on an issue.
Read about the "crowd effect"https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Психология crowd:
Sigmund Freud's basic idea regarding the psychology of crowds is the hypothesis that people in crowds act differently from people who think individually.
The mental state of the individual in a crowd is characterised by a dramatic increase in the influence of the following factors:
-- Increased emotional perception of everything he sees and hears.
-- Increased suggestibility and decreased self-critical awareness and ability to process information rationally.
-- A diminished sense of responsibility for one's own conduct.
-- The emergence of a sense of power and a consciousness of anonymity.
(2) Isn't the number of subscribers one strong indicator of the quality (and even more so, the demand) of the signal. Or do you think all people are idiots? (only, like sheep, thoughtlessly follow the crowd).
Why so extreme at once, the "crowd effect", there is of course, and has been proven by Asch's experiment:
Do you realise what you're talking about now?
(1) You are now saying, directly and frankly, that encouraging thousands of subscribers to a guaranteed plum signal is a "commercially promising topic" in the style of "chipping in the dough".
No, "number of subscribers" is not a valid indicator of quality. It can be subsumed under an indicator like "peer review".
Read about the "crowd effect"https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Психология crowd:
(2) The basic idea of Sigmund Freud concerning the psychology of crowds is in the hypothesis that people in a crowd act differently than people who think individually.
The mental state of the individual in a crowd is characterised by a dramatic increase in the influence of the following factors:
-- Increased emotional perception of everything he sees and hears.
-- Increased suggestibility and diminished capacity for self-criticism and rational processing of information.
-- A diminished sense of responsibility for one's own conduct.
-- The emergence of a sense of power and a consciousness of anonymity.
(1) I haven't taken the time to work out for myself whether or not this is a plum signal. You say it's a flush signal and others say it's not, but on the contrary, many people are making stable profits from it. Who is to be believed?
Meanwhile, the presence of a large number of subscribers indicates the effectiveness of the signal marketing, so there is something to learn. What's the problem?
(2) Crowds and all the above effects are when you're surrounded by people, not when you see a number on a monitor. And, generally speaking, Freud's theory is weak and primitive.
(1) I haven't found time to figure out for myself whether or not this is a signal that is draining. You say it's a drain, others say it's not, but on the contrary, many people are making stable profits on it. Who is to be trusted?
That's what the whole sales or subscription strategy is based on -- 1% of participants will figure it out -- and 99% will subscribe or buy, based solely on other people's "evaluations" and "recommendations".
If you remove the "crowd effect" -- the number of sales or subscriptions -- will be exactly zero.
Right now the signal is ranked at 2800. How many subscribers would it have if the "number of subscribers" figure were removed?
The signal is now ranked at 2800. How many subscribers would it have if you removed the 'number of subscribers' figure?
A killer argument
There's a great article from MetaQuoteshttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/1100-- read it:
Subscriber Security
We had a task in the beginning to create a mass service of trades copying, which would protect subscribers from using unprofitable signals providers. Trader's security was our top priority, as we understood the danger of copying trades that can lead to losing money on the account. Therefore, we decided to distribute signals according to the quality rating, which is calculated on multiple parameters. The higher the quality rating, the higher the signal is at the top and the higher the credibility of potential subscribers. In this scheme, dangerous signals are pushed to the end of the list.
In fact, there is a signal with a place higher than 2800 in the rating - signal rating drops every day while the number of subscribers grows. It means that a complicated rating formula which is supposed to determine the most quality signal, call subscribers for quality signal, than to give them maximum guarantee of safety - this complicated rating formula is completely overlapped and leveled by a single figure "number of subscribers".
It turns out that it does not matter what place the signal is in the rating - any potential subscriber is guaranteed to filter signals by "number of subscribers" and so the signal with the lowest rating but maximum number of subscribers becomes the first in the list and the key object of attention for 99% of potential subscribers.
That can explain why the signals with the highest ranking out of TOP 10 have only a couple of dozen subscribers -- while the signal with a ranking of 2800 has a number of subscribers under a thousand.
Proposal for service development
If "number of subscribers" is a necessary and important figure for subscription decision.
As an option, it is possible to rate signals in public TOP, but make barrier for paid subscription - for example, it is impossible to subscribe for signals with quality ranking higher than 1000 or subscription is free.
In this case there is no need and possibility to promote the signal at the expense of "support group".
Providers in this case will be aimed only at improving quality rating -- not at "making quick money" through "crowd effect" and other insinuations, which have nothing to do with signal quality and subscriber safety
All
clairvoyant, my ass))
I can bet that if I show 3 months in a row above 100% profit, there won't be a single subscriber
and your signal will be taken right off the showcase.