The opinions expressed in these forums do not represent those of C2, and any discussion of profit/loss
is not indicative of future performance or success.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading. You should therefore carefully consider
whether such trading is suitable for you in light of your financial condition. You should read,
understand, and consider the Risk Disclosure Statement that is provided by your broker
before you consider trading. Most people who trade lose money.
I was wondering about the scaling option. I saw that when a subscriber interested to rescale more he needs to pay an additional amount for this service to C2 and that’s fine.
But my question is if a subscriber decides to rescale for 300% why shouldn’t the strategy leader earn from that? because what is the benefit of rescaling for the strategy leader except his client can earn more ( or lose of course ) and I think that is not fair. in addition, if a client does a 50% scale maybe he should pay half of the subscription fee.
Also, when a subscriber subscribes to a strategy he affects the strategy leader position limit amount ( Future trading ) so while this strategy leader could take another client and trade for them he is limited to 1 person that did the rescale.
I think it is an important point as the strategy leader should benefit from that as well.
This was discussed hundreds of times here. Strategy leaders on C2 sell signals. Increase of scaling doesn’t make signals more profitable, and there is no reason to increase price. It is totally fair price model - subscriber buys signals for fixed price and invest whatever amount he wants.
Yes, I agree. Let’s say you have a meal at Restaurant “A” and it costs $10.00. Now let’s say you go to restaurant “B” and your meal was now $100. You would think that the $100 meal, because it was much more expensive, would be much better. However, you could have gone to a bad restaurant, with horrible service and you still would have paid $100 compared to the first restaurant.
There are strategies that look great, then come crashing down. There are strategies in which you pay $500 monthly subscription fees, and in the end they could perform worse than a strategy with $50 subscription fees.
Not the best analogy, but I hope I made a valid point.
I am aware of a signal providing/execution service firm ( i will not mention it here) where trade leader is not charged at all by the firm and also the trade leader can charge per signal per contract ( it is only for futures) in addition to a monthly fee. As a trade leader this is quite attractive to me. Somehow they have been able to go beyond the regulatory issue that you alluded to. So I am not quite sure why C2 can not do that. ( of course their business model is different and this also might have a say…)
This is right when you compare two different strategies, more expensive doesn’t mean better. But I don’t see any even close relations between your example and request to pay more for scaling. Sorry.
I assume the example is the following - I bought a cake for myself. Then I decided to share it with my friend and baker asked me to pay twice more now. Because the same cake will be eaten by two people. Seems weird, right?
