Who is prepared to pay how much for a really profitable signal? - page 8
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 latter is meant to be understood personally.
Nowadays it is impossible to buy goods without a guarantee.
You go to the shop and there's a teddy bear, you buy it, but it turns out to be manure at home. And you can't blame the seller on the market, you'll be fined up to your balls.
I suggested a guarantee mechanism. The Provider himself determines the period in which his signals will be profitable and the fee.
An obvious misunderstanding of the problem.
There are no Buyers here. There are only Investors and risks associated with this type of business. And forget about guarantees, it is not at all from this area.
Get a handle on the terms.
A month has passed and the author has earned, may sign more, or contribute more money.
The provider and the subscriber are in an unequal position. In case of profitable signals, the Provider should pay triple price as well. Reduce the triples (of the supplier's fine and the subscriber's fee) and you will get "at most a refund of the abstract fee in case of losses".
You only have to pay for the profitable months. A good solution in my opinion.
What do you think?
You only have to pay for the profitable months. A good solution in my opinion.
An obvious misunderstanding of the problem.
There are no Buyers here. There are only Investors and the risks associated with this type of business. And forget about guarantees, that is not an area at all.
Get a handle on the terms.
That's exactly right. We should make a legal provision for the issuer of a financial asset to guarantee investors to speculators a return on their asset. Otherwise, the issuer would compensate the investor speculator for all (or at least N-fold of the asset's face value) of the losses incurred. That's some bullshit.
This is exactly the point of selling signals. If you introduce the compensation for investor's losses, there is no point in selling signals, you can simply trade with an increased leverage, for example, 1:500 (there are dealers offering 1:1000).
If you do not introduce the compensation for losses, the essence of signals appears (I recommend you to trade like that, but I am not financially responsible for anything).
Moreover, the sale of signals is a risk-free thing for the seller. Because the investment in production is minimal, the risk of not getting back the investment is minimal. You are just a money pump.
At least - logical - it's like an indirect counterpart to the manager's income in PAMMs
almost exactly the same!!!only the mechanism is slightly different!!!!
This is exactly the point of selling signals. If you introduce the compensation for investor's losses, there is no point in selling signals, you can simply trade with an increased leverage, for example, 1:500 (there are dealers offering 1:1000).
If you do not introduce the compensation for losses, the essence of signals appears (I recommend you to trade like that, but I am not financially responsible for anything).
Moreover, the sale of signals is a risk-free thing for the seller. Because the investment in production is minimal, the risk of not getting back the investment is minimal. Well, it's like a money pump for you.
It's sad to see the reaction.
People have no idea about working in the trading business.
Let's raise an article in the criminal code instead of monetary compensation. If a person says that the account will be in the black in a month and takes money for it, while the account will be in the red, let him go to jail for fraud and practice pedaling his code without risk.
As long as there are no guarantees, signal providers will be virtual millionaires....