collective2

[OddTrader]

Quote from Chood:

Here's the relevant cut and paste from the thread:


. . . 1Do anyone know a good atomized system or preferably an independent site that audit different systems, and compare them like collective2.com and what do you think about this system: http://www.collective2.com/cgi-perl...114229644291876

2Do you have any experience with any system and did it work?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The url you post and ask about purports to audit signals ("Vortex II") from Team Forex, an entity more accurately covered at this url:

http://www.cftc.gov/opa/enf05/opa5126-05.htm

[Note: when cut and paste above, the url the poster put up and asked about loses some embedded address. It directs you to a purported scorecard of Team Forex's Vortex II signals. The scorecard appears on collective2.com. Go to the original post if you prefer and check it from there.]

Thanks Chood.

Quote from Chood:

Team Forex, its Vortex signals, and its leader James de Wet are not unknown to forex forum audiences -- both here, on Moneytec, and on fxstreet.com, which featured de Wet as a fx commentator.

Apparently, from the post in the other thread (forum Forex Trading, "Comparing the stock market with forex"), de Wet's back in action on Collective2.com.

Here's a post from de Wet on Moneytec earlier this year, before the CFTC enforcement action against him and Team Forex:

________________________________

“Until the past two weeks, those of you who have been following the Vortex system for a long period will have gained a great deal of respect for the results and the ease of following. The past two weeks, however, have shown that serious flaws exist in the system and that certain extraordinary market conditions have exposed them. This has lead to large losses which obviously cannot be sustained.

The purpose of this email is three-fold:

Firstly, whilst I cannot take blame for the losses, I do feel very sorry for those of you who have lost much. I know how it feels and I wish I could have prevented it.

Secondly, I am announcing the closure of the Vortex signals for the immediate future. I will be evaluating possibilities going forward, but it would be unwise to continue with the same system in its current form.

Thirdly, I have developed an intra-day system with the following characteristics. a) maximum stops 20 pips, target 30 pips per day on average, trading begins at 6AM CET and continues until the day shows a profit, whereupon we stop for the day, trading 3 ccys only.”

However, this Vortex (II?) system (charging $5 only) was one of the best performing systems listed on C2 for long time until its removal yesterday. Why didn't C2 show the poor performance of Vortex (I?) mentioned?

 

[OddTrader]

Quote from TruthTeller:

It was, and still is, a good idea. But based on my experience with C2 as a "vendor" in the past, they are definitely not ready for prime time. They've had enough time to get it right, and just don't seem to be interested. I get the impression the owner/operator is on a shoe string budget with maybe just himself running the thing. I told him in a recent e-mail that he would do well just to sell it off to someone who could put in some capital and insure that at least the servers weren't rusted and failing every 5 minutes.

Probably he initially underestimated some potential problems that could be caused by Common trading vendors, and he finally has become part of them.

 

[Chood]

Quote from OddTrader:

Thanks Chood.



* * * Why didn't C2 show the poor performance of Vortex (I?) mentioned?

Don't know. I saw collective2.com for the first time only when the other ET member posted the url and asked about it.

My guess, and this is a thought originally aired by another ET member regarding systems in general, is that Vortex signals were successful through 2004 because they basically were dollar shorts. Short the dollar and dress up the calls as a system at a time when anything short dollar worked gloriously. Couldn't miss. Then, when the 2-plus year trend reversed, signals go sour, accounts blow up, and customers get angry -- hello CFTC.

According to some folks on Moneytec who say they bought the signals in late 2004 thru early 2005 -- here, I mean before the $5 per quarter deal for Vortex II -- Team Forex continued to advertise the signals as profitable after actual customer accounts had blown up. I don't know if that is true, but the CFTC alleges in the published enforcement action something along those lines.

 

[LT701]

Quote from John Merchant:

What it means is that you should ignore any advice that you have to pay for. If they are SELLING it to you, it means that it benefits THEM, not YOU. It is axiomatic in this business that the more you pay, the less you get. You want to know how the market works? Figure it out for yourself. The hard way. With time. With losses. With failure. With self-insight. The markets are designed to make YOU wrong, and THEM right. Read Alan Farley's book.

I take it Farley's book is free?

stupid smiley series follows

:eek: