I'm not sure how we ended up arguing about scale, but it is an interesting business decision. The old joke (Not funny one) was, a friend walks up to you and say he has an investment where you can get three times your investment in a year. You say I'm in, and he then asks for $1. Of course no one really cares about giving someone $1 to get $3 back in a year if that is all you can invest. I did a case study on a company in Grad school. I do not remember which conglomerate it was, but they would entertain any business pitch from any employee where they could invest a minimum of $1mm and get a 17% return. They are happy to have hundreds of products as long as get receive no less than 17% on their investment. We all have to make the same choices when we trade. Before 2010, when I was trading full time, I set up a pairs trade to buy CBS.A and Short CBS.B. The "A" does not trade often, but I was able to buy it for a discount to the "B" . On average about $0.04. So how much time would I bill willing to put in if on an average day I might not buy 100 shares? Because it was automated, I set that up every day. If it were manual, I would have passed. I assume big firms did not care because of the low value. Over the course of 9 months, I did about 200,000 shares long/short. when I could not sell it out for $0.04 credit, I converted A to B. Most of that volume was over one month. Bob
My, admittedly limited experience, tells me otherwise. I assume for same reason you don't see people investing in below operations. We'll just agree to disagree, no big deal.
Ask for Rod at C2. Great guy to work with. We set up our methods there as well: https://automatedtrading.optimusfutures.com/
So your idea of monetizing is to pay monthly fees to paper trade your strategies? Do you have any stats you can share? Maybe people on this forum will get interested. You can send email to these guys, I have received solicitations to use their platform. Not a recommendation, just a possible alternative. http://systematic-strategies.com/