I agree, Kevin.
The only way to know for sure is for the Vendor to deliver the code (Tradestation code, Amibroker code, etc.) to the Subscriber at the time of Sale. Then, the Vendor is 100% out of the picture and none of these “detective” activities are needed whatsoever (that is the REAL solution here).
I own 3 such systems - I paid $2,500 for two of them and $5,000 for the third.
Expensive? Look at the lifetime cost. Obviously if any of those systems does not perform - that’s a different story. But if I pay someone $120/per month for a subscription here - well, you can do the math.
But - I got to examine EXACTLY the equity filter rules that generate Set-ups, position-sizing is completely defined and canned within the product, the number of positions are pre-determined, rules for exits are canned - everything is defined and converted to programmatic constructs. Owning the code, I can even tweak the rules myself if I am so inclined.
I got to study these components BEFORE I elected to buy. These systems are truly 100% mechanical (except for data feeds to brokers). The systems may succeed or fail, but it won’t be due to the involvement of a PERSON. And I NEVER have to guess if the developer/administrator is messing with his/her rules whatsoever.
I know from conversations on this site that most of the developers here wouldn’t think of (1) mechanizing their systems (or even know how to) and (2) turning over the code for that product to Customers who want to buy it.
So - for me, your interest in ferreting out developers who are cheating, etc. is mis-guided and doomed to failure. Unfortunately, you are not looking at the problem in the correct angle (with all due respect).
Until such time that a Customer can buy the code from a Vendor, these inherent problems will ALWAYS exist and there are NO guarantees that people will not abuse their promises or any rules that are established.
My2cents.
Skip
Kevin,
I too, am a work in progress. I am just glad to have your response again!
Gilbert
Gil -
You had my attention for as long as it took me to type out responses in 2 threads asking you very politely to post like a responsible person.
Maybe if you change your ways I’ll take you off “ignore.”
(I apologize to everyone else for having to post this).
Skip why don’t you put your $5,000 signal on C2?
It’s Proprietary and I signed a Confidentiality Agreement not to reveal it to anyone as a condition of buying it. When you are asking that kind of money for something and you expect to only sell a finite number of subscriptions, it is not unreasonable to demand that from Customers.
As a Customer - and as a businessman - I get that and I agreed to it. I know not everyone else might remain so honest but that is how I approach Life.
Skip
I don’t have much to say. It ran down more than I was prepared for, and when it looked to bounce I bought 20 more, and put a stop in for the whole amount. I don’t think this is the same as my other “blow ups,” but I’m sure Beau will have something nifty to come back with. I will make it back, I have no doubts.
Craig
Been pulling for you since you came to C2 Craig. Your potential has been easy to see. You do one hell of a job for someone who does the drawdown thing sometimes. But you have gotten better at letting them go. You should bring it back without trouble unless you do a couple repeats. Thats up to you. And something appears to happening right now, be carefull.
Thanks Futurm.
No, people should be able to look and see he’s into blowing up accounts. Every single one, no fail. There’s nothing new for craig, beside overleveraging, and blowing up. This is very obvious given the number of system.
Craig should be on everyone’s black list.
This coming from a guy that talks a great game, but hasn’t made a system yet that’s made any decent money.
