The opinions expressed in these forums do not represent those of C2, and any discussion of profit/loss
is not indicative of future performance or success.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading. You should therefore carefully consider
whether such trading is suitable for you in light of your financial condition. You should read,
understand, and consider the Risk Disclosure Statement that is provided by your broker
before you consider trading. Most people who trade lose money.
The trade leader created a new strategy “Tesoro Futures”, and is requesting all “CME SMALL” subscribers to move to “Tesoro Futures” (cost $200 more/mo). Trade leader’s name also changed to “TesoroFutures”.
The same trade leader runs “CME SMALL”, “CME MEDIUM”, “CME AFFLUENT”, and the new “Tesoro Futures”, just want to let people know these are linked together.
(I myself stopped subscribing, because the strategy seems to be martingale – average down multiple times and hold on to losing positions).
C2 really has a responsibility to address the previous thread warning as well as this recent change which allows the vendor to bury his latest mess at the bottom of the cat box with no further visibility or accountability. C2’s silence on this is deafening…and disappointing.
Glad to see people speaking out about this guy. His strategy descriptions are full of discrepancy’s. No Overnight, Maximum 2 contracts… had position open last night in Small with 4 contracts… earlier in the afternoon had 6. Had 10 contracts open today in Tesoro Futures using same description as Small. Description is blank, however a message was sent out to his subscribers with the no overnight, max 2 contracts, etc. He somehow reminds me of Texas DoubleDown if anyone remembers.
The below text message sent me but he does same thing again trading 10 contracts today adding on loosing contracts losing almost 10K. How to get rid off this guy from C2?
Just to let you know that I will continue to trade on CME-SMALL from Monday (06/25/2018), and I’ll trade only two contracts as usual (either 1+1 contracts or 2 contracts in one trade) and I’ll do my best to replicate the trades I executed on the 21st (except the last trade). So, please stay with CME-SMALL, we will take it to new high in coming weeks and months.
Whack-a-mole! 10 minutes later and he’s “Strategy Private” again! How convenient! Will this zombie system return again today, tomorrow, or next week under the same or different name? Only C2 knows for sure, but what we do know for sure is that C2 pockets 30% of every subscriber dollar to vendors like this, in addition to fees to the vendor. But no worry, we will just be given a pat on the head and told, “Trading Is Risky”-certainly not for C2 with arrangements like this!
There is simple solution to these type of traders.
C2 should simply copy IB or TS margin rates for mini ES futures, and eliminate
those 500 per contract per daytrade ratios. I believe around 6100 per ES.
So, one must use that and can not easily overload with contracts.
LOL… Back To Private and CME Small had a recent drawdown of over 66% and the total return is -58%
EDIT: I just don’t get it… How can people like this sleep at night.
The problem is not that this problem can not be solved. We all and C2 as well know how to do this, was discussed lots of times.
C2 itself puts up a margin rate $4,500 for NQ (wherever they copied from) and CME SMALL set up with a nominal $25K account 10 contracts. C2 knows this and knows how to stop this. They just don’t.
We (subs) register a credit card, bank account, postal address, whathaveyou with C2. And we are only the subs. So arguably no harm done if I change handle (personality.) But I can not.
Vendors can change handle before breakfast every day. C2 knows this (because they need billing information) but they hold it back from us. Because if a scam artist comes, pays them (C2) a few hundred dollars, milks us (subs) for a few thousand and they got banned from C2, it is not good for business (C2 business, that is, not subs business.) Repeat business is more lucrative.
Imagine a real hedge fund (as for some reasons unfathomable to me C2 markets itself as a game changer in the hedge fund industry) would tell you: “subscribe to us, we take 30% of your $$ but we don’t tell you about the fund managers who will manage your money. Just subscribe anyway, because we say so.”
C2 has a valid business model, so long as it acts in good faith to investors and trade leaders. But when identity, past history, visibility (Strategy Private), and accountability go out the window where does that leave investors and the legitimate trade leaders? It’s silly to keep finger-pointing at the bad actors like CME SMALL, when it becomes obvious that this appears to be a major part of the overall profit model of C2 and creates an ongoing revolving door of these bad actors.
As long as people subscribe to the likes of uvxy trader (in spite of it existing for 6 months) or many new systems that are couple of months old and shows 50-100% , no matter what checks are in place, it aint gonna help. As a matter of fact, without naming anyone, I see the same people who talk about incredible risks that existed in some collapsed systems, subscribe to the same kind of systems again and again.
But of course, it feels weird that uvxy trader is the numero uno on the leaderboard!
It’s also silly to finger-point at investors who don’t see through the inflated (and fictional) record of UVXY or read the forums, as justification for bad business practices of the likes of CME SMALL fully aided and abetted by C2 and for this to be a key element in C2’s profits. At least UVXY has been there from the inception for all to see and those who have traded have basically broken even (autotrade results) and of course also paid unnecessary subscription fees. That’s a red herring offering cover for the really serious problem of those who change names, hide behind Strategy Private, have no history of their past names and systems available, quickly blow up accounts, reappear as whack-a-moles and then to accept this as business as usual. As others have said, in other venues this would be rejected, investigated, and more.
