True, the discussion is getting pretty pointless very fast. I was just saying it could be done. So many scams out there...
Yes it is mostly a masturbatory exercise, I agree. But still, like i said, it's just an idea and not a very good one, I admit. I feel there are lots of scams in the industry, and others might be prepared to do it. If not with algos, then with discretionary trading. Yes, those communications are legally required to be disclosed, but the internal decision making is not. I mentioned the SEC because they failed many times before to prevent scams much worse than this one. Also it's a fact they're underpaid, and underpaid regulartors in a well financed industry historically weren't all that honest. Never mind, it's all pretty silly, I didnt mean to be taken too seriously, so please don't.
Speaking of c2, does anyone else find this page kind of.... weird? (I know they are trying to be funny... but if I were a potential subscriber who puts my money at risk - I'd feel a little odd about it) http://www.collective2.com/static/people.htm#
Didn't see it before! I don't find it weird, just kinda funny really. The platform designers aren't that important, i'm more concerned with how weird the signal providers are. The C2 guys just relay stuff. Last time i used a system i had this guy (system admin) constantly mention "God" in his messages. I later asked him about how he gets his signals. He quickly concluded he "puts his trust in god" and went on to talk about the good jesus christ son and so on. His system experienced a -39% drawdown a few weeks later and was dead. Luckily i got out before then.
I don't know about that... the C2 guys are in a far better position to run a scam than any of the signal contributors. In any case, my personal opinion is that the whole C2 scheme is brain dead: systematic trading sourced from amateur signal developers with no skin in the game (I think) and certainly no verifiable experience ... doesn't pass my personal smell test.
Well, it doesn't stop certain ET members from claiming C2 as hardcore trading experience, and then crowing about it. There's one in particular whose ROI was 4.7% in 2010, but he claims that he's "the best in the world at what he does". It is a brilliant business idea in some respects, but there is a disturbing aspect developing: that 'highly rated' systems on the C2 site are being slammed in third party blogs as being losers. The other piece is the fiduciary responsibility for the website owner; I personally have my misgivings that the boilerplate legalese would withstand regulatory scrutiny or a lawsuit for that matter. C2 tries damned hard not to be a registered Introducing Broker, or any other real regulated or registered agent or operator for that matter. Sounds cool, smells fishy.
I think possibly a better idea would be to convince some people that you are a good trader, then take their money, convince some more people that you are killing it, then take their money and give some of it to the first people, take a little of it, and convince more people, accept their money and give some of it to the first and second people, take a little of it, and keep going like that. This has been shown to work, but you have to be really good at shovelling cowpie. And you have to get some nice suits and a flashy car and such so you can sell it. There are downsides also...
Hi, Bone: Actually, Collective2 tries damned hard to <u>be</u> a registered entity. We are formally an NFA member and a CTA, and we also have a separate affiliated entity that, in addition to being an NFA member, is also an independent Introducing Broker. We work very hard to comply with all appropriate regulatory and compliance frameworks. - Matthew Klein (Collective2)
Is that the fella who actually has webpages where he purports to be a registered investment advisor? .... (nevermind one can check such things easily at the SEC's website... and the SEC doesn't look kindly on such violations)