First of all, I think writing an article like this will offend quite a few people, but I'm a nobody and I don't care.
Rebates and following trades are originally mutually beneficial things, but they have lost their original intention due to the chaotic and malicious environment in the circle.
First, let's talk about the various parties involved in rebates.
First, the platform.
Platforms offer part of their fee income to influential people to attract new users, using these influential newcomers to bring in more users. This motivation is straightforward.
Second, influential people.
Influential people use their influence to help the platform acquire new users and can earn income from it. This motivation is also easy to understand.
Third, users, when trading on cryptocurrency exchanges, whether you are in it for the long-term or short-term, whether you are making a profit or incurring a loss, fees are always present.
So when users register for someone's rebate, receiving a portion of the transaction fees back is naturally not a bad thing.
This seems to be fine, but if we analyze it in depth, we will find some problems.
Several points to consider when users register for rebates.
1. The proportion of rebates.
The proportion of rebates directly determines how much rebate one can ultimately obtain, but I think users who consider only this factor should be few; it should be limited to those who are inherently capable of sustaining profits.
2. A significant portion of users register for rebates hoping to obtain valuable information, or even have someone directly feeding them, telling them when to buy and when to sell, a mindless way to make money.
The idea is beautiful, but in reality.
The ideal state of rebates in my view is to share one's own opinions and views, and for those opinions to be recognized and accepted by fans, leading them to willingly register through the rebate link. At this point, expressing one's opinions brings additional benefits, which is positive feedback, thus providing more motivation to share more content. Fans benefit from the information and perspectives they find useful, and their gains come from the transaction fees that would have been generated anyway. Although the platform gives up a portion of the fee income, it gains a long-term stable customer base, which the platform is willing to do (especially since competition among platforms is fierce now).
However, the idea is beautiful, but in reality, many deviations occur due to the potential interests contained in rebates.
I will categorize and organize what I know.
1. This is currently the most common in the plaza, the eternal profit teachers. You should know that simply sharing opinions may not make most people willing to register for any rebate link. But if I share every day that I have earned high returns through trading, and I can guide you, on the condition that you register through my rebate link (of course, there are also ways to lead trades through platforms, since following trades and rebates are intertwined to some extent, so the following discussions will specifically address following trades, only the rebate part is mentioned here), then out of interest considerations, even users who have already registered an account will overcome difficulties to find a way to register a new account.
But why do I say there are deviations? Because even without thinking too much, one should understand that there aren't that many eternal profit teachers in this world; most are destined to use various means to package themselves as eternal profit teachers, common methods include but are not limited to.
1. High-yield graphics.
2. Further, dual-position trading on different accounts, when presented, only shows profitable trades.
3. Other more examples will not be listed one by one.
2. Traffic teachers, to attract attention, engage in various low-down limit actions, for example, titles like 'waterfall bear market' or 'explosive bull market', these are considered good; at least they are still discussing cryptocurrency itself. It's just that the titles sound a bit like sensational news, and what's outrageous is those who bring entertainment industry tactics into this circle, such as gossip plots and clichéd scripts have already appeared.
However, it cannot be denied that some of them have indeed gained considerable traffic. But is it a good thing to continuously lower the limits for the sake of traffic? One of the reasons for the bad reputation of this circle also comes from various limit-less actions.
And various teachers, in pursuit of higher rebates, many encourage or imply high-frequency, high-multiple trading, and to this end, teachers might frequently open trades themselves as a way to lead by example, so they can earn as many transaction fee rebates as possible.
It has formed what I think is a distorted phenomenon. But due to human greed, this phenomenon seems to have become a norm.
Then there is the practice of following trades, which is very similar to rebates, as both exploit human greed. If those following trades really have strength, then whether it's a rebate or profit-sharing, I believe most people can accept it, including myself.
However, the problem still arises from the potential profit trends, leading to some dual-position trading and so-called masters who always profit, while losses are hidden and profitable trades are heavily promoted. Yet, the naive investors are relentlessly chasing after the myth of getting rich quickly and the daily high returns, which obscures the very basic potential risks that should have been discovered.
Of course, the methods are not limited to those I have listed. Membership fees, information fees, etc. In short, the methods of exploiting people hidden in this circle can be said to be varied.
And now, rebates and transaction fees are even more intertwined.
In fact, to some extent, it is one's own greed that leads to this, yet they unconsciously want to shift this responsibility away, so the reputation of the circle has turned into scams, and so on, in the mouths of those who have been exploited.
On the contrary, those who seriously share content will gradually give up updating valuable content due to lack of traffic and real feedback; they may either join in or choose to remain independent without sharing. This creates a phenomenon of bad money driving out good money, and over time, it has formed the current distorted 'norm'.
I don't know whether to feel sorry for such naive investors or to think that their gains all have their reasons.
This even makes me ponder whether to join in as an analysis figure or continue sharing some content that I think is somewhat useful but doesn't have much traffic.
Let's stop here for today.