http://forum.inklingmarkets.com/forums/3/topics/57 en-us 60 <p>How long do you reckon it should take to get to 50,000??? Howse about 15,000?<br />Is that another measure &#8211; speed to key milestones?</p> Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:35:57 -0000 forum.inklingmarkets.com:3:57:164 Inglaterra http://forum.inklingmarkets.com/forums/3/topics/57 <p>Yep, we wouldn&#8217;t want to get rid of the top traders list. ;)</p> <p>But how about a ranking by growth percentage over the past quarter (perhaps limited to traders with at least 50,000 inkles in the bank to weed out lucky beginners).</p> Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:19:22 -0000 forum.inklingmarkets.com:3:57:179 onemike http://forum.inklingmarkets.com/forums/3/topics/57 <p>The top traders are <span class="caps">THE</span> top traders, that is clear. The tops, the best and certainly active and informative members of the inkling community.</p> <p>However, without meaning to take any gloss from their shine, they do appear &#8211; <span class="caps">PLEASE PUT ME RIGHT ON THIS</span> &#8211; to have an &#8216;early starters&#8217; advantage, in the whole.<br />They could &#8216;rest on their laurels&#8217; a tad, a little, and never really suffer for it.</p> <p>Without time on your side a newbie (ahem &#8211; such as myself &#8211; no bias here though&#8230;) is unlikely to ever make it to that hallowed list.<br />An old hand will continue to grow just because they are so large in proportion to a new trader when the new trader starts.</p> <p>But how efficient are these top traders, how much are they generating for their inkles in the bank???<br />Comments such as &#8216;got in early&#8217; etc are included as competitive advantages in user profiles, these advantages are going to be very difficult to breakdown (not insurmountable, just difficult&#8230;).</p> <p><span class="caps">SO MY QUESTION IS</span>?<br />So who really is the best? Is earlyness really what should be promoted as Tops?</p> <p><span class="caps">SUGGESTION</span> i<br />How would a more generic moving average performance; (weekly or monthly or annual gain) to (net worth) ratio sound?(possibly with proportioning up or minimum periods)</p> <p>Something that can level the field a little. A &#8216;larger&#8217; trader should be able to compete better in the long run as they can spread/take more risk. But individuals with fair ability (amongst the hundreds) may a least register, albeit briefly.</p> <p><span class="caps">SUGGESTION</span> ii<br />Break the traders into cohorts, the cohort of quarter ending 31st March 2007, 30th June 2007 etc and allow competitive stats from these &#8216;fairer&#8217; groups. Breaking the traders up would also give the traders an idea of what progression in a peer group looks like. Then you can also have the cohorts competing, e.g.best performance after 3 active quarters.<br />Would the liquidity and number of users in the early markets come into play here &#8211; what do you think?</p> <p>These are just suggestions and I am sure that there are better ideas. We don&#8217;t want to clutter the site with ratios, benchmarks etc, it is the markets that are the important part&#8230;Just with a net worth ratio of say 5k:165k for weekly starting net worth or 1:33, I see it unlikely that a newbie could increase their net worth fast enough to catch up. It is afterall net worth that generates a yield or weekly balance.</p> <p>ho hum</p> <p>back to trading</p> <p>rant&#8217;n&#8217;rave over</p> <p>So what do you think???</p> <p>Comments por favor&#8230;..</p> <p>p.d. We <span class="caps">DONT</span> want to get rid of the top traders list. This would be Additional.</p> <p>Gracias</p> Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:13:35 -0000 forum.inklingmarkets.com:3:57:178 Inglaterra http://forum.inklingmarkets.com/forums/3/topics/57