|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
So in others words the free lookers didn't buy so you decided that wasn't
good for you.
You felt it better for the public to buy then be stuck with your indicator
if they didn't like or couldn't use them. I see why you call it a business
decision. Here's an idea if your satisfaction rate is 95.5 as you claim
then offer a money back offer during a limited trial period and have a 100%
satisfaction rate.
Robert
>I can understand your concern about there being no free trials. I'd be
suspect as well. Years ago we did offer it and discovered that free trial
testers were not willing spend the time to "unlearn" old habits gathered
from using lagging indicators, and learn new ways to apply low-lag signals.
For example, a common first-approach toward creating a MACD with JMA is to
use it for both the fast and slow crossover lines as follows:
>
>MyMACD = JRC.JMA(close,6,0) - JRC.JMA(close,30,0);
>
>However, the result is mediocre. This is because MACD actually *requires*
lag, but only *between* the two crossing lines. Therefore, for best
results, it's better that the slower line have as both lag and momentum so
that it does not weaken when price reverses. Otherwise, the crossover is
delayed as the faster line tries to meet the slower one (which is turning
away). A simple moving average has more lag and momentum than JMA. So a
better MACD would be as follows:
>
>MyMACD = JRC.JMA(close,6,0) - average(close,30);
>
>Learning when and where to add or remove lag in technical indicators takes
time, and we found that during a brief trial period, the user is not
committed to making the effort, and thus may decide JMA is not much better
than what he already has.
>
>We realize that having no free trials will discourage some from acquiring
our software, and that's OK. To help in the decision making process, our
web site displays numerous charts that point out JMA's advantages, and
posts a large collection of letters from users. We also try to provide
quality tech support (within reason).
>
>All in all, we're happy to have a user satisfaction rate better than 99.5%
>
>Regards,
>
>Mark Jurik
>Jurik Research
>http://www.jurikres.com
>
|