MK - Question


Could you explain what this item means in the subscription area of some systems: Subscriptions cost $xxx at the end of each month, but only if the system has made profitable trades.

On the surface, it reads as if the system makes ANY profitable trades during the month, then you pay the fee. Obviously, this is not what it means

What it seems like it is trying to say is, “only if the system is net positive for the month.” Of course, this also encourages the vendor to practice Hold&Hope with trades towards the end of the month, just to collect the subscription fees.

And of course, is it impressive if the vendor makes $1 ?? Maybe it should be “net positive after subscription fee is deducted.” ?? To the subscriber, that is a losing month.

truthfully, I would love to see a functionality which encourages reasonable Risk:Reward instead (which is the whole point of trading), such as "Only if net positive with reasonable statistics (some minimum threshold as a combination of Sharpe, PF, APD, max DD during month, etc…). Each month would be calculated unto itself. Net positive is a rather Flat Line approach to determining "profitable trades."

The more professional C2 is, the more likely you will attract and retain longterm trader-investors. it is a constant irritant to see a vendor here, who thinks his soaring equity curve with horrible stats means that the stats don’t apply to him. In the professional world, he would be laughed out the door. he will likely be the next flying pink pig…

Just a thought…


I have a similar question along these lines. Since you have access to summary data that system vendors cannot see in aggregate, can you provide a summary analysis of how much “value” the “only if profitable” pricing structure adds? (i.e. how many more subscriptions on average for a comparable system does the profitability guarantee add.)

My system is still “young” but my impression so far is that the “guaranteed profitability” doesn’t add much extra encouragement for someone to subscribe over a flat per month subscription fee (i.e. if a user is truly interested in subscribing, he/she is just as likely to subscribe at a fixed monthly rate as he/she is to subscribe at a profitability guaranteed rate). I note that several of the older systems here at C2 have a flat per month rate; I “assume” that these vendors have learned from experience that the flat rate is best. (I have decided that beginning on April 1st, my system will be set with a flat per month subscription rate too.)

I also appreciate comments from C2 vendors and subscribers regarding this topic. Please post your comments here.




“Excellence Is As EXLENCE Does”

I disagree. I think subscribers like the idea of only paying if profitable, for reasons that should be obvious. I have tried the fixed fee method, free trials, and only if profitable and the one that seems to make everyone comfortable is only if profitable. It’s also helpful if you’re asking for more than the average system, if you’re only charging $50 a month then I dare say it makes little difference, people will pay it regardless, but if you’re charging $250 or more subscribers seem to like the idea that for that extra cost they’re guaranteed they’ll only pay if the system made money, it makes perfect sense and I think it’s very fair all round.

You’re missing the fact that it’s not a calendar month, it’s thirty days from when the subscriber started so if you have enough subscribers it’s pretty hard to game the system by gearing profits towards certain cut-off dates, if you have enough subscribers it’s constant so it doesn’t encourage the behaviour you’re talking about at all.