1200 subscribers!!! - page 114
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
I don't envy it, I can only sympathise with the subscribers. Very dangerous work was done on that signal, it had already lived long enough without any drawdowns at such risks.
By the way, until December I used a similar hamster set on my personal account - with 2 orders, but with a smaller leverage and 50 pips stop. Moreover, if in the morning I have found 2 open orders, I would always close 1 of them manually, and if I saw a clear downtrend, I would close both of them. Thus, my account was reliably protected from outages.
Why the same cannot be done by the provider of this signal is a mystery to me ;)
Are you going to sleep badly and not eat for a week or two days out of sympathy?
Well, you don't have subscribers, so you have to wait, not discuss who has cents and who has a big drawdown, and I am so wonderful and beautiful, but without subscribers.
-------------
If I were the admins, all discussions about their services should be blocked by bans, and then there won't be such messages.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies
1200 subscribers!!!
Vladimir Baskakov, 2019.03.04 22:24
Maybe you should remove the signals that allowed 30.0% drawdown at all, from the first time? On many services 20% drawdown is the end of the signalThey don't have any problems with keeping the drawdown rate at 20%, keep it at 20% and let the rest do as the service allows.
Will you be sleeping rough for a week and not eating for two days out of sympathy again?
So you do not have subscribers, so you have to wait, not to discuss who has cents, and who has a big drawdown, and I'm so wonderful and beautiful, but without subscribers.
-------------
In general, if I were admins, all discussions about their services should be suppressed by bans and then there will be no such messages.
If you want 20% drawdown, please, keep it at 20%, no one is stopping you, and let the rest do as the service allows.
I don't. I don't particularly need subscribers - I rely on investors, so I'm gaining status for the long term. My system is now in an unusually bad period, so I would not recommend anyone to sign up.
Yeah, got banned last year for discussing it, they know their job ;)
I do. 20-25% estimated, but I indicated a little more in the description just in case. The rest may work at least with 100% drawdowns, if the subscribers are satisfied with it ))
Your TS has no right to life, it is short term.
Well, that's your opinion, I have a slightly different one. Let's see - if it survives until May, it will be a year of work on real accounts.
I make adjustments from time to time, so there is a chance of a long run.
There's another jealous person lost to gloat.
So, are you getting less of a toad, are your subscribers scattering?
What's that got to do with envy, gloating, and toadying? Is it envy and schadenfreude to pick apart success stories?
Something, Vitaly, is not right in your philosophy and assessment of others. There is a saying, "He who calls himself names is himself". If you know such words and try them on others, it means that you take them off yourself -- a kind of defence -- to try your negative traits on someone else.
Well, that's not the point.
What is there to be jealous of in this case? That an ISP leaked $4 million of other people's money in a month? And yet he made his own money. That's not good money. That kind of money always comes back to haunt you. There's a saying: "You can't build your own happiness on someone else's misfortune".
And in relation to this case, to say that the subscribers themselves are to blame for it is not correct. The provider really made a fool of subscribers' heads. She was the first in the signals introduced the thesis: "Drainage is not so bad, top up your balance, we will continue.
As for me, the signal service's serious drawback is that the Provider is not responsible for losing subscribers' accounts. If you read the reviews the complaints of people are not that they are losing, but that they are losing and the provider is "in good". In fact and in fact, that shouldn't be the case.
The provider should be responsible for leaked subscriber accounts at least as part of the subscription money. For example, if the signal balance is negative during the subscription period, the money is refunded to the subscriber. Such proposals have already been made.
What does "envy", "schadenfreude", "greed" have to do with it? Is it envy and schadenfreude to pick apart success stories?
Something, Vitaly, is not right in your philosophy and assessment of others. There is a saying, "He who calls himself names is himself". If you know such words and try them on others, it means that you take them off yourself -- a kind of defence -- to try your negative traits on someone else.
Well, that's not the point.
What is there to be jealous of in this case? That an ISP leaked $4 million of other people's money in a month? And yet he made his own money. That's not good money. That kind of money always comes back to haunt you. There's a saying: "You can't build your own happiness on other people's misfortunes".
And in relation to this case, to say that the subscribers themselves are to blame for it is not correct. The provider really made a fool of subscribers' heads. She was the first in the signals introduced the thesis: "Drainage is not so bad, top up your balance, we will continue.
As for me, the signal service's serious drawback is that the Provider is not responsible for losing subscribers' accounts. If you read the reviews the complaints of people are not that they are losing, but that they are losing and the provider is "in good". In fact and in fact, that shouldn't be the case.
The provider should be responsible for leaked subscriber accounts at least as part of the subscription money. For example, if the signal balance is negative during the subscription period, the money is refunded to the subscriber. Such suggestions have already been made.
We did not talk about this signal. We discussed quite different ones, you see, quite different signals. There was no trade breakdown
P.S. The provider does not owe anyone anything, he has not dragged anyone by the ears or persuaded them to sign up.I won't. I don't particularly need subscribers - I rely on investors, so I am building up my status for the long term. I am now, by the way, having an unusually bad period for my system, so I wouldn't recommend anyone to sign up.
Yeah, already got banned last year for discussing it, they know their job ;)
I do. 20-25% estimated, but just in case a little more in the description indicated. The rest, at least with 100% drawdowns, if the subscribers are satisfied with it )).
What does "envy", "schadenfreude", "greed" have to do with it? Is it envy and schadenfreude to pick apart success stories?
Something, Vitaly, is not right in your philosophy and assessment of others. There is a saying, "He who calls himself names is himself". If you know such words and try them on others, it means that you take them off yourself -- a kind of defence -- to try your negative traits on someone else.
Well, that's not the point.
What is there to be jealous of in this case? That an ISP leaked $4 million of other people's money in a month? And yet he made his own money. That's not good money. That kind of money always comes back to haunt you. There's a saying: "You can't build your own happiness on other people's misfortunes".
And in relation to this case, to say that the subscribers themselves are to blame for it is not correct. The provider really made a fool of subscribers' heads. She was the first in the signals introduced the thesis: "Drainage is not so bad, top up your balance, we will continue.
As for me, the signal service's serious drawback is that the Provider is not responsible for losing subscribers' accounts. If you read the reviews the complaints of people are not that they are losing, but that they are losing and the provider is "in good". In fact and in fact, that shouldn't be the case.
The provider should be responsible for leaked subscriber accounts at least as part of the subscription money. For example, if the signal balance is negative during the subscription period, the money is refunded to the subscriber. Such suggestions have already been made.
P.S. The provider does not owe anyone anything, he has not dragged anyone by the ears and persuaded them to sign up.
Don't deliberately push rotten philosophies on the masses. Casinos and gambling are not so easily banned by the law.
Subscribers also need at least basic protection. NLP techniques have not been abolished.
Don't deliberately push rotten philosophies on the masses. Casinos and gamblers are not so easily banned by the law.
Subscribers also need at least basic protection. NLP techniques have not been abolished.
+
The philosophy of the social predator. They live off the "victims", so the latter are "to blame themselves".