Yes indeed jon, but here we're talking about a long position being driven to £0 by a 125pt move in the SB market on the DAX. The implication was soon made in the thread that this was due to SB company price rigging. The prices vary slightly on a like for like basis, but they're not rigged to hit groups' or individuals' stops, and the slippage should not be enough to drive anyone out of the game.
Yes indeed jon, but here we're talking about a long position being driven to £0 by a 125pt move in the SB market on the DAX. The implication was soon made in the thread that this was due to SB company price rigging. The prices vary slightly on a like for like basis, but they're not rigged to hit groups' or individuals' stops, and the slippage should not be enough to drive anyone out of the game.
alan5616
Established member
- Messages
- 927
- Likes
- 198
The criminals got what they deserved, in the USA. Well done NFA for bringing these shysters to book.
It's very frustrating that the FSA, here, don't go after the SBs & MMs with the same vigour as the NFA. Many, if not most, of them are defrauding their clients and a full investigation is long overdue. It's strange that we never get slipped, trades rejected, requoted or stopped out, at the exact level of our SL, when trying out their demo platform!!
alan516 - I suspect you've no evidence that SB firms are defrauding anybody.
Of course, it suits lazy losing traders to claim they only lost because they were defrauded, but there's no reason why more seasoned and successful (or at least surviving) trader should pander to their cop-out excuses and conspiracy theories.
Of course, it suits lazy losing traders to claim they only lost because they were defrauded, but there's no reason why more seasoned and successful (or at least surviving) trader should pander to their cop-out excuses and conspiracy theories.
Alan, I get stopped right on my stoploss. I have never had to phone them over discrepancies. Perhaps, they are pulling the wool over my eyes but, if they are, I can't find where it is. The threads I read on this site, by complainers, are so clearly the fault of bad trades that, sometimes, I think that my intelligence is being insulted. We did not come down in the last shower of rain. As far as demos are concerned, of course, they are designed to attract the punter. I've never used a demo because it has seemed to me so obvious.
alan5616
Established member
- Messages
- 927
- Likes
- 198
The issue of enticing people to open accounts, based on false prices (aka demo), was a key element in the instigation of legal action against FXCM and Gain Capital. Fortunately, the NFA didn't buy the story that "nobody expects to get these prices when they open a live account" and slapped multi million $ fines on these crooks. Well done NFA.
new_trader
Legendary member
- Messages
- 6,770
- Likes
- 1,655
Well done nonsense. Nobody should expect to get filled in the real market in the same way they do with a demo account. This has set a precedent in that brokers will stop offering demo accounts through fear of being sued by clueless trader wannabe's who should stick to sucking their thumbs and playing their Nintendo 3DS.
alan5616
Established member
- Messages
- 927
- Likes
- 198
It's just as well, for US retail forex traders sake that the NFA, former Attorney General and FXCM shareholders didn't see this the way that you do. One day, we'll get a FSA with teeth and these crooked SB Cos will have to run an ethical business or, be shut down.
I am the last to say that these people are angels. What I am saying is that I have never caught them messing about with me but, there again, I do not pile all my money into one trade. I know what these posters want. To get rich very quickly. Nice work if you can get it!
the hare
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,944
- Likes
- 1,282
OK here's a problem that I personally experienced. I had around 20 accounts with a UK spread betting company (the accounts where in the names of family and friends etc) The SB company was aware that I was trading these accounts (I'd discussed this at a face to face meeting with the firms managing director)
On bank holidays, it was common for this particular spread betting company to limit the position size of trades to $40 per pip. A number of the accounts where also placed on dealer execution.
You can probably guess what I'm going to say, on numerous occassions the winning trades with relatively large position sizes that where accepted (in some cases by phone) where later reversed on the basis of insufficient liquidity, whilst the larger sized losing trades always stood, and where not reversed.
On one occassion I actually had a conversation with the firms marketing director who claimed that no trades above $40 per pip had been executed on a particular bank holiday for ANY client, and that therefore all trades for that day above this level had been adjusted down to $40 per pip. The problem of course is that the dim witted fool was unaware that they'd happily accepted half a dozen losing trades from me in various other accounts for position sizes much greater than that amount. Was he incompetant ? or just a liar ? or is that what passes for acceptable marketing spin ?
I would argue that accepting large positions when they lose, and reducing winning positions is a clear case of fraud. They where dumb enough not to realise the accounts where linked, and they where caught out. Eventually they reduced the size of the losing trades, but not without a great deal of presure being applied.
In retrospect I should have taken them to the cleaners, but I learned a lesson, and if I ever decide to cross swords with them in the future (and I might), I'll be better prepared.
You could argue that I should have known better than to trade on a bank holiday, and you'd probably be right, but the fraud on their behalf still occurred, because it was a situation they could easily exploit.
I also have some interesting statistics on slippage too. I trade a random entry system, and most of the time I'm not really competing for liquidity with technical traders. It could be argued that over a sufficient sample size I'd get a normal distribution of positive and negative slippage (which is generally the case with my current broker), but you can probably guess that wasnt the case when trading with a bookie.
I think that the complaint was reasonable (and presumably the company did too or they would not have taken action). However, my analysis of the situatuon at the time is that antagonising a bucnh of crooks, and publicly exposing their marketing director as a liar on a forum probably wanst going to make dealing with the situation any easier. If I had of started a thread, Sharky would have deleted any complaints anyway
T2W does get its fair share of threads where complaints are misguided, but I'm sure there are equally legitimate complaints that never see the light of day. Im my case, the sums involved where relatively minor, but if the dispute runs into hundreds of thousands, or millions its unlikely anyone would want to jepordize their position by airing details in public. Its also likely that settlments are made on the basis of non disclosure, so the public never really gets to see the scale of the problem.
I acknowledge that SB's may be fine for smaller accounts that arnt worth stealing from, or larger accounts that they dont want to lose. But in my experience (which is limited, cos I didnt hang around to be ass raped again) you have to keep a watchfull eye on these rascals.
Last edited:
I admit, I've never opened accounts in the names of family members and never traded at $40+ per point on Bank Holidays, so I haven't personally any experience of this form of treatment with the SB companies I have dealt with. I suppose as I never will be doing these things I never will have the evidence either.
But, you say it was 'clearly fraud'. Do you mean it was illegal at that time and in their jurisdiction? I would have thought only a court would be in a position to say this.
But, you say it was 'clearly fraud'. Do you mean it was illegal at that time and in their jurisdiction? I would have thought only a court would be in a position to say this.
Like Tom, I have never opened accounts for other people with an SB company, either.
Good debate going on here people. I think the OP must have balls of steel or be some kind of sadist type (with respect:cheesy
I have a question in my head from reading this thred------Are SB firms a bunch of crooks who should be behind bars, or are they genuine? I know it's a stupid question, but some are for and some are against. Jeez, i've been reading this forum for a few days, I would have hoped you guys would have worked it all out by now!!
And if they and brokers are all bent, why on earth are you trading and reading this forum? Also, I have a big zit on my neck, and i'm going out later. What is the best way to hide it? wear a 70's shirt with massive collars, or always stand with people on my right and never let anyone get to the left of me? :cheesy:
I have a question in my head from reading this thred------Are SB firms a bunch of crooks who should be behind bars, or are they genuine? I know it's a stupid question, but some are for and some are against. Jeez, i've been reading this forum for a few days, I would have hoped you guys would have worked it all out by now!!
And if they and brokers are all bent, why on earth are you trading and reading this forum? Also, I have a big zit on my neck, and i'm going out later. What is the best way to hide it? wear a 70's shirt with massive collars, or always stand with people on my right and never let anyone get to the left of me? :cheesy:
Those slippage statistics would be interesting. Passing on negative slippage but retaining positive slippage is precisely what FXCM were taken to the cleaners for. It seems they made $8 million from the racket and that was only their US accounts. Given the culture of greed in this industry it's inconceivable that SB companies aren't doing the same if not worse. Some day someone is going to infiltrate one of them and expose them in the press or on tv.
OK here's a problem that I personally experienced. I had around 20 accounts with a UK spread betting company (the accounts where in the names of family and friends etc) The SB company was aware that I was trading these accounts (I'd discussed this at a face to face meeting with the firms managing director)
On bank holidays, it was common for this particular spread betting company to limit the position size of trades to $40 per pip. A number of the accounts where also placed on dealer execution.
You can probably guess what I'm going to say, on numerous occassions the winning trades with relatively large position sizes that where accepted (in some cases by phone) where later reversed on the basis of insufficient liquidity, whilst the larger sized losing trades always stood, and where not reversed.
On one occassion I actually had a conversation with the firms marketing director who claimed that no trades above $40 per pip had been executed on a particular bank holiday for ANY client, and that therefore all trades for that day above this level had been adjusted down to $40 per pip. The problem of course is that the dim witted fool was unaware that they'd happily accepted half a dozen losing trades from me in various other accounts for position sizes much greater than that amount. Was he incompetant ? or just a liar ? or is that what passes for acceptable marketing spin ?
I would argue that accepting large positions when they lose, and reducing winning positions is a clear case of fraud. They where dumb enough not to realise the accounts where linked, and they where caught out. Eventually they reduced the size of the losing trades, but not without a great deal of presure being applied.
In retrospect I should have taken them to the cleaners, but I learned a lesson, and if I ever decide to cross swords with them in the future (and I might), I'll be better prepared.
You could argue that I should have known better than to trade on a bank holiday, and you'd probably be right, but the fraud on their behalf still occurred, because it was a situation they could easily exploit.
I also have some interesting statistics on slippage too. I trade a random entry system, and most of the time I'm not really competing for liquidity with technical traders. It could be argued that over a sufficient sample size I'd get a normal distribution of positive and negative slippage (which is generally the case with my current broker), but you can probably guess that wasnt the case when trading with a bookie.
I think that the complaint was reasonable (and presumably the company did too or they would not have taken action). However, my analysis of the situatuon at the time is that antagonising a bucnh of crooks, and publicly exposing their marketing director as a liar on a forum probably wanst going to make dealing with the situation any easier. If I had of started a thread, Sharky would have deleted any complaints anyway
T2W does get its fair share of threads where complaints are misguided, but I'm sure there are equally legitimate complaints that never see the light of day. Im my case, the sums involved where relatively minor, but if the dispute runs into hundreds of thousands, or millions its unlikely anyone would want to jepordize their position by airing details in public. Its also likely that settlments are made on the basis of non disclosure, so the public never really gets to see the scale of the problem.
I acknowledge that SB's may be fine for smaller accounts that arnt worth stealing from, or larger accounts that they dont want to lose. But in my experience (which is limited, cos I didnt hang around to be ass raped again) you have to keep a watchfull eye on these rascals.
Good debate going on here people. I think the OP must have balls of steel or be some kind of sadist type (with respect:cheesy
I have a question in my head from reading this thred------Are SB firms a bunch of crooks who should be behind bars, or are they genuine? I know it's a stupid question, but some are for and some are against. Jeez, i've been reading this forum for a few days, I would have hoped you guys would have worked it all out by now!!
And if they and brokers are all bent, why on earth are you trading and reading this forum? Also, I have a big zit on my neck, and i'm going out later. What is the best way to hide it? wear a 70's shirt with massive collars, or always stand with people on my right and never let anyone get to the left of me? :cheesy:
The best way to hide it is to be with a crowd of other people who have one on their necks, as well.
Welcome to the club.
Nobber, 25k lost in the sb world is less than loose change. These sb firms claim that they are regulated by the fsa. The question i ask myself is how independent are the fsa, dont they all **** in the same pot as the saying goes. IG emailed me back and to be fair iv never had a problem with their customer service. Marianne claimed that IG are regulated and to abuse the system would leave the door open for claim and its just not in their interest is the message she was getting across. My position is that making £20 - £100 here or there is hardly worth it and I wanted to bet big, not only for the gains but for the experience of feeling such wins. Of course greed kicks in which is difficult to manage when your on a winning streak, but that is part of a good traders tool box, being able to manage emotion. Making £4,000 on gold within a matter of minutes is quite something. Scalping proved very successful for me. My last trade however was sloppy and I know where I went wrong. The problem I had was that having 25k in my account, I though at £200 pp even a move downward would recover and an initial loss would recover throughout the day. Indeed this was correct and at one point my profit would have taken my account on the road to £60,000. The particular day in question was a no news day and therefore the initial rally from a massive drop in the dax in my view would continue and it did. However my entry point could have been better. For me, sb wont be significant unless you have £20,000 to play with, once your there and you are comfortable with your trading ability, my opinion is that your in with a chance to make some life changing money. I am lucky in that my outgoings are low and I have a steady regular income. Generally this has been a good thread with some very obvious experienced traders present to learn from and who indeed I am following at the moment. Of course you will get pricks but at least they make themselves known so you can ignore their posts but you will find that in all forums. I will be back trading and have been pleased with some recent paper trades. I will be comfortable posting my trades with profit/loss figures and rationale behind the positions when i return. Its a very good site this with lots of potential to improve. My thought is we should all be viewing each other as part of a large team, exchanging ideas to make money, it doesnt seem to have gone down that road yet, but potentially it could be powerful if done correctly
BeginnerJoe
Senior member
- Messages
- 3,329
- Likes
- 351
First you blame the bookie for your loss. Now you are dismissing the loss as insignificant. The guy on the other end holding your 25k would have laughed his nuts off for that kind of easy money. What I am seeing is that the already paid for education went in one ear and came out the other. This is going to take several courses.
As for being a part of a large team, you already are. I estimate 95%+ of the people lose.
BeginnerJoe
Senior member
- Messages
- 3,329
- Likes
- 351
