Market: How will situations of product failure be handled after a build update ? - page 6
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
You are constantly trying to solve the problem from within. As a result, you are coming up with solutions that are delusional to implement.
Guys, let's look at the problem more simply. Why not introduce a subscription (subscription fee) for the product and make its cost a major part of the total cost of the product? That solves a lot of problems:
- No one will renew the subscription to draining EAs, which means that the programmer cannot make profit from outright shoddy work;
- The buyer, if dissatisfied with the product will be able to cancel the subscription, while he/she will lose only the initial payment, not a very large one, which would not be a tangible loss.
- The money will go to the programmer, as long as his product is used. - This is a very powerful motivation for developers. The real demand for and quality of their product will be clear at once. You can charge any price on the market for outright hackwork, but the money will bring only what hundreds of people around the world use. In this case the rating in the form of quite real money will be a completely fair reflection of the current contour.
- The programmer in this case firstly, will try with all his powers to keep the circle of his subscribers and secondly, he will try to develop his product so that other users join its usage. This means that all the bugs and incompatibilities will be on the developer's shoulders, but his work will be in demand and well-paid. The really viable ideas will evolve and develop (functionality, interface, working methods), and this means that MetaTrader will develop.
- MQ as an intermediary will receive a constant source of income, because in this case there will not be one-off sales but a constant flow of income into the account.
- Programmers and MQ will not need to produce hundreds of useless Expert Advisors and indicators. It will be enough to create a few really high quality products - these two or three products will collect the absolute majority of funds.
- Subscription may be made more fair to customers. For example, the cost of subscription can be expressed as a certain percentage of the EA's monthly turnover. In this case, if the EA's account is large, the absolute subscription cost will be significant. At the same time, the product will be open for not rich traders (up to cent accounts), because their turnover is not considerable.
- Truly talented developers will be able to earn a real lot. A lot, much more than from single sales of even very expensive experts.
- All the problems of incompatibility between the product and the new build will fall on the developer, which will relieve MQ of unnecessary work. At the same time the products (at least the demanded ones) will be updated in time and with quality, because otherwise there will be no money for their use either.
What is the point of a subscription, per se?
A subscription is a monthly fee paid by the subscriber to the creator of the product. For example, if you really need a paid indicator for your daily work, every month you will pay some money to its creator.
OK, plain and simple.
Second question: can such a subscription solve the problem voiced by the topic of the thread? All I've seen is that with a subscription "everything will fall on the authors" - is this true?
OK, plain and simple.
Second question: Can such a subscription solve the problem voiced by the topic of the thread?
- Yes, it can. In this case, all the problems of incompatibility with the new version of MT5 lie entirely with the developer. If the developer is in the taiga, and his product is used by hundreds of people around the world, but it did not work on the new build, then the developer is likely to rush hard to fix this bug, forgetting about the taiga and hunting, because for the amount of money that brings them users, some will be willing to stay outside the Garden Ring for life. (Note that all this will be absolutely voluntary, on a voluntary basis, so to speak, the truth abundantly smeared with a thick layer of black caviar:).
- Maybe.
Why in the world would I interrupt, say, a skiing job because of a developer screw-up?
Subscription is inherently wrong because it's the wrong class of product. In short, don't pry into things you don't understand.
Why in the world would I interrupt, say, a skiing job because of the developers' faults?
Subscription is inherently wrong because it's the wrong class of product. In short, don't get into things you don't understand.
Nobody owes anybody anything. If you want to sit on a ski resort, sit naked **** in a snowdrift, because there will be no money for a normal hotel anyway, because no one will use a product that does not work, and therefore will not pay for it. If you want to work and get big money for it - welcome. Subscription will create all the conditions for this.
Stop ranting about "wrong class of product". If you like to create "that class" of products - create them in Jobs for food, but if you want to make something really worthwhile and profitable, create an idea and develop it to the extra class, there is no other way in business.
It has to be decided on the side of the marketplace. Even if it means raising the commission.
No, it's not a warranty period, like with household appliances.
1. Why the hell should I interrupt, say, skiing vacations because of a developer's bug?
2. Subscription is inherently wrong, because it's the wrong class of product. In short, don't poke around where you don't understand anything.
1. laptop + G3(4,5...) modem will solve the problem of a giant of thought.
2. I like it. The main thing is to have a choice: either sell/forget it or give a time-limited subscription license.
Guys, let's look at the problem more simply. Why not introduce a subscription (subscription fee) for the product and make its cost a major part of the total cost of the product? That solves a lot of problems:
A subscription is a thing. It is convenient and correct. But what about the price? A subscription per month is roughly 10% of the price of buying the whole product.
In the Market there are and will be many products for 10 -15 quid. And the payment technically can't be less than 10 quid. This issue can not even be raised.
I.O. Under the subscription covers only those products which have a monthly payment of at least 10 quid.
It's probably the best idea I've had in a long time.