1200 subscribers!!! - page 208
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
Have you ever seen a "top-up"?
I have, but any fool can take a risk and make money on a cent )) let him refill it, the same way ))
Quit your whining already. You know what gets in the way of a bad dancer.
If you have a good brokerage, you will make a profit of 360,000 per cent.
If your profit is less than 300 000% and you'll have a 50% profit in the future, I'll be happy for your success.
You have a red number TOTAL - look at it there. Don't make up things that don't exist and didn't happen. For me it's the bottom line that counts.
You're looking in the wrong place.
You're looking at the result:
and the result is quite good, I think he'll have more subscribers and more, and he and his subscribers will make money.
What are you looking at? )))
Earned 21692.51 with a top-up of 21200.00 )))
Several million dollars have been dumped.
The establishment dealerships will buy themselves a Tesla and go to the Canary Islands this weekend.
Don't have a hundred friends, have your own dealing centre.Several million dollars have been dumped.
The establishment dealerships will buy themselves a Tesla and go to the Canary Islands this weekend.
Don't have a hundred friends, have your own dealing centre.If you do not have a clear view of the profitability of the brokerage firm, you will get a profit of 360,000% and I will be happy for your success.
You have to reckon with it, you have to do it right away. Don't make up things that don't exist and didn't happen. For me it's the bottom line that counts.
You're looking in the wrong place.
You're looking at the result:
and the result is quite good, I think he'll have more subscribers, and not a few more, and he'll earn both.
As for the recruitment has already said.
But there is another point. I personally don't have anything against cent accounts as such and I am even willing to have paid subscribers on them. It's just that some people abuse them and come up with certain schemes.
Another point is that some have much lower liability, exactly as for cent accounts "if I lose - no big deal".
One example in the attachment. Look at the first 2 screenshots, there are about 30 signals of one author. That was a few months ago. And look at the 3rd screenshot, what he has at the moment, especially on the drawdown. Just due to the fact that these are cent accounts he was able to gain huge interest on the scheme "account survival on opposite deals" and then to get subscribers. Now that's cheating.
But if a trader has one or two cent accounts, works normally, monitors it like a real trading account and doesn't cheat before monitoring, it is acceptable. But how can you keep track of who has what moral principles?
One example is in the attachment. Look at the first 2 screenshots, there are about 30 signals by the same author. That was a few months ago. And look at the 3rd screenshot, what he has at the moment, especially on the drawdown. Just due to the fact that these are cent accounts he has managed to gain huge interest on "account survival on opposite deals" scheme and then he has attracted a lot of subscribers. That's cheating.
A blatant sham, alas. It's just plain overleveraged. Yeah, well...
Even I got caught. I don't keep track of it all around here. Can't do without it, I guess. There are no simple mechanisms.
They do not have any idea how to make money here (in this specific provider's signals).
UPD: @Maksim Korotkiy sorry for the insult, I was wrong (I got in without understanding). Your claim in this case, the cent worth of Provider's account is more than justified, in light of @Vasiliy Pushkaryov's above whole "good old" scheme with banal spillover.
On the subject of replenishment, they have already said.
But there is another point. Personally, I have nothing against cent accounts as such, and I am even in favour of having paid subscribers on them. It's just that some people abuse them and come up with certain schemes.
Another point is that some have much lower liability, exactly as for cent accounts "I'll lose - no big deal".
One example in the attachment. Look at the first 2 screenshots, there are about 30 signals of one author. That was a few months ago. And look at the 3rd screenshot, what he has at the moment, especially on the drawdown. Just due to the fact that these are cent accounts he was able to gain huge interest on the scheme "account survival on opposite deals" and then to get subscribers. Now that's cheating.
But if a trader has one or two cent accounts, works normally, monitors it like a real trading account and doesn't cheat before monitoring, it is acceptable. But how can you keep track of who has what moral principles?
I did some research recently. I was picking out good signals.
and i had two groups of them.
The first one was called "don't believe the story before monitoring".
there i only looked at the chart after monitored.
The second was called "believe history before monitored".
That's where I looked at the whole chart.
then 3 months later i went to look at these signals.
The ones I had only watched after the monitored period - were still trading normally.
As for the ones I have watched the whole history - now almost all of them are already lost.
Thus, I conclude: all the signals with a nice history before adding them to the service are signals that were "cooked".
as I see now, it makes no sense to show the history prior to adding them to the service.
Previously, the signals were "prepared" for 3 months and immediately went into action. Now some of the more hardy ones take up to a year to prepare the signals.
One example is in the attachment. Look at the first 2 screenshots, there are about 30 signals by the same author. That was a few months ago. And look at the 3rd screenshot, what he has at the moment, especially on the drawdown. Just due to the fact that these are cent accounts he was able to gain huge interest on the scheme "account survival on opposite deals" and then to get subscribers. Now that's cheating.
The signals used to be "cooked" before they were added.
Now they're "cooking" right in the service.
waiting for one to survive, and then actively promoting it.
How do you fight this?
I told you not to look at the history before adding it to the service.
But if these schemes are being manipulated directly in the service, what should be done about it?