Domenic Martino
To some degree I also think the current c2 “Pay Performance” billing methodology is disadvantageous for subscribers.
I don’t see how.
In other words subscribers are still charged under “Pay For Performance” even though their account is in a loss.
Correct if we’re speaking about few months DD with attempt to rebound. However flat fee system will charge a subscriber with total disregarding of current situation. So in general it means “sell a hope” 
I think that a fair “Pay For Performance” billing scheme is to create a “watermark” where profits are calculated and this watermark must be surpassed before any future profits may again be calculated.
I’m totally agree. Hight watermark model is known business model and useful for measuring a performance. There were few discussions about implementing the model. I pinged MK privately, because I don’t like current “Pay per performance” model, but so far nothing was done, unfortunately 
Science Trader
I think the idea is interesting, but it should combine a high performance floor with a high fee. Not–as in your case–a low performance floor with a low fee.
Correct. Few months ago I offered on the forum “discount” payment model that is legit in the states. Just search by word “discount”.
Si Nguyen
I’m always scared when somebody start to “guarantee” a profit
Eu
Eu,
As I said in the previous post, our +200 pips per month guarantee is very similar to the other Pay for performance" systems at C2. The only different is our subscribers only pay us if our system make at least 200 pips while they have to pay for other system(s) if the other system(s) make at least $1. We dont guarantee (or promise) that our subscribers will make 200 pips every month for sure. We only said that if our system fell to make at least 200 pips per month, our subscribers dont have to pay us.
The guarantee itself does not necessary good or bad. Its how people look at it that make the different. You may not like it because you think that it is a marketing trick or because this offer is better than your regular Pay for performance" offer but most people after they do their homeworks (check, learn and compare the Statistics of different systems) like our offer better because they know that with our system they only have to paid for the subscrption fee AFTER THEY HAVE MAKE AT LEAST 5 TIMES the subscrption fee rather than paid more than $100 in subscrption fee for the system that may only help them get a few dollars in that month.
Thanks for your comment!
Si Nguyen
That isn’t the case, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. I have no desire to “look good.” And the only ones who get “run down” are thieves, schemers, and those who like to pick the pockets of newer traders via pumping their system to look better than it really is.
2Si Nguyen
I think that high watermark model of payments will resolve your desire for having happy subscribers. There isn’t any need for reinventing something. There exists “time proven” business solutions. I hope that if enough system vendors will vote/request high watermark model of payments it’ll be implemented at C2. So far I didn’t have any support from system vendors for the implementations of the kind of payment model. Simply, they aren’t interested in fair game as I understand
Eu
@ Ross: Most people are smarter nowaday so I dont think that you will get many more subscribers by pumping your system to look better than it really is. Time will tell who are the true successful traders, thieves, schemers or lossers.
@ Everyones: I think we have too many off topic posts on this thread so I hope that we can stop the unnecessary posts now.
Thanks!
so I hope that we can stop the unnecessary posts now.
So… You don’t support high water mark business model? Well, majority of C2’s system vendors don’t support the model as well lol
Eu
Eu,
I think you misunderstood my opinion about the water mark business model. Please re-read the post I reply to Domenic on 5/13/07 at 0:19 am up there and you will see that I am TOTALLY support this model.
Si Nguyen
I think you misunderstood my opinion about the water mark business model.
Probably. So please join to my vote for high water mark payment model All the cheap gifts from system vendor means nothing. Excuse me, for the cynical point of view.
Eu
Eu,
No problem! How do I vote for this high water mark payment model?
Si Nguyen
How do I vote for this high water mark payment model?
You can try submit your voice to coll2 at collective2.com. It’s useless, but you might try.
Eu
P.S. I’m pinging for high water mark model last 6-7 months. Nobody cares
I just sent the suggestion for the water mark model to the email you gave me above. Let’s hope Matthew will have the time to look at it soon 
I just sent the suggestion for the water mark model to the email you gave me above.
Well… thank you. At least you aren’t trying to fake. Unfortunately I had bad experience with C2’s vendors about the business model. As I understand they prefer to collect fees and gosh(!) never risk a profit of the collection. Bastards. Do I have to say that the guys aren’t in the market? Sad story about impotents at the market, but they can give a lot of garbage out. A lot of garbage lol
I don’t think that water mark will be realized in near future at C2. However we’ve tried some kind of fair game.
Eu
you apparently didn’t understand my post, and I don’t allow any subscribers, so as I said, Richard is just weird, and I repeat the content of my previous 1-2 posts.
The only off topic is when people butt in with stupid side comments aka Mr. Haines
