GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
Oh god - I don't recall ever making that bold a claim.....
maxima
Established member
- Messages
- 607
- Likes
- 31
you did imply
or so I thought :smart:GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
I think implied I inhabit the real world. Not sure I always know what's going on there...
(once in a while I have a clue though)
GJ
(once in a while I have a clue though)
GJ
GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
saying what? Who the hell's gonna pay a grand a pop to read my twits? Seriously - I'd love to know (as you can imagine).
maxima
Established member
- Messages
- 607
- Likes
- 31
it depends on what u r going to twit
if it can help to make 10K why not? the effective market theory invented by myself says - most of money made by so called informed parties
P.S. never mind I am just trying to make conversation
Last edited:
GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
sure sure - I'd be in jail and grabbing the soap before you can say 'insider dealing'
No thanks
No money in the world is worth that.....
No thanks
No money in the world is worth that.....
GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
Plus, I could give out the most interesting information I see every day and there is truly no guarantee people would make money off it.
maxima
Established member
- Messages
- 607
- Likes
- 31
I am not an expert in this area but considering enormous effort the western world made in direction of liberalistation and free cheese in past decade that it might well be more comfortable to be in jail with a soap in hand than a middle-middle class... with a bit of a c0ck in the ar$e
GammaJammer
Guest Author
- Messages
- 1,246
- Likes
- 830
hmmm charming image I'm sure.
Or I could just not bother.
And as for finding 'co minders'.... all seems too much like hard work to me just to get other people involved. Why don't I just stick to what I'm doing. Has got me this far.....
Or I could just not bother.
And as for finding 'co minders'.... all seems too much like hard work to me just to get other people involved. Why don't I just stick to what I'm doing. Has got me this far.....
TraderNumber7
Well-known member
- Messages
- 376
- Likes
- 45
No. I am saying the Server Side component contains the management module (no secret) and with that module, your intermediary can many things that can have an impact on your position. Widening the spread, is just one thing they can do.
This retail business is based on object oriented Client/Server and Thin Client/Server Architecture, which now includes full XML and/or Java based WebClient component implementations. Without getting into the details of either OOP or Web Services technology such as XSLT, WSDL, SOAP and thers, just know that as the Retail Trader, you interact on the front-end of the Trading Platform, with the client-side trading application, either through a 32-bit fat client installed on your HDD, or through an XML/Java based WebClient. Before XML enabled retail trading was possible over TCP/IP based networks and the Web, the commercial (Brokers, Broker Dealers, etc.) and wholesale (Banks and Institutions) trading communities used EDI based messaging between computers with a VAN in the middle doing format translation between vendor and end-user.
EDI had some severe limitations and anyone having attempting DCOM and/or CORBA implementations for accessing application components/functionality on remote computers, ran into those limitations as well. Hybrid HTML, taking the form of XML, with its wide extensibility and network protocol agnostic disposition, coupled with the Java object model and the higher bandwidth Web access available today in many locations on earth, provided the backbone that enabled the WebClient Server Architectures being rapidly deployed today to the retail trading community and even at the institutional level - UBS Investment Bank has what I think is a really good WebClient platform for Currency Trading, of course, for the Institutional or Commercial Trader. The global bank HSBC, also has a nice WebClient and Fat Client trading solution as well.
You can if you stay away from hard-core Bucket Shops and simply don't deposit funds with them. There are other alternatives in the Retail space with better trading platforms, better market liquidity and better customer service, too.
Always run multiple data feeds on your computer from independent sources and then simply cross-check the price behavior you see with your Intermediary against the aggregate of all feeds. A pretty straight forward task, regardless of who you trade with.
No, because you are not executing your trades through the secondary feeds. Again, the best offense is a better offense, IMO. That means, doing your homework and finding those intermediaries that won't rake you over the coals, when the market comes near your stop level - if you have to use a stop in the first place.
TraderNumber7
Well-known member
- Messages
- 376
- Likes
- 45
I would say that this is where you finally got your answer and the guy actually told the TRUTH, unlike representatives are other Brokers, such as FXCM. In the other thread, the FXCM representative is STILL over there attempting to disprove that his firm does not do the exact same thing that Alpari points out here and that I pointed out in the FXCM "Discussion" thread.
I've been trying to make this abundantly clear for years now to Newbies. Maybe people should call Alpari, just to finally hear a Broker admit what those of us talking about this for YEARS already knew! I at least take my hat off to the rep at Alpari for stepping up to the plate and delivering the truth when asked.
And, this brings up the entire point of this little exercise. When you trade inside the books of your Broker, your Broker becomes Judge, Jury and Executioner, all at the same time. They are providing you access to the market, reviewing your trade prior to execution into the market, making the market, controlling the spreads, counter-party to your position and they provide you with final trade accounting. That's the very definition of Bucket. Yet, many of these guys won't admit it.
The problem here is not that you are trading Micro or Mini Lots and the only way to do that in many cases is on the books of your intermediary. That's not the problem in most cases, because Interbank does not engage at the smaller fractional levels. The real problem is two fold:
a) Most Brokers lie and advertise that you are actually trading the Forex at Interbank Rates. That's not true. You are essentially trading Private Dark Pools and Proprietary Liquidity, that may or may not be liquid enough to off-set the total aggregate volume [at the time of execution] of a particular Broker/Intermediary.
b) Your Broker controls the tip of price at the Bid/Ask level and at any moment can widen the spread you see on your proprietary trading platform - which can take place at or near your stop level. This can take you out of your position, even though Interbank never traded at that level. I'm not talking about a mere 1-3 pip differential. I'm talking about the routine spiking in prices that you see where from platform to platform, the price might be off as much as 15 pips or more, depending on volatility at the time of the spike.
There are three (3) Forex Market places, IMO:
Hybrid Retail
Wholesale
Pure Interbank
It is not that there is anything wrong with making a living doing this. I'm not some uptight narrow minded bigot, snapping and flashing his finger at Retail Brokers, for example. However, I am calling for some serious reform in the way Retail Brokers Advertise and Market their services. They all need to get real with the trading public and stop pretending to be "ECN," "STP," or "Real-Time Matching" Intermediaries to the Interbank system, 100% of the time. That is a lie and it needs to stop.
Thanks for posting this discussion from Alpari - like I said, I give them credit for making the statement and telling the truth when asked - but I do think they too, need to change their Marketing tactics to reflect the truth upfront, instead of having to be asked directly.
Newbies, if you are opening up PayPal Accounts or setting "Nanp Lot" Accounts so tiny that you can fit number of particles between here and the edge of the galaxy between the decimal point and the last number to the right.... then you are NOT trading Interbank. And, if the truth be told, those of you Retail Traders out there doing many of these 100K Lot deals are NOT trading Interbank either, without some serious manipulation of your deal by your Intermediary.
Like I said, I've got no problem with people making a buck. But, everybody needs to know what time it is, too - and how their capital is being routed, if at all. Most of the time, folks, these Intermediaries are NOT routing your order ANYWHERE AT ALL. Your order gets placed into a pool of orders headed in the same direction but at different prices with others. Your Intermediary is "settling" with their proprietary pool or with Interbank through a third-party after the fact some time down the road with their own "credit," and then making aggregate calculations and adjustments for the differences in the various Bid/Ask levels, as they run net gains and losses to your account with them.
There is no central clearing and there is no established Time & Sales for Retail Forex, folks. This is not just OTC. This is OTC on steroids! This is like OTC, Incredible HULK style, folks. It is like a child playing with matches, if you don't know what you are doing. You can burn the entire house down, if you are not careful - dealing with some fake Intermediary working out of his dirty shorts in a basement somewhere in no-man's land.
Be careful out there Newbies and for goodness sakes, please, by all means, do your OWN homework thoroughly.
yakatan
Member
- Messages
- 59
- Likes
- 0
Thanks for that in-depth software explanation. My background was in C++ so your effort wasn't lost on me.
When the internet and client application reached the threshold that allowed them to do what they are doing today they must have been rubbing the hands and licking their lips,
internet + client side application = bucket shop.
yakatan
Member
- Messages
- 59
- Likes
- 0
@TraderNumber,
As always another great informative post.
Basically the current regulation for trading if allowed in horse racing would mean that the bookies owned the horses and run the races according to their profit book - basically who comes first second etc.
In fact we should explore this analogy even further in this thread.
Anyway the upshot of it is that, current regulation allows legal racketeering.
The reason that such abusive regulation is not allowed in horse racing, is because it would be obvious to even the simplest minded person unlike the trading industry, where abusive regulation can be hidden behind clever server-side apps.
As always another great informative post.
Basically the current regulation for trading if allowed in horse racing would mean that the bookies owned the horses and run the races according to their profit book - basically who comes first second etc.
In fact we should explore this analogy even further in this thread.
Anyway the upshot of it is that, current regulation allows legal racketeering.
The reason that such abusive regulation is not allowed in horse racing, is because it would be obvious to even the simplest minded person unlike the trading industry, where abusive regulation can be hidden behind clever server-side apps.
LittleKnown
Active member
- Messages
- 160
- Likes
- 12
Piparb, tradernumber7, in a nutshell, dbFXCM are no good? But dbfx are number 2 after saxo bank on the retail list
TraderNumber7
Well-known member
- Messages
- 376
- Likes
- 45
Bingo!
No doubt, not many forums are talking about the side of the equation that you just brought up. The 'willful' Regulators (government bureaucracies) are the other Elephant sitting in the middle of the room, that no one ever talks about much in this regard. Now, they want to drop the 10:1 nuclear option on the U.S. market. For what? Why? What is 10:1 supposed to "clean-up?"
The real causes for the super high failure rate in Retail FX (in my opinion) have more to do with bogus (as you call it: racketeering) regulation and a severe lack of education among the new traders who come into the business for the first time - or those who come from the equities market, thinking that this model works on the exact same principles. That's the problem. And, tweaking with leverage is nothing more than placing band-aid on something that will not away unless there is systemic change in Trade Execution Regulation and Trader Education.
Do you remember when retail Equity Options hit the broader public market many eons ago? Well, the same thing happened then. The Racketeering mindset coupled to an enabling Regulatory regime (here in the U.S.) allowed for many to be basically ripped-off, until Regulators started implementing real protective measures AND the industry as a whole began educating the new Options Traders on the CRSO. Now, everybody and their Grandmother knows about the Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options. And, every Grandmother on earth can name at least one (1) Options Training Course worth its weight in Gold.
So, you bring up a REALLY good point which does extend this thread into a new and relevant direction:
a) What kind of serious Trade Execution Regulation do we want to see as Traders?
b) What kind of serious FX Education is necessary to get the average newbie up to speed on the distinct differences between FX and other types of traded market environments?
Tweaking leverage down to 10:1 (especially if you don't already trade millions to billions in notional value per day or per week) will not solve the 90% failure rate problem in RFX (retail forex).
Very good points you bring up. There is a lot of work yet to be done in this business.
TraderNumber7
Well-known member
- Messages
- 376
- Likes
- 45
Piparb, tradernumber7, in a nutshell, dbFXCM are no good? But dbfx are number 2 after saxo bank on the retail list
Well, my initial "rant" on this forum regarding dbFX, was intended to blow-off some steam given the lie they told about not using the FXCM back-end hardware. Well, the logical proof for the lie has always been there, but it was not until earlier this year that the physical proof became known to the public, when the FXCM servers went down all day long and just "coincidentally," the dbFX servers went down at precisely the same time. When the FXCM servers came back on-line, the dbFX servers came up with them.
I ran some plain Jane Vanilla network diagnostic tests that anyone can run from a Windows command line, or from a Unix box connected to the internet and found that network termination points for connectivity to the server side of the FXCM Retail solution, had the exact same series of IP addresses as the dbFX Retail solution. In other words, same Gateway, same router, same subnet, same machine name and the exact same approach path to the firewall. That's no coincidence - as far as I was concerned, that was physical proof.
At the same time, however, I do realize that Deutsche Bank is still the 800 lb Gorilla, especially when it comes to providing liquidity to the FX markets, globally. So, regardless of which trading platform you use, if it is a real FX trading platform providing a genuine level of depth and breadth and not a 100% pure Bucket solution, then there stands a very good chance that the dealing rates you see inside your Retail platform has at least some Deutsche Bank liquidity embedded. So, given their imposing size alone, I reluctantly placed them on my 2010 Retail List.
As far as Saxo is concerned, I gave my reasons for allowing them on the list as well: Options. There aren't many genuine, plain vanilla FX option pools out there anyway and when a person comes to realize the importance of options in their trading, it really does become a very hard sell, to get them to let go of their options needs. Saxo Bank, I admit, does have a shady history with its founding principles (do the homework to find out). However, it has since hired a new CEO and made many internal changes to the way they do business and they have made some interesting (right minded) acquisitions and/or created some good strategic business relationships.
But, most interestingly, they have integrated their FX Options Board directly into SBT II. Having an equity options background before coming to FX spot many years ago, I know the significance of being able to use options strategies in synergy with a good technical trading system. So, for those Retail FX traders out there that also have extensive equity options backgrounds, they can decide to use FX spot, without sacrificing their need for options to remove unwanted risk. This is why I allowed Saxo Bank on my 2010 List.
So, for both dbFX and Saxo Bank, there were very specific and very real justifications that forced my hand, such that I could not ignore them when talking about some of the best options in Retail FX. There are others, however, and I also include them in my personal (non-inclusive) list as well. In fact, I just added one more U.K. Broker to the list just recently as they provide really good access to an entire basket of solid Retail trading platforms and none of them will be subject to the CFTC's 10:1 ruling, if it should happen.
