margin - Bitcoin Trading Bot: Binance, Coinbase Pro, Bittrex, HitBTC, Bitfinex..

[Rapturoso]

I took this ongoing tirade as a personal affront. The moderator has been notified.

You're welcome to your own opinions, however I do not believe anything I have said is incorrect or untrue.  I stand by my observations.

Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm

[1555809900]

1555809900

[1555809900]

1555809900

[1555809900]

1555809900

[1555809900]

1555809900

[allyrbase]

"Your customers" => no, just you...

I beg to differ...

He's simply expressing his frustration which a few of us here also feel.
I've said my bit and moved on.

He isn't threatening to hurt or maim anyone... as a paying customer, he's entitled to his voice.

[Rapturoso]

"Your customers" => no, just you...

I beg to differ...

Oops.  EDIT!

Yes, Thanks for the support!  Another frustrated customer maybe ?

Advertising as an 'invite to treat' Leonardo Lifetime Access to 7 exchanges means exactly that, lifetime access to 7 exchanges through Leonardo, without compromise.

I would be interested to see where anyone can argue against this.

Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm

[DaZuru]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

[leonArdo@margin]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for your contribution. I really appreciate it.

However, none of the final options you mentioned are possibly for us as our resources are quite limited and our efforts have to go into improving margin. Maintaining a second codebase is completely beyond our capacities and it is for this reason that we have to EOL leonArdo. There will be a final version and some limited updates in special cases with key additions, but that will be the extent of it.

Once again I really appreciate your opinion.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

[leonArdo@margin]

Jonathan, I currently own a license just for Bittrex. The idea was to test on Bittrex first then see what happens.

Now, I need Binance support as well quite badly. But I'm not quite sure what is the right direction right now since you are in the middle of switching the platform. Does it make sense to get a license for Leonardo on Binance right now or should I wait? My intention is to try out the new subscription model as well but I would need both Bittrex and Binance support.

Thank you.

If you want to switch to binance to try it out just contact us at support@marginsoftare.de

Basically, if after the free period of margin ends you think you will revert to leonArdo then it makes sense to purchase an add on exchange.

If you think you will stick with margin then you will get access to all exchanges once we switch.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

Jonathan, perhaps your e-mail server is down? I tried sending it but it bounced back.

Yes, I sent you a pm. Sorry about that.

There was a typo. This is correct: support@marginsoftware.de

Best wishes,
Jonathan

[rothcom65]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

For This: "2. Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each. "

I would vote you for the CEO of Margin.de
Period.

Ps: I guess current unethical strategy will not bring Margin new customers.

[hooliuk]

hello All

Quick question.

I have added bitfinex to my bot today. It seems to be taking ages to place another order after making a buy or a sale.

Is this correct?

I've noticed that in the setting menu there is a Bitfinex sectoin stating 'manual call quota per minute' ...  not sure if this is something to do with it.

Thanks

Hool

[leonArdo@margin]

...

For This: "2. Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each. "

I would vote you for the CEO of Margin.de
Period.

Ps: I guess current unethical strategy will not bring Margin new customers.

In order to get a fee per trade you need a special license from the financial regulator.

This is not possible in Germany. Period.

[leonArdo@margin]

hello All

Quick question.

I have added bitfinex to my bot today. It seems to be taking ages to place another order after making a buy or a sale.

Is this correct?

I've noticed that in the setting menu there is a Bitfinex sectoin stating 'manual call quota per minute' ...  not sure if this is something to do with it.

Thanks

Hool

Hi hooliuk,

What is the 'manual call quota per minute' parameter set at? If it is set too low you can increase it. Most of the calls we do from bitfinex use web sockets and don't affect the call quota.

I just tested Bitfinex there and it was quite fast.

Anyone else having difficulties with Bitfinex?

Best wishes,
Jonathan

[allyrbase]

@rothcom65 thanks for chiming in and your willingness to see both sides.

Speaking for myself here -- as someone who purchased the ultra license in LATE December, have only paper traded (as I felt the software still had some small issues to be worked out)... while I feel taken advantage of, I don't expect Margin to give us lifetime free access to the new model. That doesn't seem sustainable to me. However, I would have appreciated to see a little more effort in extending the free period, or at the very least allowing those who purchased within xx days prior to the rebranding announcement, the option to be refunded, especially if they have not used Leo to trade IRL.

[Rapturoso]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

Option 2, keeping the existing customers happy with the lifetime product they purchased and renaming it Margin and changing the business model for new customers only, whilst still maintaining a decent profit from new customers would be the way we would expect things to go and seems the most logical step for Margin Software to take seeing as they can't take residual percentages of trades from their customers by German law. This would keep the company making decent money from every new customer and their continued subscription whilst not alienating it's existing customers. However, Jonathan has already said that this is something that he is neither interested in or willing to discuss as a viable option.

He's made his decision clear to make the Leonardo name redundant and try to take everyone's purchase value with it. The product itself has not been made redundant, just the name. It's akin to making an employee redundant, but then taking on another employee to fulfill exactly the same or similar role under a different title and using it as an excuse to dismiss the original employee without any form of compensation, effectively washing their hands of the situation and starting afresh without considering the implications. The position must truly become redundant for it to be legal. Taking on a different employee to fulfill the role under a different title and dismissing a previous employee who did a same or similar job and calling it a redundancy is illegal. One can't make a person redundant, it must be the position and job that has been made redundant for a business to justify it. Considering Leonardo's/Margin's position as a trading terminal with automatic trading features has not changed, it stands to reason that any purchase made for the lifetime licence would be subject to a contract of sale that Margin Software automatically entered into at that point. This contract would transcend any rename, proxying or other form of rebranding designed to cheat the customer out of their rightful licence to use a functioning piece of reasonably bug free and API specific software on 7 exchanges for life. Margin Software can't legally just expect to wash the company's hands of their responsibilities under such contract of sale and expect people to take it laying down. There are laws preventing this. You sold a lifetime service and simply saying you won't honor that service contract due to a rebrand does not absolve you of your responsibilities under contract law.

This product is not end of life at all, it's practical position has not been made redundant, Jonathan has just made our purchases redundant under the Leonardo banner, yet still thinks it's alright to charge subscriptions to everyone who's already purchased a Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime license, in effect offering the exact same product on a subscription only basis but renamed. It's shocking that Jonathan has to perpetuate this lie when all he has to do is appologise to his Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime license customer base and promise the that their lifetime licence will be honored and perpetuate through the transition to the Margin titled product and allow them to keep using it unhindered, with regular updates to keep it functional on no less than 7 exchanges of the customer's choosing. This would not be hard to accomplish and would not change the current model he is proposing for new customers to be on a subscription based model rather than a lifetime purchase.

The two can happily co-exist and with his original veteran customers still suggesting improvements, offering that valuable feedback so that his new customers can benefit and whist still gaining ample subscription revenue to keep the company afloat.  Surely the original customers are the people who are most familiar with Leonardo and are the ones that Jonathan should be keeping happy so that he can rest assured, knowing any feedback that comes from them will improve the product and keep the new subscriptions rolling in?

Do us Lifetime licence holders have to band together and create the European equivalent of a class action lawsuit for you to reconsider the veteran customers of yours? It seems so. Anyone interested in doing so should feel free to post without prejudice and collaborate. I'm sure quite a few would be interested in this case.

Jonathan and the Leonardo team are welcome to our Discord for an interview at any time, given reasonable notice.  It would be interesting to see what Margin Software think of their veteran base of Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime licence customers and the valuable feedback that they have provided throughout this product's development.

Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm

[jefikas@yahoo.com]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for your contribution. I really appreciate it.

However, none of the final options you mentioned are possibly for us as our resources are quite limited and our efforts have to go into improving margin. Maintaining a second codebase is completely beyond our capacities and it is for this reason that we have to EOL leonArdo. There will be a final version and some limited updates in special cases with key additions, but that will be the extent of it.

Once again I really appreciate your opinion.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

Hi,


I’m one of your small time "heroes"

1. I’m the one complained December 21 2017 that ping pong does not "loop" it did just the first part either buy or sell and then just went to sleep. Here at the forum Marginsoftware claimed that it is fixed! It was not until well later it was confirmed over and over to be broken.

2. I’m the one noticed you that your stop loss was just yellow line well I’m the one took the bullet for you my friend Margin / Jonathan as your stop loss did not help me at Christmas time. freakin stop loss had just one job to save my ass but. It just did NOT!

My point here:

Your product is proven faulty and faulty after you told us it is fixed. In this forum you are reading at this moment. So Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) as a company does not deliver promises and does not fulfill MY expectations.

Therefore:

There are plenty of arguments at both sides. In that case there is institution for that to solve such questions daily basis it is called Consumer Disputes Committee as far as I understood it’s at https://www.evz.de ? They will calmly decide who is right. And without hesitation will shut any company down eventually to protect customers if needed.

I think that I as a private individual have 2 year period to file my complaints and if issues are not fixed within reasonable time I do have basis to claim back my money?

Same institution will act as independent mediator at such situations where your customers might think you use “bait and switch” tactics in case you will just repackage your existing product!!!

As I’m not German citizen nor netizen I cannot make the initial claim as it must be filled at country of origin. Und my German is really bad.

So if there are German heroes then just file the claim and it will be solved normally within 90 days FOR GOOD!!!

NOTE!


Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) at this very moment still sells “lifetime licenses” to customers who might not be aware of ongoing changes (OK new logo and rebranding.) but at the chart I can still buy your product “FOR LIFE” like today? Really? Maybe it is good time to specify the phrase “lifetime license” on the page or remove it.


NB! I’m not mad I want the situation to be sorted out before I start dumping my money into it monthly basis that’s it!

Thanks


edit:

i filed the complaint thru:

https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/main/?event=main.home2.show

COMPLAINT FORM SUMMARY
COMPLAINT REFERENCE: 2018/18335
Print out date: 09/03/2018
STATUS: Registered

NOTE !!! IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I BLAME MARGINSOFTWARE NOR EMPLOYEES  IN ANY WAY!!! I AS I CUSTOMER CAN ASK LEGAL ADVISE FROM INSTITUTIONS AS EU CITIZEN. I DID IT TO PROTECT MY CUSTOMER RIGHTS AND TO BE SURE THEY ARE RESPECTED!

Consumer protection legislation in the EU guarantees that everyone has the right to be treated fairly when buying goods and services whether online or offline.
European legislation guarantees consumers

fair treatment
products which meet acceptable standards
a right of redress if something goes wrong

[leonArdo@margin]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for your contribution. I really appreciate it.

However, none of the final options you mentioned are possibly for us as our resources are quite limited and our efforts have to go into improving margin. Maintaining a second codebase is completely beyond our capacities and it is for this reason that we have to EOL leonArdo. There will be a final version and some limited updates in special cases with key additions, but that will be the extent of it.

Once again I really appreciate your opinion.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

Hi,


I’m one of your small time "heroes"

1. I’m the one complained December 21 2017 that ping pong does not "loop" it did just the first part either buy or sell and then just went to sleep. Here at the forum Marginsoftware claimed that it is fixed! It was not until well later it was confirmed over and over to be broken.

2. I’m the one noticed you that your stop loss was just yellow line well I’m the one took the bullet for you my friend Margin / Jonathan as your stop loss did not help me at Christmas time. freakin stop loss had just one job to save my ass but. It just did NOT!

My point here:

Your product is proven faulty and faulty after you told us it is fixed. In this forum you are reading at this moment. So Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) as a company does not deliver promises and does not fulfill MY expectations.

Therefore:

There are plenty of arguments at both sides. In that case there is institution for that to solve such questions daily basis it is called Consumer Disputes Committee as far as I understood it’s at https://www.evz.de ? They will calmly decide who is right. And without hesitation will shut any company down eventually to protect customers if needed.

I think that I as a private individual have 2 year period to file my complaints and if issues are not fixed within reasonable time I do have basis to claim back my money?

Same institution will act as independent mediator at such situations where your customers might think you use “bait and switch” tactics in case you will just repackage your existing product!!!

As I’m not German citizen nor netizen I cannot make the initial claim as it must be filled at country of origin. Und my German is really bad.

So if there are German heroes then just file the claim and it will be solved normally within 90 days FOR GOOD!!!

NOTE!


Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) at this very moment still sells “lifetime licenses” to customers who might not be aware of ongoing changes (OK new logo and rebranding.) but at the chart I can still buy your product “FOR LIFE” like today? Really? Maybe it is good time to specify the phrase “lifetime license” on the page or remove it.


NB! I’m not mad I want the situation to be sorted out before I start dumping my money into it monthly basis that’s it!

Thanks


edit:

i filed the complaint thru:

https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/main/?event=main.home2.show

COMPLAINT FORM SUMMARY
COMPLAINT REFERENCE: 2018/18335
Print out date: 09/03/2018
STATUS: Registered

NOTE !!! IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I BLAME MARGINSOFTWARE NOR EMPLOYEES  IN ANY WAY!!! I AS I CUSTOMER CAN ASK LEGAL ADVISE FROM INSTITUTIONS AS EU CITIZEN. I DID IT TO PROTECT MY CUSTOMER RIGHTS AND TO BE SURE THEY ARE RESPECTED!

Consumer protection legislation in the EU guarantees that everyone has the right to be treated fairly when buying goods and services whether online or offline.
European legislation guarantees consumers

fair treatment
products which meet acceptable standards
a right of redress if something goes wrong

Hi,

Your product is proven faulty and faulty after you told us it is fixed. In this forum you are reading at this moment. So Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) as a company does not deliver promises and does not fulfill MY expectations.

We deliver a software product. You do know that Apple, one of biggest companies in the world, brings out patch releases for their software all the time. That's because that is the nature of a software product. We are doing our best here. Furthermore you bought a product still in beta. We provided a free demo version for you to try out before you buy it too so there is really no excuse not to know what you are buying into.

We have put thousands upon thousands of hours into delivering a trading terminal for the cryptocurrency space. The first true trading terminal. We have to deal with new exchanges that cannot handle increased trading volumes and deliver unreliable responses through their APIs. And unlike many of our competitors we don't only have to handle this, but we deliver a native desktop application with an advanced GUI. It's hard work.

We are a small startup working our asses off over here so perhaps cut us a little slack.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

[Rapturoso]

We deliver a software product. You do know that Apple, one of biggest companies in the world, brings out patch releases for their software all the time. That's because that is the nature of a software product. We are doing our best here. Furthermore you bought a product still in beta. We provided a free demo version for you to try out before you buy it too so there is really no excuse not to know what you are buying into.

We have put thousands upon thousands of hours into delivering a trading terminal for the cryptocurrency space. The first true trading terminal. We have to deal with new exchanges that cannot handle increased trading volumes and deliver unreliable responses through their APIs. And unlike many of our competitors we don't only have to handle this, but we deliver a native desktop application with an advanced GUI. It's hard work.

We are a small startup working our asses off over here so perhaps cut us a little slack.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

This may actually encourage you to think again and honor the Leonardo 7 Exchange Lifetime access service agreement that you entered into with customers after they accepted your invite to treat. Did you honestly think that everyone would just lay down and accept that their product will be essentially locked up against their wishes, renamed, then sold again as a different product?

Why should any customer cut you some slack when you have essentially told them you are abandoning the contract you entered into with them at the point of sale? Then have the cheek to ask them for more funds for a subscription to a service that they already have a lifetime contract for?  Are you serious?  Leave the guy alone.  He doesn't need to cut anyone slack and I certainly hope he and others like him pursue remedy to the fullest extent of the law.

Whilst your product is innovative and a great addition to the crypto trading world, it's far from perfect and needs lots of work to bring it to a professional level.  Many have noted this and many more have helped you on your way by supporting your software that, at times, has acted like an early beta.  We have persevered and supported you the whole way, we have demoed your product and then seen what it's weaknesses and strong points are, we have bought a license to use your software on exchanges for life and we have done so believing that our contract will not be compromised by greed and a huge legal oversight on your part.  We have even referred other customers to this service and you have benefited from the increased customer base this has created.

The service on your web site clearly offers access to a number of exchanges for life through your software trading terminal, this contract still stands for existing customers and anyone that purchases through that same invite to treat web page and this contract cannot be simply disregarded. You don't need to maintain two different code bases. One will do, incorporating the existing customer's lifetime service model and the new customer's subscription model.  It's not hard to see that this is the right thing to do.  Do you want your company to fail instantly when everyone complains about this or do you want to do the right thing and stay afloat?  The choice is yours ultimately.

Crypto Play Radio Discord https://discord.gg/7VPvgrm

[hooliuk]

hello All

Quick question.

I have added bitfinex to my bot today. It seems to be taking ages to place another order after making a buy or a sale.

Is this correct?

I've noticed that in the setting menu there is a Bitfinex sectoin stating 'manual call quota per minute' ...  not sure if this is something to do with it.

Thanks

Hool

Hi hooliuk,

What is the 'manual call quota per minute' parameter set at? If it is set too low you can increase it. Most of the calls we do from bitfinex use web sockets and don't affect the call quota.

I just tested Bitfinex there and it was quite fast.

Anyone else having difficulties with Bitfinex?

Best wishes,
Jonathan

definitely seems to be an issue.  But not on all my pairs.  I'm only running 5 pairs but BTC/NEO and BTC/XMR are really struggling. It keeps sitting saying strategy busy...  very odd. I've set the call quota to 70 now.  Lets see if this resolves the issue.

I have another question.  As the price increases it doesn't re-ajust the buy level. it leaves it waiting for a drop rather than constantly working the peaks and troffs.  Have I missed something with that?

thanks

[mano237]

Hello leonArdo community!

Is it possible to set up the bot to buy in if the price goes up let me say 5% within 2 minutes? It should look for all coins, not for a specific one. Is there any possibility to do that with leaonArdo?

[jefikas@yahoo.com]

I can see frustration on both sides. Lifetime means what it says. We can talk semantics all day and never get anywhere. I can also see that having a viable business means the software will continue. I also don’t like heated exchanges, where someone is called a troll for voicing their opinions, and where someone says the company is unethical. There has to be a willingness to talk things through and come to a reasonable compromise of sorts. With any software purchase, there is a company that wants to do what they love and make money to keep doing it, and a customer that wants use out of it. If those two things benefit each other, everyone is happy. When the equation becomes imbalanced, there is friction and one side has to make a change. Software doesn’t do what the customer expected, refund or change the software. Business has to decide what they can do. Business can’t stay afloat with current software licensing model to stay in business. Have to change or go under, not good for anyone.

Extremes:
1.   Business changes licensing model, leaving current customers in the dust.
2.   Business marks all current customers as lifetime paid and changes model for new customers.

My guess is that option 2 is what most customers would want, unless they have other reasons motivating them such as fear of the business going under and losing access to software they love. Number one was probably the best bet to keep the business afloat at the risk of alienating customers.

Seems a compromise was put forth in between the extremes by providing a free period and by reducing fees to try to create a win for all. Some like it, some do not for whatever reasons. The choices are to continue to try to reach a consensus, or a higher percentage of agreement, or just see what survives the fallout of the current offer.

1.   In an effort to offer other options for discussion, which may be impossible, it there a way to turn over the API portion of the code for community updates, or charge for API updates.
2.   Maybe you get a percentage of trades like an exchange. I’d give you .1% of all trades. I give Bittrex .25% on each.
3.   Another thought would be to continue to support API changes for free, and entice people away from the old software with great new features with Margin. This would only work if there was an agreement on what current feature sets or performance criteria for Leonardo it should end with. I know there are challenges with this as have been mentioned.

I think entertaining a frank discussion with customers, without everyone getting bent out of shape, is beneficial for everyone. It may not change the current offer, but it could change opinions to be a little more positive and receptive to changes that must happen for us to continue our relationship. I think everyone wants this to succeed or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for your contribution. I really appreciate it.

However, none of the final options you mentioned are possibly for us as our resources are quite limited and our efforts have to go into improving margin. Maintaining a second codebase is completely beyond our capacities and it is for this reason that we have to EOL leonArdo. There will be a final version and some limited updates in special cases with key additions, but that will be the extent of it.

Once again I really appreciate your opinion.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

Hi,


I’m one of your small time "heroes"

1. I’m the one complained December 21 2017 that ping pong does not "loop" it did just the first part either buy or sell and then just went to sleep. Here at the forum Marginsoftware claimed that it is fixed! It was not until well later it was confirmed over and over to be broken.

2. I’m the one noticed you that your stop loss was just yellow line well I’m the one took the bullet for you my friend Margin / Jonathan as your stop loss did not help me at Christmas time. freakin stop loss had just one job to save my ass but. It just did NOT!

My point here:

Your product is proven faulty and faulty after you told us it is fixed. In this forum you are reading at this moment. So Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) as a company does not deliver promises and does not fulfill MY expectations.

Therefore:

There are plenty of arguments at both sides. In that case there is institution for that to solve such questions daily basis it is called Consumer Disputes Committee as far as I understood it’s at https://www.evz.de ? They will calmly decide who is right. And without hesitation will shut any company down eventually to protect customers if needed.

I think that I as a private individual have 2 year period to file my complaints and if issues are not fixed within reasonable time I do have basis to claim back my money?

Same institution will act as independent mediator at such situations where your customers might think you use “bait and switch” tactics in case you will just repackage your existing product!!!

As I’m not German citizen nor netizen I cannot make the initial claim as it must be filled at country of origin. Und my German is really bad.

So if there are German heroes then just file the claim and it will be solved normally within 90 days FOR GOOD!!!

NOTE!


Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) at this very moment still sells “lifetime licenses” to customers who might not be aware of ongoing changes (OK new logo and rebranding.) but at the chart I can still buy your product “FOR LIFE” like today? Really? Maybe it is good time to specify the phrase “lifetime license” on the page or remove it.


NB! I’m not mad I want the situation to be sorted out before I start dumping my money into it monthly basis that’s it!

Thanks


edit:

i filed the complaint thru:

https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/main/?event=main.home2.show

COMPLAINT FORM SUMMARY
COMPLAINT REFERENCE: 2018/18335
Print out date: 09/03/2018
STATUS: Registered

NOTE !!! IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I BLAME MARGINSOFTWARE NOR EMPLOYEES  IN ANY WAY!!! I AS I CUSTOMER CAN ASK LEGAL ADVISE FROM INSTITUTIONS AS EU CITIZEN. I DID IT TO PROTECT MY CUSTOMER RIGHTS AND TO BE SURE THEY ARE RESPECTED!

Consumer protection legislation in the EU guarantees that everyone has the right to be treated fairly when buying goods and services whether online or offline.
European legislation guarantees consumers

fair treatment
products which meet acceptable standards
a right of redress if something goes wrong

Hi,

Your product is proven faulty and faulty after you told us it is fixed. In this forum you are reading at this moment. So Margin UG (haftungsbeschraenkt) as a company does not deliver promises and does not fulfill MY expectations.

We deliver a software product. You do know that Apple, one of biggest companies in the world, brings out patch releases for their software all the time. That's because that is the nature of a software product. We are doing our best here. Furthermore you bought a product still in beta. We provided a free demo version for you to try out before you buy it too so there is really no excuse not to know what you are buying into.

We have put thousands upon thousands of hours into delivering a trading terminal for the cryptocurrency space. The first true trading terminal. We have to deal with new exchanges that cannot handle increased trading volumes and deliver unreliable responses through their APIs. And unlike many of our competitors we don't only have to handle this, but we deliver a native desktop application with an advanced GUI. It's hard work.

We are a small startup working our asses off over here so perhaps cut us a little slack.

Best wishes,
Jonathan

Hero is not enough, we need superheroes!

So correct me if I’m wrong. You invented Perpetua mobile (as you throw metaphors).
You keep your product at “BETA” till the EOL. Cool no responsibilities what so ever.
But not really you are responsible you even marked it at your contact info at your website.

Dear Margin / Jonathan you must admit that the “new margin” you are promising is the product your customers bought in first place. Right? Or how long the new margin will be as beta? Same circle again? I think this question just begs the answer?

Okay I can imagine that it is extremely nerve wrecking to promise hero status to all existing customers. But maybe just maybe on top of thousands of hours programming the take these 5 hours and dig thru the 205 pages of this forum and find your “superheroes”

FIND THE ONES who made your product work better!!!
Contact your contributors and make the PERSONAL offer they cannot refuse there are not thousands there are not even hundreds of them. Maybe couple of dozens. And they WILL BE your salesmen for good. And there should be no problem to you? As it has not being problem to us to be your beta testers. Or hands up who has time to dig thru the forum to find people who deserve it.


And again metaphors from the movie fight club we all know:

“Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on: we cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances, and we guard you while you sleep. Do not fuck with us.”

PLEASE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWVxI6XZAuE

NOTE! This is movie quote! I have no intention to harm any individuals!

Martin

[hackbyte]

So .. well...

leonArdo will run perfectly on ubuntu 16 lts?

What about notification sounds? I have a really fresh installed hp compaq 8710w with a completely clean and fresh install of ubuntu...

I get notification poups on the desk..

But i don't get any sounds from leonardo..

What the heck?

By the way .... do you guys _really_ believe, people will pay a subscription for a software which is still riddled with so many bugs and quirks and even hast not the slightest bit of documentation?


Meh ... seriously ... get real and fix that thing before you launch the new variant.

This nearly already killed any trust i had in you.....

3 day old latest bleeding edge leonard 3.8.0 on an platform which is specified from you as working.......

And there are still such poor fscking bugs............

Hacky

[hooliuk]

hello All

Quick question.

I have added bitfinex to my bot today. It seems to be taking ages to place another order after making a buy or a sale.

Is this correct?

I've noticed that in the setting menu there is a Bitfinex sectoin stating 'manual call quota per minute' ...  not sure if this is something to do with it.

Thanks

Hool

Hi hooliuk,

What is the 'manual call quota per minute' parameter set at? If it is set too low you can increase it. Most of the calls we do from bitfinex use web sockets and don't affect the call quota.

I just tested Bitfinex there and it was quite fast.

Anyone else having difficulties with Bitfinex?

Best wishes,
Jonathan

definitely seems to be an issue.  But not on all my pairs.  I'm only running 5 pairs but BTC/NEO and BTC/XMR are really struggling. It keeps sitting saying strategy busy...  very odd. I've set the call quota to 70 now.  Lets see if this resolves the issue.

I have another question.  As the price increases it doesn't re-ajust the buy level. it leaves it waiting for a drop rather than constantly working the peaks and troffs.  Have I missed something with that?

thanks

Also it doesn't look like the wallets are updating...  I have sell orders open, and the wallet has not reserved the amount. Then it lets you sell the wallet.  And then...  the order in the strategy stops. 

hmmm