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.
Now, it looks it is a flat price, no matter how many autotrades the subscribers have. Is this healthy? The answer is no. The C2 differentiates the autotrading fees based on the magnification ratio of the subscribers’ execution. C2 should come up a standard about how the developers charge the subscribers. The factors can be: 1. the ratio of the investment that the subscribers executes. This opens doors for small accounts. This will make it affordable to the small accounts.
2. The performance of the strategy with SP500 as bench mark. It can be annualized.
3. The performance time, longer time, higher fee.
4. The sharp ratio of a strategy.
If C2 does it likes this, what is expected:
More subscriber. A penny is also money.
More reasonable to both the developers and subscribers
This will smooth out the developer’s income. It significantly improve the loyalty of the developers to C2.
It is a good idea to look for mechanisms to involve small investors. That will allow many investors to initially participate with smaller amounts. Platforms need many investors to participate. Only this will guarantee success in the future.
C2 is a publisher, the developers are authors offering their trade signals, and the subscribers pay C2 to read/execute those trade signals as they see fit. Because a subscriber needs not autotrade, there is no reliable way for a developer or C2 to know the scale at which a subscriber is using the signals (eg, on an investment of $10k or of $1000k). So #1 is not feasible or possible, except with autotraders, and I believe #1 is possibly illegal under US law to charge subscribers based on the level of their investment under the current C2-developer arrangement. #2, #3, and #4 are performance based suggestions, and indeed many developers do feel they have the track record that allows them to charge more for a strategy that has higher values for each of those metrics… but suggesting that developers relinquish their ability to set their own pricing and give C2 an override to set their pricing for them? Doubtful, I suspect. Humbly I suggest: feel free to develop your own algorithm for how C2 should set developers’ pricing for their subscription rates (according to your suggestions above), and then use it for your strategies. Perhaps if you publish the algorithm here all the developers will love it and begin using it… job done.
I agree with v1Trader. To permit C2 to “regulate” pricing would stifle pricing creativity that the developer might come up with. Let’s me honest. This is a marketplace where developers are vying for subscribers’ attention. Pricing is part of that process. Frankly, a developer who is innovative (and competitive) in pricing shows that he/she is more business minded than just coming up with a trading algorithm. I like that.
Good points!
Humbly I suggest: feel free to develop your own algorithm for how C2 should set developers’ pricing for their subscription rates (according to your suggestions above), and then use it for your strategies.
This is exactly what I am thinking!
