RIP Collective?

So strategies on here have always been 90% crap… Because of a lack of Forced TOS and vetting. These are some things I think will help will Mathew listen, given his track record probably not, at least he can’t have the excuse of I didn’t know, or nobody told me so.

Sub side of things:

  1. All strategies have to be TOS
  2. Free 6 month vetting record before they are released to subs

Developer side of things:

  1. No fees , x split 50/50 40/50 whatever maximum 50/50
  2. With fees maximum option should be 100% profits whether they come from collective or your own site.

What the above will accomplish is more trust in the systems from subscribers hence more money flowing to developers.

The above also draws more competent honest developers given that they can actually make meaningful profits, and not dish out insane amount of fees where it’s not even worth while anymore.

Hence why I’m closing my newly started strategies that actually survived the Feb slaughter and actually profited from it, imagine if collective had more developers with these kinds of robust strategies, where instead of bleeding Subs in Feb. they would maintain or gain even more when everyone tells there buddies friends some strategy on collective actually made me X%.

Sadly they won’t as it’s not worth it currently. I might give it a try see what the potential is an experiment but I just would think fees would go up tremendously.

This will probably fall on deaf ears.

Nobody prevents subscribers from using TOS only and waiting for six months before subscribing. As a sub I don’t want collective2 to limit my rights to subscribe to any strategy with any age.


Problem is it off puts a lot of users , as a new person subs gets burned never comes back, instead of subs to a fairly reliable strategy, sticks around.

Main problem is that a lot of users were burned in Feb 2018 with the systems successfully trading for 1 or 2 years before. Just market regime changed. People believed in 100% annually. :frowning:

1 Like

I don’t think C2 will enforce the TOS only for systems since half or more of their revenue may come from that category.

I think for the subs side of things they should concentrate on TOS strategies for the most part and take some risks on NON TOS strategies to a smaller scale too. There have been some decent non TOS strategies.

I don’t think TOS is a guarantee of a system to be profitable but at least it guarantees no gambling.


thing is you want to keep subs around, you don’t want a revolving door of scam sales men, of brining in a few suckers to subscribe for a few months than dumping them for more new bait, it’s not a way to run a business. Yes revenues will go down, but it will climb back up as you build an actual good service and community.

Yup…I think any attempt to improve quality needs to be addressed.

Martingale Like Strategies for YM opening 93 contracts, and getting margin calls, but of course we should allow systems like that here cause they make money through poor souls who’s account they will blow with margin calls if they haven’t already.

The whole business model is attracting the next sucker to blow his account on these horrendous systems, which proven over and over again is not sustainable, eventually you go bankrupt.

Honestly though, I’m pretty sure there will be an investor who loses his shit, and sues collective even with their legalese, pretty sure they are breaking a bunch of fiduciary, ethics, and outright negligence, can’t claim ignorance when anyone with a few brain cells can see that these strategies are highly abusive.

1 Like

Also nobody mentioned the bid/ask price scammers. The equity curves on these systems are fantasy.


“Martingale Like Strategies for YM opening 93 contracts, and getting margin calls, but of course we should allow systems like that here cause they make money through poor souls who’s account they will blow with margin calls if they haven’t already.”

If you are referring to A strategy for YM you are sadly mistaken. Look again. Look deeper before misinforming people on a public forum.


I have been saying the same thing for many weeks. Yes it does fall on deaf ears. I was determined to provide good quality long terms strategies, which I feel is in the best interests of C2, of investors, of all parties in fact. But it seems blatantly obvious - the big elephant in the room - that C2 cannot survive without the fees they keep taking from the 90% fly-by-nights, sub-standard, ‘should be made illegal’, systems which dupe retail investors who often arrive starry eyed to C2 from a google search (‘stock trading systems’ search = C2 appears on page 1 of google results). Anyway, long story short, I have (like many good trade leaders with good intentions) have been completely de-motivated to stay on C2, and I am closing up shop here - not really bothering with it all. It is a waste of time. And Matthew - bless him - just sounds desperate most of the time - to make this business work (with good intention), full of rationalisations and self-convincing reasoning to fit a square plug into a round hole. Good luck, but ‘distributed hedge fund’. Dream on!


Good bye @tradeLab. With all my respect but you have nothing to show here. Your strategies are flat since june, no TOS which means even you don’t believe in them, price 140$, description “Coming Soon” for 5 months now. I can find better stock strategies cheaper than 140$ with longer record. Nothing to show here from you side, sorry, but this is truth. Matthew will not change it even if he offer C2 services for free.

The only chance is if you position your strategies as long term conservative strategies. Than you need to wait around a year or even more to prove it.

There are a lot of paper traders on C2 and you need to be different from them to make money. It is a high competitive business.