Quote from oldtime:
talk about opening a can of worms
starting at the end "happy to report we have the technology" weren't those Hitlers exact words after he explained his great solution?
There was a TV show in the late 70's "The Bionic Man" with Lee Majors. The lead-in included a very serious narration, "We can rebuild him. We have the technology." I should probably not use such dated references, (they might not be funny anymore) but what i'm proposing might sound a little like trying to build a bionic man.
Quote from oldtime:
I'd like to get the brokerage contract on this deal.
Didn't we already try that in the tech bubble when everybody signed on and found out we were buying AMZN today?
Oh, i should'v mentioned this would operate on the forex through a variety of forex brokers through a variety of liquidity providers. Theoretically, the liquidity providers are big enough to where they might not notice a change in their profitability if 50,000 accounts were collecting a small pension.
The first to notice a consistently profitable system would be whatever brokerage the robotic portfolio was using. And they may have ways of slowing down the equity curve if it looks like it just won't quit. Dunno. So one way around that would be to use as many brokers as possible.
An extremely profitable system might bother the relationship between a broker and it's liquidity providers. So it just needs to stay underneath the radar. Can't be too greedy.
Quote from oldtime:
I'm with you on the robe and a bowl of rice, that's all I need to be happy (like my girlfriend said, "A roof over your head is also a nice touch.")
Yes, i'm thinking it might work if it's not too greedy. If people stuck with some basics the pensions could have a better chance at sustainability.
Quote from oldtime:
The term "collusion" comes to mind. If it's just GS and JP no big deal, but if it's 50,000 or more independents that could be a problem, especially since they are all small donors if donors at all. I guess the master robot could decide who to pay off.
Yes, the master robot - the central algorithm - could treat some accounts differently. The central algorithm could be distributed on several cloud clients/servers. The individual account holders would not need to know each other.
The central algorithms could be managed by an individual or a group. But even if it was a group, it would be legal. That individual or group would be rewarded for the excellency of their algorithms, their management. They could recieve a % of net profits on a schedule (ie. quarterly). Individual account holders could be trusted to send the agreed upon % to the manager or the management group. In other words, the individual accounts could be just that, someones personal private account with their name on it and their funds in it.
So the kickback method may not be automated if the manager does not have authorization on that account, except to send it signals. To do that, each individual account holder would need his/her own client/server in the cloud, but that would be the "slave", just doing some money management routines that cater to that accounts level of equity and desire for leverage. If there's a trust relationship, the kickback process could be automated, but i don't think that's necessary.
Quote from oldtime:
Will there be an 800 number for those who don't have or don't choose to own a computer? (or better yet a monthly newsletter by snail mail.)
Good idea. Snail mail would allow someone to become a hermit somewhere remote, i guess. Actually, i know of a hermit in south america. He's always somewhere remote, but he also videos himself talking and posts them on youtube because he visits internet cafes. I'm thinking internet access would be the minimal requirement, and should be able to handle all transactions including communication.
I actually did a monthly newsletter one time, back in the late 90's when such things were still mainstream. Mustv been before forums became easy to set up and use, and before most people were online. That clientele was found through paper media. And it was because there was an effort to teach people some things, and track a demo portfolio from month to month. But in this case, the clients don't need to even understand anything about the algorithm processes, and the growth in their equity speaks for itself (news). But i suppose, for a special kind of kickback relationship, someone could be quite disconnected from the internet and still receive a pension.
Depending on where in the world one may be located, one's overhead could be quite low. Where would that be? Dunno. Let's take Philippines for example. Someone could go quite remote, but still be close enough to an internet cafe where they could instruct their forex broker to send X pesos to Y bank so they can go to the local ATM.
If someone wanted to be more independent from the central algorithms and the person or group that handles that, they could learn more about the process and install their own robots on their client/server in the cloud. Then they would have that learning curve and all the management that goes with robots. The central algorithm dependency is for maximizing the efficiency of the management, and to exploit the knowledge and experience that usually only a few are able to accumulate.
Of course, another way to handle accounts would be to set up what's called a PAMM account or something similar. That may be a solution of sorts. What are the advantages of a networked signal sending operation (such as i've proposed)? I'll have to think about that.
