And again we even agreed on that number (since your guess was lower then mine)
The number
isn't the point at all (which is perhaps just as well, given that neither of us knows what it is anyway!

).
We disagree because you imagine (or at least you imply and allege, actually in four or five other threads in addition to this one) that your suspicion that nobody or almost nobody stays with them for as long as a year (about which I think you're right) somehow demonstrates either some kind of "failure" or some kind of "trickery" on their part.
The reality, of course, is
very different: to anyone who actually understands their business model, and knows people who have become successful career-traders through using it, it's very clear that they
wouldn't/couldn't/shouldn't have people staying for as long as that.
But your ceaseless determination to try to find fault with them leads you continually to try (albeit never successfully) to find alleged faults, all of which are actually based on factual misinformation and/or substantial misunderstandings. (And the irony there is that because you're so busily doing that, you actually also fail to criticize the things that really
are problematic about their business!

).
I am going to put you on Ignore for a few weeks so I don't get tempted to respond to this baloney...
I appreciate that that's your right, of course.
Just as I'm sure you appreciate that other members here (including myself, if I choose to) have the right to correct the blatantly prejudiced misinformation that you for ever post here, on this subject.
