Myths

[Gamma_Jammer]

I can see one glaring problem with trading off the results of black box signal providers (even including the likes of James who, as far as I can tell is both knowledgeable and perfectly well intentioned), and it's this;

Traders taking these signals are almost certainly going to fall into one of two categories...

i) New traders with no understanding of their chosen market and no real idea of what they want, except that they would quite like a few hundred risk free pips a month.

2) Traders with more experience and therefore some idea of what they find works and what doesnt.

Admittedly these are pretty broad categories but you get the picture.

In the case of the 'newbies', they are likely to struggle to stick to the system if it starts having a losing streak, as they won't really understand what's going on.

In the case of the older hands, there will always be an entirely human tendancy to tinker with the trading to incorporate things they have learned etc (I for example would be loath to sell if an instrument is hovering above a major moving average - 200 day etc).

But these systems generally seem to be optimised to rely on a trader following them to the letter. That's all well and good, but when you're live trading, with your own money, and you have no idea why the system has just given you a buy signal, and the market's ticking down towards your stop, frankly where's your belief in the trade going to come from. I firmly believe that you have to do your own homework.

[James]

I am quite prepared to tell clients exactly why I am taking the trade - there is not secret formula in my trading style. In fact I used to have a trading chat room which I used more for teaching than anything else. I don't have the time for that now, but I am still quite open about exactly why I take each trade. It is normally companies with secret "formulae" (usually no more than a few moving averages) which deny their clients the both the ability to learn and the chance to preserve their capital. I think it is these companies you might be referring to more than mine? In any event, there is a market for signal providers, depsite the fact that many, if not most, are scams. I used Max Mckegg for a year when I started trading, and found the service instructive, confidence boosting and profitable. I still correspond with Max regularly, and we share ideas. I also get daily opnions from two other advisors. I don't take their trades, but do take their ideas, levels and strategies into consideration. Likewise, I have about 7 Forex hedge funds on my client list.

[autofx]

jsoft

There are no headaches with a signal service where the
signals are computer generated. Easiest thing in the world,
once the technology has been developed and tested.

You say the Microsoft example is "way irrelevant", but I see
no arguments for that statement.

[jsoft]

Originally posted by autofx
jsoft
There are no headaches with a signal service where the
signals are computer generated. Easiest thing in the world,
once the technology has been developed and tested.

Yes, if it runs completely automated, I suppose it helps. However, what I meant is the billing and support issues while dealing with few hundred subscribers. There is always ones who are not happy, ones asking to backup your trades or asking for refund.

The point I've made was that it may be justified for somebody with the limited income, but some money manager, making high five figure monthly income. Ultimatelly, it all comes to the time we have.

Originally posted by autofx
You say the Microsoft example is "way irrelevant", but I see
no arguments for that statement.

Mainly because Microsoft doesn't have to do it, while for most "signal providers" it puts bread on the table. You may argue as much as you want, but very few signal providers trade or have ever traded for the living and are adding "an additional stream of income".

[autofx]

You may argue as much as you want, but very few signal providers trade or have ever traded for the living and are adding "an additional stream of income".

So I think what you're telling us is, you know me and other
signal providers personally, and are aware of how well we
trade, the size of our bank accounts and the sizes of the houses
we live in, etc.

Oh, and your business acumen is so astute that you are able
to tell us whether our business cases make sense or not.

How would we ever manage without you setting us straight?

[jsoft]

Originally posted by autofx

So I think what you're telling us is, you know me and other
signal providers personally, and are aware of how well we
trade, the size of our bank accounts and the sizes of the houses
we live in, etc.

Why you're so sensitive anyway? I apologize if I've offended you, because that was never my intention.

As the matter of fact I do know many providers personally, obviously I can't know all of them. However the pattern tend to repeat itself.

Also I know many fund managers personally and they aren't looking for such "an additional stream of income". Mainly, because they business focus is on the trading and it provides them with more than sufficient income.

My business acumen has nothing to do with it - it is all common sense. If it is different in your particular case, why won't you tell us the facts, instead of launching the personal attack?

Originally posted by autofx

Oh, and your business acumen is so astute that you are able
to tell us whether our business cases make sense or not.

Take it easy - you've missed my point. What I said was that seling $100/month signals doesn't make business sense for one making 100k+/month from the trading. So yes, it does make business sense for most signal providers.

[autofx]

Where is the personal attack?

I'm simply challenging your statements. So far, I see nothing that
refutes my original points effectively.

Do the arithmetic on $100/month/subscriber times
1,000 subscribers. Or 2,000 and up, for that matter. It costs
virtually nothing to add new e-mail addresses to a
distribution list. So, you add more income for nothing spent
and with very little effort or hassle. I think most businessmen
would believe such a venture is very worthwhile.

If you don't see that, you're the one who lacks common sense.

And consider this: Jim Cramer, who has a net worth in the
nine figures, has his "Action Alerts" service, which is in the
category of service we are talking about.

Why do you think he does it?

Maybe you don't know what you're talking about.

[jsoft]

Originally posted by autofx
Where is the personal attack?

First, you've used an abusive tone. As for the actual quotes, please find just the few below:

"Oh, and your business acumen is so astute that you are able
to tell us whether our business cases make sense or not."

"How would we ever manage without you setting us straight?"

Obviously all I did I've expressed my own opinion and this is what this forum is about. I understand you didn't like it so I've offered you the change to clearify your case, by providing the facts. Fair?