hard to say. I suspect the cost is minimal for a test system. After all, most things are automated, and how much bandwidth & storage does a few months of one small trader cost? It is mostly a little text and data.
Besides, I think it would be a cheap way to get new customers and C2 exposure to brokers, who might like a reasonably sophisticated test account and the C2 systems. More eyeballs would also help vendors.
"And if Dom got in with some kind, why couldn’t he get out with the same???"
I don’t understand that either.
I would agree in an ideal world the ‘symbol help’ page could be a bit more user friendly, I think it is currently loosely ordered by symbol, but this in itself is not particularly helpful as the reason you’re looking at the page in the first place is because you don’t know the symbol! Alphabetical by contract name would be more useful or better still by asset class then alphabetical so then all bonds or currencies are grouped together, energy, softs, metals etc…
Your approach is like a surgeon who says to a patient "I’m going forward with your surgery even though our heart-lung machine shut down unexpectedly a couple of times last week. But hey, it was the manufacturers error, so don’t blame me."
I think you should understand that people (not me) are supposed to trade your signals with real money. I think first and foremost your concern should be with those people. I am stunned that you continued a system on C2 while you were encountering problems with its execution on an almost daily basis. Even in the case were you are not responsible for these problems, you should still care about your subscribers’ money. I’d advise you to discontinue your public system, start a test system to which no one can subscribe, and start selling it again as soon as its orders have been executed for a prolonged period without any problems or glitches.
What am I missing? I only see the one copper symbol in C2. Can
you enter and exit that one symbol? If so, why is it C2’s fault
you are still in?
If you read my post carefully, you will notice I’m not accusing you of anything. I just said I am stunned by the fact that you continued a system that had so many glitches, irrespective of who’s at fault. I also gave you free advice, and as with any free advice you should feel free to ignore it entirely.
I am not complaining either as you suggest, as I have no reason to complain about something that doesn’t really affect me.
I have already suggested to C2 (in your favor) to give every vendor a free test system.
Matthew -
Symbols helps says:
"If you don’t see below a contract that you want to trade, let me know and I’ll add it for you."
Sam & Co. -
In the past Matthew worked to correct problems Dom had with other commodities (according to Dom there were many problems). This time Matthew didn’t cooperate. Without knowing what exchanges Dom had with Matthew or Dom had with his subscribers it is difficult to judge Dom’s actions.
As for why he opened more copper contracts instead of closing them I suspect Dom tried to repair the damage to his record on his own. He was acting like a fish out of water. He was no longer following his pattern based system and started to get into more and more trouble. I’m sure most traders have been in the wrong trade for the wrong reasons. Hopefully this isn’t a sign of how he trades this particular system. i.e. averaging down…
In the past Matthew worked to correct problems Dom had with other commodities (according to Dom there were many problems).
That was exactly my point. The majority of vendors don’t experience many problems (perhaps just an occasional quote feed failure). If a vendor experiences many problems it indicates C2’s technology is not ripe yet for that kind of a system. In such a case I would have a lot more respect for a vendor who would temporarily suspend trading, work out each and every issue with C2, and then only continue when he’s 100% sure that C2 offers all the infrastructure for his particular style of trading.
Domenico - Don’t take anything Science Trader says seriously. By now it should be obvious to you his only goal is to create more chaos and confusion all around, while serving up bad suggestions for his own personal entertainment.
> This time Matthew didn’t cooperate. Without knowing what exchanges Dom had with Matthew or Dom had with his subscribers it is difficult to judge Dom’s actions.
Before putting on a trade it is the trader’s responsibility to understand
the contract (or C2’s version) before he trades it. Say that three times
over if you are responsible for OPM.
> As for why he opened more copper contracts instead of closing them I suspect Dom tried to repair the damage to his record on his own. He was acting like a fish out of water. He was no longer following his pattern based system and started to get into more and more trouble.
IOW, he panicked. Right?
I don’t want people who panic trading for me.
Once again: It’s not clear to me why the fact that you can’t trade copper on the electronic exchanges forced you to keep adding to your losing copper position until you lost everything. You could have closed your copper position at any time.
But you gambled, and you lost, and now - as usual - you blame C2.
On any given trading platform, some contracts and exchanges are supported; some are not. That’s the way trading works.
Professional traders don’t call up Ameritrade and complain that they lost money because they were unable to trade over-the-counter derivatives using Ameritrade’s platform. They understand that some instruments are tradable and some aren’t.
Stop blaming C2 for your trading incompetence. You made a bad bet. You lost. The results speak for themselves.
As an aside to everyone reading this: I usually ignore public criticism of this site, because it comes with the territory. Indeed, often it’s useful, and helps improve the site. But in this case I refuse to allow this absurd claim – that Domenic’s not being able to trade a particular symbol caused his reckless trading – to remain unanswered.
Dom understands the contracts but obviously didn’t understand C2s peculiar implementation. This is one of the drawbacks of using high leverage. When a mistake is made regardless of who is at fault then serious damage to an account can be done. TLA.
He either panicked or went into an average down trading style to recuperate his losses.
Steve
"As for why he opened more copper contracts instead of closing them I suspect Dom tried to repair the damage to his record on his own. He was acting like a fish out of water. He was no longer following his pattern based system and started to get into more and more trouble. I’m sure most traders have been in the wrong trade for the wrong reasons. Hopefully this isn’t a sign of how he trades this particular system. i.e. averaging down…"
I suspect that you are suspecting wrongly. Have a carefull look at Dom’s past trades and you will see that averaging down belongs to his trading style. In the past it turned out fine but this time not.
I would like to mention that a priori I have nothing against averaging down. I just wnat to clarify that your suspicion wrong is.
I love the comedy of absurd lol
Chorus: “domenico laruccia why you didn’t close the trade? why? why? why? why? why?” lol
as of rest I think it was explained few times for domenico laruccia and it’s definitely the system vendor fault, not C2.
One thing that I’d like to add. Even if you domenico laruccia a customer, C2 cannot allow falsification of trades by your desire. It will immediately destroy the business with first sign of the falsifications. You were able to enter a trade, you’re able to exit it. You didn’t. Period. All other words about poor system vendor who cannot provide the same pritability to his subscribers as in his “reality”, because bad, bad, very bad C2 (Gosh. C2 isn’t even reality 
) are just lame excuse from my point of view.
Eu
Domenico,
I read all your posts carefully and I still don’t understand your point regarding that copper trade. The main reason why I still try to understand is that Steve seems to agree with you, although even he doesn’t know why you didn’t close that copper trade.
Is this a language problem? Let’s for a moment put aside all the moralism about who is responsible or not. Can you explain what happened according to you by chosing from these description (more than one choice allowed, and also allowed to add another short description)?
1. You wanted to open a position in an electronic traded contract but you got a pit traded contract even though you didn’t want that.
2. You wanted to open an electronic traded contract, but you discovered that this wasn’t possible and then you opened a pit traded contract.
3.You wanted to open the position, and you entered the signal, but your order was executed wrongly.
4.You wanted to close the position, and you entered the signal, but your order was executed wrongly.
Jules (& others) - you are correct about copper. From what I see, Dom has no gripe. The more he talks, the less I see his point. It is difficult to fathom, since as an open trade, it is hidden from view.
People complain that C2 should offer everything. Should MK add Mumbai (India) futures contracts? Rubber? Mainland China futures markets? Pakistan? Filipino whale shark egg case futures? Maybe add Tiger shrimp? Some electronic and some pit traded contracts have pitiful volume. Maybe add UBS, Lehman or Goldman-Sachs internal baskets and hedges for their Wealth Management customers? How about options on moon rock futures?
MK picks his markets. There is only so many things that a website can effectively manage. He does an excellent job, considering there is nothing else out there like C2. The number of things traded expands faster than he could keep up. Is it necessary to have every copper instrument on every exchange? LME? Others?
Frankly,
> Chorus: “domenico laruccia why you didn’t close the trade? why? why? why? why? why?” lol
Not exactly: “why do you blame C2 when you (Dom) didn’t close the trade”?
> One thing that I’d like to add. Even if you domenico laruccia a customer, C2 cannot allow falsification of trades by your desire.
EXACTLY! We agree! What can C2 do in this case once Dom is in the trade? Add an E-HG contract and let Dom exit the P-HG position
via that? No: any changes intra-trade would amount to a falsification of
Dom’s track record.
> People complain that C2 should offer everything.
MK must draw the line somewhere, and even if he offers "everything"
today, there will be something else tomorrow. Moreover, traders must
ask questions first and trade later: it is insane to want a contract changed intra-trade like Steve and Dom suggest.
That said I do think the e-copper should be added. And I do think symbol help could be reorganized into a more intuitive and organized layout.
As an example Wheat, e-Wheat, and mini-Wheat are under “W”. Kansas Wheat is under “K”. @ES is on the top, SP is under S, and @ NQ is under N. XG (DAX) is between @QM (Crude) and CT (Cotton). Sorry MK, some of this doesn’t make sense. I can see why you want to have popular stuff like @es in an easy to find place, but then relist those items alphabetically and/or by category.
"I already full explained."
Yes, you are a barking moonbat!
> Guys I’m nto going to answer anymore, I 'l close this trades with within 5 to 15K profit …
Good for you and good luck. I wish I knew with such certainty where copper (or anything) was going.
Do yourself and your readers a favor:
http://www.google.com/support/toolbar/bin/static.py?page=features.html
http://www.wikihow.com/Install-a-Spell-Checker-Into-Firefox
http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/toolbar/FT3/intl/en/
