Should Freetrade use only neutral descriptions of stocks?


#21

As some people have said above, maybe it should use neutral descriptions, but they can still be unconventional. I.e. don’t use negative descriptions.


#22

Viewing Freetrade as a “serious” company will come with growth. Look at the mass adoption of Robinhood in the USA as an example no one could describe that as a joke platform no matter how they describe their stocks.


#23

Can’t really comment on Robinhood as I haven’t see how they describe their stocks.


#24

You don’t need to know how Robinhood describe their stocks to understand my point. The size of the platform lets you know it’s a serious stock broker. If Freetrade achieves the kind of growth here as Robinhood has in the USA then it’ll be a “serious company” regardless of quirky stock descriptors.


(Matteo) #25

I see the point but I don’t really agree with it. I feel that reality is much more complex than that. I remind you that Golia was taken down by a single stone, Ratner was the CEO of the Ratners Group and with a single speech burned 1 billion dollars out the value of the company.
History is full of example of small things causing downfalls of many too big to fail let alone moderately big.
You take a life to earn a reputation and you can burn it in an instant therefore I don’t believe they could write whatever they want. Quirky is ok but with moderation and not denigration I believe is better.

Plus saying if they get as big, I well hope they will, it feels like selling the skin of the bear before catching it.
Since no one knows the future and how small things like this one might affect it might be a safer bet to avoid any possible trouble from the start because a number of them will find you anyway.
This is of corse just my personal opinion and as always I can be wrong.


(Emma) #26

I shall attempt to keep this from becoming an unwieldy diatribe.

It takes intelligent people to build a challenger stockbrokers but somehow people think they have deliberately decided to self destruct or not thought something through based purely on a few words?

The aim to disrupt and innovate is the core of fintech. That just doesn’t mean taking away the fees, it’s not doing things a certain way just because that’s the way it’s always been done.

You trust them with your investment, trust them with your money but don’t trust their judgement?

Yes the safe bet is doing things exactly the same way as everyone else but that’s how you get stuck in a rut


(Matteo) #27

@Rat_au_van you are absolutely right and I totally agree. Thanks for your comment.
I apologise if my comment came out too strong and as start a diatribe, was not my intention even if it appears otherwise.

I do trust their judgment, I was voicing my opinion/concern on this singular instance, whatever they will decide in the end to do will be fine by me. No objection.


(Alex Sherwood) #28

Thanks but there’s no need to apologise Matteo, we appreciate the fact that everyone’s giving feedback with Freetrade’s best interests at heart.

We won’t always agree - this is a subjective topic after all - but among other things, threads like this are a great way to find out people’s perception of what we’re doing, which is incredibly useful by itself. And we need your ‘unfiltered’ feedback in order to do that.


(Matteo) #29

Thank you very much Alex but I really felt I needed to apologise because in light of Emma’s reply I realised how heated things were getting, how my previous comment got interpreted and how potentially the whole conversation might have escalated if not for @Rat_au_van moderation, a big thanks for that.


(Emma) #30

Diatribe was aimed at me, not you.
I tend to rant :grin:


#31

Totally agree. But. The aim of the short titles is on record as:

Whether you are for, or against, unconventional descriptions, I don’t think “BT - Slow Internet” fulfills this brief. Whereas “Superdry - Sorta Japanese Clothing” does.


(Matteo) #32

@Rat_au_van your comment was really timely and helpful. Probably my comment could have been defined as a rant and the start of a very heated battle of opinion losing sight of the true objective of the conversation and peaceful exchange of opinions.

@EdS I totally agree. The Superdry description is great! Make me smile every time.

Maybe it would be better to focus on finding a better description instead on arguing about it.


(Chris) #33

They could put shit internet but that’s an opinion. Slow internet is factual.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_connection_speeds


(Big Boss) #34

This topic is getting ridiculous. If you were going to invest in BT and was put off my Freetrade’s description of “Slow Internet”, then you haven’t done your research and shouldn’t be investing at all!

I would like a lawyer’s opinion on whether Freetrade can use “Slow Internet” as a description without issue or recourse. If it’s ok, then go ahead. I like it.


(wayne lamb) #35

Its already covered by regulation from the ASA, although not a direct advert, you can not advertisie something that doesn’t have factual proof to back it up. Take a look at recent rulings on the asa’s webstie.


(wayne lamb) #36

Its not factual based on that list, BT has average speeds which are above that stated on the wiki for the UK’s average internet speed. See ofcom 2017 study.


#37

Did a quick search in BT’s annual report and it says:

BT Consumer customers are now getting faster broadband speeds with average download speeds improving by 20% to 43Mbps.

it also mentions that the Government defines superfast speeds as 24Mbps or higher.

BT also apparently launched 152Mbps and 314Mbps packages but it’s not available in my area and their website doesn’t sing and dance about it like it does with other packages, so I guess it’s available to 2 people in London :wink:


#38

There’s a few threads going down this same road now.

The request for a Dividend notification was met by someone responding ‘but that might influence how people invest and shouldn’t be implimented’.

The idea to intrude short selling was met by ‘this can be risky and should only be available as a ‘premium paid for option’.

Now the very descriptions of a stock could potentially influence and investment and need to be altered.

Maybe users should just be denied all information for fear of influencing someone’s decision making :sob:


(Mike Smart) #39

Maybe use a generic icon and randomised name/description each time you enter the app…

and rename Freetrade to FreeLotteryTrade


#40

Not sure the best place to post this, but how can we request that the description for Greggs gets changed from “sausage rolls” to “vegan sausage rolls”? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: