A real dialogue between a Developer and prospective Sub

S: I’m really interested in subscribing to your system, but it’s had a very good run and I don’t want to get in at the top.
D: That’s a valid concern. How about waiting for a reasonable drawdown or correction?
S: Well, I thought about that recently when the strategy went flat and pulled back a couple of grand.
D. So why didn’t you subscribe at that point?
S. I was scared the “top” might be in and maybe the good run was over.
D. So, if I understand you correctly, you’re worried about entering into strength as well as weakness, correct?
S. Yeah, I suppose.
D. In other words, you are scared about possibly losing money?
S. Yes.
D. With all due respect, based on your answers, I think you shouldn’t be subscribing to any strategy.
S. But I really want to make some money and I lack experience.
D. I understand. But I am not a financial advisor. Have you considered consulting with one?
S. No. I really don’t want to pay for advice.
D. Fair enough. Let me know if you have any questions about the system. Take care and best of luck.

P.S. The Sub subscribed and canceled when the trial period was over.


the fact is 99% of everyone on this site are novices and are trading their lunch money. There is so much id like to say but won’t. There are probably around 5 or fewer traders that look to be very good IMO. its a great place to establish a verified track record and pray that a fund is looking for a stud…when the #1 developer is trading AAPL for 4 years…and anyone would have made just as much $ by buying and holding…not much more to say…your banging your head against a wall bro.
Excellent results Guy… keep up the solid trading!

Actually, I think it’s more like dinner money, but you may be right. :slight_smile: Thanks for the kind words.

That is pretty rich! Sums up a large % of the people out there. Searching for the ‘holy grail’ or a free lunch, sucks to admit it as a developer myself, but there isn’t one out there… This is not a game of perfection, but of odds and stacking cash over the long run.

Like anything in life, hard-work, dedication and commitment to a strategy are crucial. Knowing the inherent weaknesses of our own personalities, which directly effect our trading success, is even harder.

This is why I offer an intensive VIP equity coaching package, to help traders come to grips with the myriad of problems that arise trying to make money actively trading the markets, but unfortunately most people simply can’t afford my package.

I had a couple subs drop during my 1.9% drawdown in the midst of the 20%+ gains achieved in February, not sure what they were looking for, but I figure it is probably for the best. If you make 15% trading my system and can’t handle a 2% pullback, then I have to admit you probably aren’t cut out mentally to handle my system (or any system for that matter).

I also enjoyed the recommendation of one of these ‘unsubscribers’, who instructed me that they dropped because I traded an etf they didn’t approve of!

Was it the child molester etf? :laughing:

My subscribers seem to be generally good people. They have stuck with me during my current drawdown and not much in the way of complaints. Generally does not mean totally–I had a person join before the drawdown and write a scathing review before they quit at the bottom. Thing is, all that is OK. I put a draconian outline of potential drawdown in my system description, and I point people to the negative reviews and remind them that in order to trade the system you cannot believe that $1000 is a big loss within the context of the system as it is. Warn and Warn and Warn again…then turn in decent robust results and the good people will join you.
One other thing–listened to the Tom Basso interview on Covel’s podcast. He described a “system” whereby he pulled portions of his own capital out of the system as people rushed to join as equity rose, and put his own capital back in in pieces as people pulled out during drawdowns. I have not figured out how to “code” that in my system, but I will take note of it :smile:

1 Like

Glad you have some good people as subscribers John. I am about to get started so I’m taking notes so-to-speak. Most people don’t have the courage and all that it takes to do what we do. They also don’t understand it sometimes on the level that is needed. It would certainly help to look at the positive in a system: the money that the system developer did generate instead of how much more they could have had. If there is reasonable room for improvement no issues there.

I think your practice of Warn and Warn and Warn again is good, and definitely needed. The sad thing is that as humans, we tend to hear what we want to hear sometimes and the real person comes out when a certain emotionally painful threshold is hit. I guess as system developers, we just do the best we can on both ends (for them as well as ourselves). Also, if they like you as a person, I think they’ll tend to be more gracious during those tough times. Good going John!

The issue is that some people are not cut out to accept the risk of trading. Heck…I have had drawdowns where I have had struggles sticking with my system. If you lay out the risks, and people see what the system has done, then it has to be their decision both ways–ie: join and stick with it, or not. The Tom Basso quote in particular informed me that even investors with millions behave the same way. Add in the probable fact that most C2 traders have less than a million to invest, and understandably they are risk averse, while looking for the big score at the same time! This is true for us as developers also. If we had the track record to attract big capital, we would likely be running a fund and charging 2% and 20% performance fees. We build that record here on C2 using small capital and showing that even with small accounts, we can relatively safely grow equity without big drawdown. Then we can earn our own piece of the larger pie.

Very good points John. Even with the hedge funds though, a small percentage I am told do well. But you are right, it is all about accepting the risk and that is a hard place for most people, subscribers and traders alike.

Another issue I’d like to mention is that even if we develop good track records here, the trading world on that other side may be very different…meaning, you may have to place x number of trades daily. The “pressure” is another story, unless the managers of the fund have a different philosophy.

So much to consider on both sides but it’s all good.

Not anymore… 2+20 is long dead. The market is overcrowded with start-up managers, while clients have grown bigger and more sophisticated. So fees are waaaaaay down from 2+20…

Also, these days, “big capital” (pension funds, university endowments, etc.) looks at way more than just track record. Business continuity is usually very high on their checklist. JohnGrover4, the reasoning goes, is human, therefore, he is mortal, sometimes suddenly so. So before a big investor commits, say, $100 million to JohnGrover4, they would want to know what’s going to happen if JohnGrover4 gets hit by a bus. At the very least, they would expect JohnGrover4 to have an operations department that would facilitate the prompt return of capital in the event of JohnGrover4’s untimely demise. Ideally, they would want to see a firm (however small) that is capable of operating past said demise. Say, JohnGrover4 has two partners actively involved in the business and four experienced employees handling logistics, administration, and technology. One-man bands, however versatile, rarely cut it…


Very true. I was just posting a hypothetical idea. There are some managers running small funds of around 50-100 million who simply charge a fee, and that would be an acceptable goal as well. Either way, without an objective track record no other doors will be open.
Perhaps no other doors need to open, but it is always good to have a goal that is just out of current reach. In my experience, without that, motivation wanes.

It all comes down to the gambling vs. investing question. In a casino the odds are rigged for negative expectations for the players. Its a bad investing strategy. However, the house is playing the other side of the same games and they have positive expectations. But that doesn’t mean a player can’t break the house. And if you think the house has such a good business then you can BE the house … just buy stock in any number of publicly traded casino’s such as LVS (;->)