Who has already tried the Signals subscription to get on the tail of ATC 2012 participants? - page 46
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
The logic behind the choice of money management:
Volume copying only occurs in the automatic scheme in proportion to the provider's deposit and the subscriber's maximum risk limit. That is, if Provider has opened 1 lot with a deposit of 10000, while Subscriber's limit is 8000, then Subscriber's volume will be 0.8 lots.
For example, this assumption about the future profitability of the trade is still valid?
Before receiving and executing signals, we need to be clearly synchronized with the master account on positions.
That is why the first step is to replicate the master account positions, and replicate only if we can enter as well as the master position. That is, we do not synchronise if at least one master position is in plus.
This is done to protect the trader's account - a position with a loss cannot be opened when it is in the profit on the Wizard. Because the master can close his profitable position in profit, we cannot guarantee this for his subordinate.
For example, does this assumption about the future profitability of the deal still hold?
There is a clear indication that the subscriber must enter the market as well as the provider.
There have been many explanations for this position. Don't try to pull new meanings out of it.
There is a clear instruction that the subscriber must enter the market no worse than the provider.
There are many explanations of this position. Don't try to pull new meanings out of it.
No one is trying, the business of selling independent copywriters is booming.
Way to go, I wish there were more such principled positions. The other day we ordered a signal mixer.
Respect and respect for letting the progamers make some extra money.
No one is trying, the business of selling independent copywriters is booming.
Way to go, I wish there were more such principled positions. Just the other day we ordered a signal mixer.
Respect and respect that you give progeramma earn extra money.
I daresay that you think we are fools.
Well, not clearly think so of course (it's not nice), but flashed in the soul of this thought and gives rise to a smirk.
Thanks for the kind words anyway.
Guys, you've deployed such a service, Respect and respect))), not only for the "signals", but also for the site as a whole - o_Oh, yes noticeably, a lot of hits...
(ah, and about the mixes well, if the public begs, with your scope, a one-two punch))))
p.s. *does the vendor set the price himself?
*how much of a percentage does the resource (you) take off?
I daresay that you think we are rubes.
Of course you don't (that's not nice), but the thought crosses your mind and gives you a smirk.
Thanks for the kind words anyway.
Quite a bold assumption, I'd even say it's a bit far-fetched. We have not known each other for five minutes, so where have I gone so wrong as to suggest this?
I have a double attitude: on the one hand I may use any of your flaws when selling your software, on the other hand I'm not at all happy when you have flaws.
I have revealed the real picture of what customers want. Forced synchronization and subscription to several signals at once to one account.
By the way I fell out a bit and couldn't understand why there was a renewed interest in copywriters, and it turns out the MQ signals service has launched.
You see !!!, you launch a signal copying service !!!, and progres have orders for copiers.
Isn't that a symptom that there's something wrong with the service?
I daresay that you think we are rubes.
Of course you don't (that's not nice), but the thought crosses your mind and gives you a smirk.
Thanks for the kind words anyway.
That's a pretty bold assumption, I would even say it's a bit far-fetched. We haven't known each other for five minutes, so where have I gone so wrong as to suggest that?
Isn't it a symptom that there is something wrong with the service?I didn't use the word business for nothing.
It's just that you see business as one thing, and I mean a completely different scale. And since you are reiterating the "lapses and symptoms" line, my original assumption was absolutely correct.
Our scale is to serve NN million desktop terminals and provide a mass service in such a way that it doesn't kill the infrastructure, doesn't make the stupidest mistakes to subscribers, doesn't let dishonest crooks get away with it, and doesn't expose you to a lot of claims. Have you thought about this?
What is your scale? Is it possible to make global estimates from this level of scale?