Anyone heard of Savi Trading?

[SaviTrading]

Thanks for your comment ‘sneakytrader’, we were wondering how long it would take. Once again it seems like the same type of comment as tom smith. You signed up to T2W just today and the first thing you do is write a negative INACCURATE comment about our firm.

Earlier today, we saw a fair comment posted about us, which disappeared within 2 minutes of it being posted. I am not sure why this is, but perhaps T2W is not such a fair forum as we thought initially. It seems like something weird is going on and comments are being filtered in some manner, which is not fair especially from what is considered such a credible forum.

We always encourage our traders to be open with us, and tell us if there is anything they want changed etc, and form friendly relationships with them all so they feel they can come to us if they ever have a problem. In fact, just in the last few months we have conducted surveys amongst all our traders with regards the service they are getting, and we never received anything like this from any of them.

The fact these statements are so inaccurate leads us to believe this might be somebody who is nothing to do with Savi, but rather has a vested interest in dragging down our name.

We have no doubt these type of comments will resurface again, and obviously we are not going to keep responding to them again and again. The key thing is it seems there are a few people (or one person with several alias’) that are literally sitting there waiting to write negative things, things which are clearly not accurate, so it makes you wonder what their game is here.

Once again, this forum is being used incorrectly to try and deceive people and if anyone wants to discuss this further, please call us or come in for a visit, as we have nothing to hide. You can even sit with any of the traders on the floor, and get a true reflection as to how we do things here.

 

[lrcam]

As a former trainee at Savi Trading - I can say that I 100% disagree with what sneakytrader / tomsmith are saying. I found them to be nothing but professional, helpful and friendly. I was trading the Bund and had a fantastic mentor called Vishal assigned to me. For various reasons (nothing to do with Savi Trading) I had to leave but they were extremely accommodative to my situation. The training was in depth and taught me all the aspects on the Financial markets and how they work. This indepth training has helped me gain a new career within the Financial Markets as my new employers recognised the knowledge I had learnt from Savi.

I wouldn't listen to what people say on here. If you are thinking about joining Savi Trading visit them yourselves and make up your own mind. The vast majority of members on here are complete pricks.

Cheers

 

[federero]

Hello

I feel I need to come in as someone who has joined Savi Trading and is currently on their programme and try and give some insight into how it is. The main reason I am doing this is I see how hard the team there are working to help me and others, and just feel that the some of the negative views on this forum can’t be for real from the experience I have had.

I was looking for a way to get into trading, where I would receive training and mentoring so that I could get a kickstart in my new chosen career. I looked around at numerous firms and courses, and realised that you do not get anything for free in the current market. There are 2 day courses that cost over £2,000, where they teach you a few things and then you have to go and trade your own money in your own account, so that is why when I looked at Savi and Amplify, I thought the price they charge of £2,995 is pretty reasonable as you get a minimum of 4 months of training. To me, it was a no brainer, that if I was going to pay for training, then I would join one of these firms, as not only would they offer me 4 months training rather than a few days, but also that they would back me financially.

I had read differing views on these firms, but I thought to myself that I should go in and do my own due diligence, as there are a lot of opinions on the internet, but hard to say whether they are true or a competitor to these firms.

Anyway, as I say I was impressed by what both of these firms had to offer and realised that they mentor you in real time, not from a book. This, to me, was the key point, as anybody can show you in hindsight what has happened. Anyway, the reason I joined Savi was more because they had a route to going live that depended on set parameters being met, as well as the traders I met when I went to their offices impressed me and seemed genuine in that they were in this for the long term.

I am now 7 weeks into my programme, and if I am honest, at the start I struggled a little to come to terms with how much there was to learn, but as the weeks have gone on I have started to get accustomed to what is required, with the help of the mentors and am very happy with my decision. I have just met the parameters to go live last week (6 weeks in) and have just started trading a live account a few days ago. I am not trading very big clip sizes as yet (although they are bigger than one user said in a previous comment on here), but then nobody at Savi ever told me that I would be. They set out parameters I would have to meet to get bigger clip sizes, as well as to a live account, and they have stuck to this so far.

The key thing I am trying to say here is they have provided me with everything they said plus more. They have stuck to all the terms they told me at the start and hence I have no reason to complain. They hold regular seminars in house where I have met many of the other traders, and nobody I have met has anything negative to say about the experience they have had. Some of these traders have been trading with them now for nearly a year, and are still here, trading pretty decent clip sizes.

Regarding the mentoring, I have found it very helpful, and feel without it I wouldn’t be in the position where I am at the moment. The mentors they have offer a good view on the market and do have a lot of experience, there is a guy there who used to trade at Deutsche bank for over 20 years, as well as some younger guys with less experience, but fresh ideas. But all the mentors have a very good knowledge of the markets and are very easy to access when you need help.

There are a lot of people on here that seem like they don’t like the model that companies such as Savi and Amplify offer, but to be honest I don’t believe you can get anything for free in this world and the days where prop houses would pay you a salary to come and trade for them are long gone. If you want to join a firm, you can either pay for training or pay high desk fees and put up some of your own margin if you feel you don’t need the training. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in now, and I just feel that the best decision I made was accepting that and joining a programme. Here is to hoping I still feel this way in a few months.

If anybody has anything else they wish to know, please PM me and I will respond to you as soon as I get time.

Federero

 

[Black Swan]

Savvi, just threaten to sue T2W, that generally does it ...then there's no need to get your sad acolytes to spew sycophantic and or phantom tripe in defence of your *chop-shop*...Spare us reading such utter 5hite eh? There's a good lad...

 

[The Enquirer]

If you are serious about trading and are looking for a floor position then do some homework and apply to firms that offer on-floor training and do not charge, more often then not a firm that needs to charge often means they are undercapitalized and are not successful at trading themselves, or else why would they need to charge.

Hello, Could you, or anyone else, give us the names of some of these firms? (that train without charging).

 

[Hotch]

Hello, Could you, or anyone else, give us the names of some of these firms? (that train without charging).

Schneider would be one of the best known I would say.

 

[pboyles]

Thanks for your comment ‘sneakytrader’, we were wondering how long it would take. Once again it seems like the same type of comment as tom smith. You signed up to T2W just today and the first thing you do is write a negative INACCURATE comment about our firm.

Earlier today, we saw a fair comment posted about us, which disappeared within 2 minutes of it being posted. I am not sure why this is, but perhaps T2W is not such a fair forum as we thought initially. It seems like something weird is going on and comments are being filtered in some manner, which is not fair especially from what is considered such a credible forum.

We always encourage our traders to be open with us, and tell us if there is anything they want changed etc, and form friendly relationships with them all so they feel they can come to us if they ever have a problem. In fact, just in the last few months we have conducted surveys amongst all our traders with regards the service they are getting, and we never received anything like this from any of them.

The fact these statements are so inaccurate leads us to believe this might be somebody who is nothing to do with Savi, but rather has a vested interest in dragging down our name.

We have no doubt these type of comments will resurface again, and obviously we are not going to keep responding to them again and again. The key thing is it seems there are a few people (or one person with several alias’) that are literally sitting there waiting to write negative things, things which are clearly not accurate, so it makes you wonder what their game is here.

Once again, this forum is being used incorrectly to try and deceive people and if anyone wants to discuss this further, please call us or come in for a visit, as we have nothing to hide. You can even sit with any of the traders on the floor, and get a true reflection as to how we do things here.

Can you explain why Companies House has a proposal to 'strike off' Savi Trading?

 

[SaviTrading]

Can you explain why Companies House has a proposal to 'strike off' Savi Trading?

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This was an administrative error at Companies House and has now been corrected.

 

[pboyles]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This was an administrative error at Companies House and has now been corrected.

I'm not so sure, CH have indeed changed the status but have also issued a DISS40 on 11 Aug. A DISS40 is explained as follows,

"companies, without laibilities, can be struck off by its members or by CH ; however the striking off has to be discontinued if there is an objection. CH then issues a DISS40 to record that fact."

 

[SaviTrading]

I'm not so sure, CH have indeed changed the status but have also issued a DISS40 on 11 Aug. A DISS40 is explained as follows,

"companies, without laibilities, can be struck off by its members or by CH ; however the striking off has to be discontinued if there is an objection. CH then issues a DISS40 to record that fact."

Just to expand further on this point, DISS40's are issued for a number of reasons as well as the reason that Pboyles has stated above. In this instance, the DISS40 has been filed for Discontinuing Stiking Off Action and states the following:

"Cause has been shown why the above limited liability partnership should NOT be struck off the register and accordingly the Registrar is taking no further action under section 1000 of the Companies Act 2006 Limited Liability Partnerships..."

The DISS40 is available for download from Companies House Website to verify and confirm the above.

 

[pboyles]

Just to expand further on this point, DISS40's are issued for a number of reasons as well as the reason that Pboyles has stated above. In this instance, the DISS40 has been filed for Discontinuing Stiking Off Action and states the following:

"Cause has been shown why the above limited liability partnership should NOT be struck off the register and accordingly the Registrar is taking no further action under section 1000 of the Companies Act 2006 Limited Liability Partnerships..."

The DISS40 is available for download from Companies House Website to verify and confirm the above.

I understand the striking off has been discontinued but why was it initiated? Was it all a clerical mistake?

 

[Pazienza]

I understand the striking off has been discontinued but why was it initiated? Was it all a clerical mistake?

I know why it should have been initiated...

 

[Black Swan]

Just to expand further on this point, DISS40's are issued for a number of reasons as well as the reason that Pboyles has stated above. In this instance, the DISS40 has been filed for Discontinuing Stiking Off Action and states the following:

"Cause has been shown why the above limited liability partnership should NOT be struck off the register and accordingly the Registrar is taking no further action under section 1000 of the Companies Act 2006 Limited Liability Partnerships..."

The DISS40 is available for download from Companies House Website to verify and confirm the above.

You can defend and dissemble until you are blue in face but it's utter 5hit mismanagement to allow that to happen, makes you look like a right bunch of chancers and unprofessional slackers...

 

[pboyles]

You can defend and dissemble until you are blue in face but it's utter 5hit mismanagement to allow that to happen, makes you look like a right bunch of chancers and unprofessional slackers...

Accounts are overdue since May so that's one possibility, though it sounds a bit soon.

 

[Black Swan]

​

Accounts are overdue since May so that's one possibility, though it sounds a bit soon.

There is no excuse, when you are a public facing company everything has to be done the right way. No late accounts, no threats to strike off..etc..etc..

 

[pboyles]

​

There is no excuse, when you are a public facing company everything has to be done the right way. No late accounts, no threats to strike off..etc..etc..

Savi are saying it was administrative error by Companies House though the DISS40 refers to a notice dated 9 August (which is not available on Webcheck). I suppose CH will provide an explanation in due course.

 

[pboyles]

Actually there was a First Gazette issued on 9 August 2011 to strike them off, its published in the London Gazette but not on Companies House.

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/823205/supplements/1542

 

[SaviTrading]

Actually there was a First Gazette issued on 9 August 2011 to strike them off, its published in the London Gazette but not on Companies House.

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/823205/supplements/1542

As stated previously, the notice was issued in error and has now been rectified.

We believe we are a credible organisation that has been in operation for a number of years being involved in a number of different areas as well as the training element that is being given a lot of weight in this particular forum. A number of other companies have come and gone within a matter of months (without naming names) however due to our management team we have had good growth in our business.

We believe we have spent enough time on this issue and at the end of the day, in markets such as these active traders and ourselves are busy trading and don't really have the time to continuously respond to and defend incorrect accusations against our company.

 

[pboyles]

As stated previously, the notice was issued in error and has now been rectified.

We believe we are a credible organisation that has been in operation for a number of years being involved in a number of different areas as well as the training element that is being given a lot of weight in this particular forum. A number of other companies have come and gone within a matter of months (without naming names) however due to our management team we have had good growth in our business.

We believe we have spent enough time on this issue and at the end of the day, in markets such as these active traders and ourselves are busy trading and don't really have the time to continuously respond to and defend incorrect accusations against our company.

It is not an incorrect accusation, there was a first gazette published to strike you off. It has since been withdrawn. Was this purely a clerical error on CHs part or was the gazette issued due to late accounts and then withdrawn when you promised to file accounts by a new deadline?

 

[pboyles]

s.

We believe we have spent enough time on this issue and at the end of the day, in markets such as these active traders and ourselves are busy trading and don't really have the time to continuously respond to and defend incorrect accusations against our company.

I suppose we'll have to ask Companies House then.