New Market - how do we sell new EAs now? - 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
Well, there aren't many advisors like that. I think the author should contact the administration here and explain the situation. There are exceptions to every rule.
And I'm not sure that such a signal goes to archive. If memory serves me correctly (I had one such signal), it simply becomes invisible for copying (like those with high drawdown), and after a trade it appears again in the rating. I might be confusing something, but still, somehow it's like that. And if that's not the case, then it makes perfect sense to do it this way. I wrote that...))In my TS League experience it's somewhere around 5%. Realistically, there are TS that work on H4 and show one trade in a fortnight. Therefore, it is true, the signal should take into account such possibilities, and be removed to archive only if there were no deals during the month.
In my TS League experience, it's somewhere around 5%. Realistically, there are TSs that work on H4, and show one trade in a fortnight. Therefore, it is true, the signal should take into account such opportunities, and be removed to the archive only if there were no deals during the month.
H4 and one deal in a fortnight is a medium term. But on D1 there are 10-15 deals per year. :)
In my TS League experience, it's somewhere around 5%. Realistically, there are TSs that work on H4, and show one trade in a fortnight. Therefore, it is true, the signal should take into account such opportunities, and be removed to the archive only if there were no trades during the month.
The principle of natural selection has not been abolished, if no one buys it means a weak product, not the Market in what -.
It's not a fact, maybe it just hasn't been noticed. And this product is not just not bought, it is not even downloaded. According to my statistics, the peak of downloads is right around the time when the product is first published and is on the 1-2 page of new products. But since these news have become very crowded and the product leaves the first page of news very quickly, that it just does not have time to notice. And since there are no downloads a product goes further and further into oblivion.
It's not a fact, maybe it just hasn't been noticed. And this product is not just not bought, it is not even downloaded. According to my statistics, the peak of downloads is right around the time when the product is first published and is on page 1-2 of the novelties. But since these news have become very crowded and the product leaves the first page of news very quickly, that it just does not have time to notice. And since there are no downloads the product goes further and further into oblivion.
What about the manufacturers of smartphones, clothes, etc., they do the same and no one complains about ungrateful customers.
That's not an appropriate analogy. According to you, in the shops, goods from different manufacturers are piled into one pile, with new arrivals standing in a prominent place and old arrivals being tucked away in the closet.
And what about manufacturers of smartphones, clothes, etc., the same thing there and no one complains about ungrateful customers.
Absolutely not the same.
Each level of quality has its own market.
There are high quality goods - they are expensive and sold in expensive shops. And there are their own customers, of which there are few.
There is the medium segment in terms of price and quality and sold through the appropriate channels. And there are their own customers who prefer the golden mean in terms of price/quality ratio.
There are low-quality, but cheap products - they have their own marketplaces. And they have their own customers, of which there are many.
And here there is one site and junk just floods everything. Customers who are looking for medium and high quality products simply do not have time to consider their goods among the third group.
Moreover, because the product is specific here, often low-quality products fall into the second group (this is basically what happens).
The bulk of customers cannot distinguish between quality and fake. And as a result, there are junk products on the front pages. This, unfortunately, is now the rule for the marketplace.
Absolutely not the same.
There is a market for every level of quality.
There are high quality products - they are expensive and sold in expensive shops. And there are their own customers, of which there are few.
There is the middle segment in terms of price and quality and sold through the appropriate channels. And there are their own customers who prefer the golden mean in terms of price/quality ratio.
There are low-quality, but cheap products - they have their own marketplaces. And their customers, of which there are many.
And here there is one marketplace and junk just floods everything. Customers who want medium and high quality products simply do not have time to consider their goods among the third group.
Moreover, because the goods here are specific, often low-quality products end up in the second group (this is mostly the case).
The bulk of customers can not tell the difference between quality and fake. And as a result - on the first pages of rankings are junk products. Unfortunately, this is now the rule for the market.
Don't think that buyers don't understand anything, this is a misconception
Let's just say they know far less about EAs than they do about sausages.
The majority of clients are not professional traders. And many of them cannot even test the trial on their own in the tester. The bulk of them, I would say.
But surely there are a few dozen pros (or even hundreds) who understand what they are buying.