I think the money itself is that important. I look at the %, and if you do that, it really doesn't matter if the starting capital is 10K or 100K. Also they might aim at small investors. Either way, the traders can show money management with 10K just as well as with 100K. What I didn't like about the site was that it is so new, that they don't have enough traders. Half of the systems are traded by Stock_picker77, or whom. Also it is hard to go by 2 months published record. Maybe 6 months from now they will have better records and more traders. One plus was that they show the number of subcribers. But they also need a big board with all the systems on one page...
Pekelo, These are good comments. I would greatly appreciate it if you and others could pass these comments on to the site developer. I offer systems at this site, and am discouraged at the overall interest by prospective subscribers. I know the site is still new, and 2 or 3 months of history aren't really enough to gauge a system, but there is even a lack of people who simply want to sign up for free and watch 2 or 3 systems. He could do a lot more with the site, and some constructive comments might help. Brian
The starting capital matters a great deal. If I am holding diversified positions in a portfolio and trading with any degree of frequency, commissions and slippage as a percentage of capital are much different if I'm trading 10K or 100K. Further, any serious system developer who is going to be worth subscribing to isn't going to want to deal with 10K, just as a matter of principal. So the guy is going to be attracting a bunch of wannbees, who in turn aren't going to attract the subscribers that are at the heart of his business plan. Someday, someone is going to get this idea right. But both this site and Collective2 have a long way to go before I'd take the time to post to them. For credibility, I'd think that an outfit like WealthLab or Tradestation would be a good candidate to start a similar site.
I think this is a big misconception at both Collective2 and at Traderscue. Collective2 starts everyone at 100k. Obviously, not everyone has 100k to start trading with. But this figure is set just for the sake of being able to compare apples to apples. If someone only has 50k to start with he can simply pro-rate the number of shares/contracts to fit his own situation. The same holds true at traderscue. But you're right - each site has its shortcomings. And maybe someday, someone will get it right. It sounds like an opportunity to me.
Thanks. I am not interested in that site anymore, so I am not going to contact the siteowner, but feel free to copy my post and send it to him. The other big problem is what they trade, which is stocks. Unless someone picks up and coming stocks, they are not the fastest investment vehicle so they need time to get a decent result. And even then, because of diversification the result will be deluded, unless one puts everything in a single basket, but that system will be avoided by subscribers because of risk aversion. About the money management part. A site could offer 10K, 100K or even a million to trade. Chances are that the subscriber is not trading that EXACT amount whatever the trader is playing with, so a conversion ratio is needed anyway. Because of this, it doesn't really matter what the original capital is, but I personally prefer 100K. As a disclaimer, I have a system on collective2, and even that I know several problems with the site, so far I haven't found anything better in its category...
I should say that I also have systems at Collective2. I agree that this is a better site right now. But currently I am using stocks as my investment vehicle, so traderscue could be a better fit. In the future I plan to grow into options, and possibly Forex. But I need far more education in these instruments before I'll seriously trade them. Brian
I find the "pay by profitable trade" interesting. I remember looking at this site months ago, but I didn't remember seeing that payment option. Just quickly thinking that if one had a system for "sale" there - using the pay by profitable trade option - it would amount to basically trading without any risk. Your only out of pocket cost would be the $98 to host the system.
Wow. I just had the time to take a look at the "traderscue" website. That place looks like a ghost town compare to collective2. The one thing I do like about traderscue is that they show the number of subscribers to each system - something that collective2 does not do. Unfortunately, the total number of subscribers for the 7 pages of system is a whopping zero. And that's what I wonder about collective2. I "looks" busier, but I really wonder how many actual paying customers there are. I'm also curious as to why most vendors select the fixed price per month fee instead of the pay by profitable trade fee structure. What am I missing here? Woudln't the pay by profitable trade be the safest for potential customers and more profitable overall for the vendor?
Dont forget the 30% cut into whatever you charge your subscribers, and you have to pay tax on the balance.