Reply to thread

That's ridiculous.

What?  And charge more if you have a period that performs above the historical system average?  I guess that would be fair.

In my opinion:  A subscription fee should be a fairly small percentage of your portfolio, and it's a cost you choose to pay for information - no different to buying a "charting" program, a subscription to Australian Financial Review or whatever.  You wouldn't hit your data supplier up for the fact that you had a losing period whilst using their price feed?  Being upset about it suggests to me that maybe someone has overextended themselves.

Of course, the model of no pay if losing and pay extra if winning can be fair (as mentioned above) and of course, is how some funds operate (fee for performance type model). 

In my book...as long as the service is honest and tells you what information you are going to get...and then gives it to you (at the agreed on price)...you can't complain.  No more than you can complain to the AFR for losses when they post on the front page that the market has crashed overnight.

Like in any market that exists; sadly their are the sellers that are dishonest - but that's a different issue.

An honest system provider gives you the information they said they would give, upon signing up.  That's it.