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.
One guy sent me private message around a month ago offering his system. He got 64% in almost three weeks and was claiming that he got 10 subs already, that was true. The price was 500$/mo. I’ve rejected an offer , but started simulation.
System description was changed and his web site went private now, but it was a funny statements that he doesn’t think and talk about drawdowns since when drawdown is more than 10% he is getting nervous. Not exact wording, but the meaning is the same.
He has huge number of followers in auto-trade mode now.
The only question that I have is why people pays 500$/mo for this?
Is it a special strategy used for such pump-and-dump systems? Like jump in early, hope hard and jump out quick?
Things like this make me wonder what I am doing wrong. I feel like I have decent strategies, but am fine waiting for a year track record to get subs. I would wait a year before subscribing to almost anything. So, I respect that. However, when I see someone like this with a $500/m system getting subs and I am charging only $50 and have only a handful of consistent subs, I wonder if higher fees actually attract more subs. I guess he did have a much higher flyer than me, but still I wonder if lower fees doesn’t actually help.
So disappointing to see this. I just hope he never made false promises to subscribers about his methods. If he told them all that the risk management could lead to very large draw down and they sub then that is fine, but neglecting the conversation of risk control and being a sales man instead of a trader just to lure subs in at a very expensive price is not right.
The name of the strategy was oringally AMMA and then he changed it to AggressiveTrader. I was spammed too and tried to lure me in. My rule is now to never subscribe unless there is at least 6 months track record. Then the next rules kick in such as what is the biggest win/loss and win/loss ratio and drawdown etc. But most of these high flyers never make it past 2 months! lol…
Its obvious the reason for the developer to charge that much but its also greed that subscribers subscribe to such a strategy without a longer historical track record. I personally think C2 should put in a ‘training mode’ rule where the developer should not be allowed to charge that much so early…lol…but I doubt that will happen.
@MrHH pointed out the system name correctly. I was trying to start some general discussion, not related to this particular system.
I have the same thoughts, but from subscribers side. Maybe I am doing something wrong waiting for a year of systems performance. In the subscribers list I’ve seen the guys which subscribe for such type of systems almost every time the system appears, and I was wondering if they can put couple statements here. I don’t think that they are losing money constantly, so the certain way to get income from these high flyers exists.
Yes. I would love it if subscribers AND developers make money but its unfortunate that when investors pay for expensive systems they should have some assurance the systems come as advertised. When investors have to pay for high subscriptions and then risk their capital its a lose lose scenario for them.
Its probably advertising for speculators for quick riches…lol. The developer had a short track record and huge returns for a short period of time. I believe this system in particular is based on the average down theory and the assumption the markets will most of the time retrace. During those steep drawdowns the system averaged down a losing trade hoping it would retrace. In a trending market that logic will get wiped out. And thus, that huge move up yesterday caused the huge loss yesterday for the system. These systems will eventually lose subscribers or the subscribers will scaled down but when they scale down the high monthly fee is not worth it. Just advertise a little more but be patient and produce a track record then it will sell itself. Just my opinion…
This is an interesting topic and you have to wonder if the often quoted statistic of traders failing 90% of the time(or more) is universally true and what we are observing here on C2.
I stopped paying the listing fee on my system because there were no subscribers after 9 months. The system is robust and works very well over the long-term. That does not seem to matter much on C2 because very few followers are interested in long-term performance.
It makes sense for me to find a different venue for my systems instead of trying to compete against the short-term high risk systems that are so popular on C2.
This venue serves a useful purpose because a live track record that is independently verified keeps us all honest. Unfortunately, (pun intended) the lessons to be learned here are falling on deaf ears.
I agree but most developers at C2 are starting out and have no funds or clients to trade live accounts for otherwise they won’t be here and managing their own clients. For beginning fund managers they should produce a winning track record for at least 6 months to a year before charging huge subscription fees. If they want subscribers early they should charge a nominal fee based on their early performance. Its a supply and demand situation here at C2 just like the trading markets…lol
If you don’t want to compete with high-fliers, then you need to extend your track record at least for year, even more, and start your competition with the long-term robust systems. You will find subs looking for robust long-term systems, but only if your system will be better then, lets say Antares or SystematicBlue or the Momentum of Now.
I agree with the above poster. 9 months is not long enough to wait for systems with lower, safer return. SystematicBlue didn’t get its first real paying subscriber until it had traded for 5 quarters.
Either you have very exciting returns that can get subscribers quickly, or you accept that you must take the time to build a track record for the (IMO more sophisticated) subscribers looking for more depth.
There is no special strategy that can be predicted to yield well in the beginning. It´s like tossing a coin. Predicting the outcome of a system in the short term equals predicting the market in the short term. You´ll have a chance to get it right but a number of times you´ll be wrong and lose everything, considering the leverage.
But if buy&hope is your thing then just invest 100% in XIV or SVXY. You´ll get nice returns in no time until ***t hits the fan. At least you don´t have to pay 500 bucks per month this way. That price is rediculous…
Several years ago I was trying to develop robust algo. I’ve ended up developed several tens of strategies, which were able to survive 1-2-3 months after start of the trading. They call such strategies curve-fitted strategies. Maybe I need to do that exercise again and sell that strategies here for 300$/mo.
And if the strategy breaks, then I need to say that it goes to test mode, make it free, optimize it again and than start this cycle from the beginning.
, but started simulation.
Maybe I am doing something wrong waiting for a year of systems performance. In the subscribers list I’ve seen the guys which subscribe for such type of systems almost every time the system appears, and I was wondering if they can put couple statements here. 
