I’d like to propose a very bold “option” for subscriber’s fees - I believe it would benefit both subscribers and vendors alike.
To put it succinctly: charge subscribers a percentage of their cumulative gain - on either a per-trade basis (averages out for losses), per-day, per-week, per-month, etc… We can approach this dynamically and while it might very difficult, to say the least, to automate (about to go way out there), but, as different subscribers are allocating different amounts of capital, perhaps the percentage-take can be adjusted according the scale on which the subscriber is trading the account.
For example - the vendor’s initial account value is 5k and would like to charge 10% of monthly profits. However, say a subscriber scales the account up to 25k, this adjusts his obligations to only 2% . . .savvy?
I know - so many subscribers would be up-in-arms that other subs might be getting a better rate, but let’s be honest; subscription to a system is a privilege (ha.) The competitive factor on C2 would skyrocket. And in any case, the rate doesn’t have to be dynamic - a vendor can charge, 5, 10, 15% of cumulative profits in a certain period… and that’s that.
What say you?
This is not allowed by U.S. regulations. You need to be registered as a CTA or CPO in order to use this business model. Most system developers on C2 are not registered CTAs.
Therefore we only support flat-rate billing based on a per-subscription model – not on any sort of percentage basis (i.e. not percentage of profits, nor percentage of money under management).
Let me suggest a different idea then… for auto-trade there is a “per lot” charge that C2/ the brokers charge for the benefit of auto-trading.
Perhaps you could add an additional “per lot” charge that goes to the system creator? I.E., if someone is trading my system in their brokerage account and they have it set to 500%… then the “per lot charge” is 5x the base rate of (let’s say) $1/lot (or whatever). It would seem that this would be a way to legally reward the system developer. It’s not a “commission” or “percentage”… it’s a "convenience fee."
The easy (and obvious) way to defeat this is to simply not auto-trade and choose to enter the orders yourself… that is anyone’s right, obviously. To that I would suggest allowing system developers to set an “auto-trade” subscription fee and a manual fee… the system developer could set the manual fee higher, to encourage auto-trading.
Or, if you didn’t do the “2 fee” system, and there is still just one fee and the “per mini-lot” charge… I enter orders at all hours of the day and night. Maybe someone doesn’t want to live under the constant pressure of needing to trade at a moment’s notice! Some people with a moderately sized account might choose to go with auto-trade anyway, simply for the convenience… even if it does cost slightly more.
Just a thought!
[LINKSYSTEM_63552492]
