History of product price available as a graph at the bottom of the overview or accessible by a “Show Price History” button under the buy choices . Every price change by the vendor creates a new data point on the graph with a date and a price.
- It will help vendors who utilize fomo tactics to enhance sales.
- If it is also available in the stats side by side with sales it will help vendors gauge what their best price is.
Something like this but the x axis gets an entry with every price change .
So the dates are not periodic
Each review has the price the user bought the product for next to it .
However as this move may be helpful for many users browsing products ,you may object that it raises privacy concerns.
Meaning if someone sees your real name and next to it “bought for $10000” you might be uncomfortable and hesitant to review a product .
Well , what if someone sees your real name in the reviews of a product that costs $10000 ? What changes ? More or less the same effect.
Weigh reviews by cost of purchase and show reviews given while the product was free normally if you do the above change.
Let those who wish to abuse the system by having accounts review their product while free think it works , let the users browsing for products see
that this seller had 30 reviews who bought at 0$ .
That means while the product is free the reviews are weighed equally and when it becomes paid then they are outweighed by other reviews.
Add to the ranking system a score that is calculated by the review stars and the price the reviewer bought at, and add a new tab for it next to the popular tab.
For instance :
review_score=(review_stars-2.5)*purchase_price (NOT listing price!)
Then when a buyer clicks this tab the products are sorted based on their accumulated score above.
Why does that help you ? Expensive + good products float to the top of this tab.
The objection to the latest statement is “The expensive and coercive for reviews will float to the top actually” . Yes that is true so :
If a client can prove he was incentivized / bribed / coerced / promised in exchange for a review by a vendor then he gets a refund (minus the mql5 commission)
If the vendor no longer has the funds in the account , or an amount for that , then he get’s a negative balance which is paid to that user until the amount of the purchase price (NOT the listing price!) is repaid (minus the commission). If you cannot do that logistically or legally outside of the 7day holding period , increase the period to 14days and if the vendor has no funds he is banned from the market.
Look at this image :
The signal provider has floating trades
Registers the account as a signal
Proceeds to close the trades and pumps the signal stats
It is also possible there are still trades open from before the registration which are slowly “dripped” (closed) to pretend the signal is growing.
Do not measure performance before registration of the signal
Do not measure performance based on trades opened prior the registration of the signal
Display big yellow vertical bars around deposits/withdrawals of a signal in the graph with a warning sign. I still don’t understand why some providers do the “deposit/withdraw at the same day” but i’m sure there’s a possible exploit in there.
photo by Pavel Danilyuk
Add your own ideas in the comments if you want