UBS rogue trader also lost 123K spread betting

donaldduke

Experienced member
The City trader accused of fraudulently gambling away £1.4bn of his bank's money had lost £123,000 of his own cash through a spread betting account, a court heard.

Kweku Adoboli, who is standing trial accused of bringing Swiss bank UBS to the brink of collapse, lost so much of his own money spread betting he had turned to Wonga.com and a string of other payday lenders, the jury was told.

Southwark crown court heard that Adoboli, 32, opened an account at IG Index, a spread betting firm that allows customers to make bets on financial instruments in March 2010. In the year running up to his arrest last September he lost £123,000 and was issued with two warnings by his bosses for failing to declare the account, which breached the banks rules. He had also opened a second spread betting account at City Index.

UBS trader accused of fraud 'lost £123k of own cash on spread betting' | Business | The Guardian

I wonder which made him feel worse, losing £1,400,000,000 of the banks money, or £123,000 of his own??
 
Last edited:

timsk

Legendary member
Amazing isnt it. Yet if he'd come on here and said he was a professional trader with UBS people would have been following his every word like he was some sort of trading god.
Hi PB,
True, but as generalizations go, wouldn't you agree that so called 'experts' who work for city institutions are likely to be more knowledgable than the average T2W member? After all, the latter don't trade for a living while the former do. Also, this particular individual is a rogue trader - he's not a typical example of a city trader. Therefore, IMO, pro' city traders are a likely source of salient information and useful insights. Even if this chap had come on T2W and let it be known that he's a pro' at UBS - who's to say his posts wouldn't be highly informative and helpful? You know - a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'!

Having said that, I completely agree with the point implied by your comment, namely, that it's very wise to question anything and everything one reads on here and elsewhere. That's a point that's emphasized in the First Steps FAQs which all new members are encouraged to read.
Tim.
 

DionysusToast

Legendary member
Amazing isnt it. Yet if he'd come on here and said he was a professional trader with UBS people would have been following his every word like he was some sort of trading god.

Way to turn this into an "Anti-T2W" post PeeBee :clap: :clap: :clap:
 

chinabean

Active member
Hi PB,
True, but as generalizations go, wouldn't you agree that so called 'experts' who work for city institutions are likely to be more knowledgable than the average T2W member? After all, the latter don't trade for a living while the former do. Also, this particular individual is a rogue trader - he's not a typical example of a city trader. Therefore, IMO, pro' city traders are a likely source of salient information and useful insights. Even if this chap had come on T2W and let it be known that he's a pro' at UBS - who's to say his posts wouldn't be highly informative and helpful? You know - a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'!

Having said that, I completely agree with the point implied by your comment, namely, that it's very wise to question anything and everything one reads on here and elsewhere. That's a point that's emphasized in the First Steps FAQs which all new members are encouraged to read.
Tim.

Hear Hear!! :)

Definitely agree, plus the fact he got reprimanded for opening a spread betting account shows that he's not that smart!!

That being said, he does also highlight the fact that there are some people that work in front office that really do not merit that position.
 

scose-no-doubt

Veteren member
His dad is a UN representative innit... Who ya know...
 

D70

Established member
Hi PB,
True, but as generalizations go, wouldn't you agree that so called 'experts' who work for city institutions are likely to be more knowledgable than the average T2W member? After all, the latter don't trade for a living while the former do. Also, this particular individual is a rogue trader - he's not a typical example of a city trader. Therefore, IMO, pro' city traders are a likely source of salient information and useful insights. Even if this chap had come on T2W and let it be known that he's a pro' at UBS - who's to say his posts wouldn't be highly informative and helpful? You know - a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'!

Having said that, I completely agree with the point implied by your comment, namely, that it's very wise to question anything and everything one reads on here and elsewhere. That's a point that's emphasized in the First Steps FAQs which all new members are encouraged to read.
Tim.

Can I just correct something here. Investment bank traders DO NOT trade for a living. They are paid a salary to turn up each day. They may possibly get a % bonus of any proprietary trading they do on their book but most bank "traders" are actually just market makers and take very little proprietary risk, if any at all. Having worked at banks and hedge funds. I can quite happily say that a 'trader' at a bank yields zero interest and is just as idiotic as your average Joe. A 'trader' at a hedge fund on the other hand. He's the guy you want to be talking. He IS trading for a living.

Sell side vs buy side.
 

timsk

Legendary member
Hi D70,
Hmmn, if I've understood you correctly, you appear to be saying that T2W members shouldn't pay any more attention to your posts than they do the 'average T2W member'? Does the knowledge and experience you've gained at the banks and hedge funds you've worked for not count for anything? I dare say you're a humble and self-effacing man, but I don't think you're as idiotic as the average Joe!
;)
Tim.
 

D70

Established member
Hi D70,
Hmmn, if I've understood you correctly, you appear to be saying that T2W members shouldn't pay any more attention to your posts than they do the 'average T2W member'? Does the knowledge and experience you've gained at the banks and hedge funds you've worked for not count for anything? I dare say you're a humble and self-effacing man, but I don't think you're as idiotic as the average Joe!
;)
Tim.

You've put it very well and yes, that's what I think.

My posts have no more validity than any other member.

No one knows the qualifications / experience / success / failure that a t2w identity may have had. We all just post opinions. And as we know, all opinions are just that, opinions.

Obviously, we all try to say it with some rhetoric but it's up to the reader to distinguish pinches of salt and a substantial offering of content.

One interesting thing.
I used to post under a different name on t2w and, I believe, was quite popular and even "followed". I had to stop using that name because I wanted to "out" a member who I knew to be lying.
Anyway, point of the story is. After making the change in name, it was surprising to me that even tho I was the same person, because I was a "new member" the reception I received was completely different. I believe this backs up my argument that all posters are of equal stature, well they are to me at least ;)





.
 
Last edited:

wackypete2

Legendary member
You've put it very well and yes, that's what I think.

My posts have no more validity than any other member.

No one knows the qualifications / experience / success / failure that a t2w identity may have had. We all just post opinions. And as we know, all opinions are just that, opinions.

Obviously, we all try to say it with some rhetoric but it's up to the ready to distinguish pinches of salt and a substantial offering of content.


I agree your posts have no more validity than any other member! LMAO :LOL:

Just kidding, but I do agree with what you are saying. (y)

Peter
 

timsk

Legendary member
You've put it very well and yes, that's what I think.
Thanks for the compliment D70 but, if it’s all the same to you, I'll continue to pay marginally more attention to your ramblings than I do the average T2W member. Only a little mind, I don't want to over inflate your ego!

On a more serious note, whilst I admire the sentiments you express and, broadly speaking, I accept your point, I don't think it's entirely practicable for most members. Given the size of T2W, I think it's necessary to have some criteria by which one decides who knows their onions and is worth paying attention to and who is just as 'idiotic as the average Joe'. I'm not saying that I automatically accept verbatim what someone says just because they've worked in a bank or whatever. But, for me, their comments tend to have greater gravitas than the average member. By the same token, if you (as an example) disputes something I say or makes a comment that I don't agree with, it's more likely to result in me questioning my own beliefs than if the comments come from someone else that I don't respect (as much). I've adopted this approach for many years now and I'm not aware of it letting me down. The problem of course is identifying the members who, supposedly, know what they're on about. Working for a hedge fund / bank is a good clue, IMO. Think of Martingoul and Jack O Clubs - two examples off the top of my head. Arabianights is another, but often he descended into lulz and hid any pearls of wisdom he might have had to offer in quagmires of brown sticky stuff. Anyway, I hope you take my point - even though you don't agree with it.
Tim.
 

D70

Established member
Thanks for the compliment D70 but, if it’s all the same to you, I'll continue to pay marginally more attention to your ramblings than I do the average T2W member. Only a little mind, I don't want to over inflate your ego!

On a more serious note, whilst I admire the sentiments you express and, broadly speaking, I accept your point, I don't think it's entirely practicable for most members. Given the size of T2W, I think it's necessary to have some criteria by which one decides who knows their onions and is worth paying attention to and who is just as 'idiotic as the average Joe'. I'm not saying that I automatically accept verbatim what someone says just because they've worked in a bank or whatever. But, for me, their comments tend to have greater gravitas than the average member. By the same token, if you (as an example) disputes something I say or makes a comment that I don't agree with, it's more likely to result in me questioning my own beliefs than if the comments come from someone else that I don't respect (as much). I've adopted this approach for many years now and I'm not aware of it letting me down. The problem of course is identifying the members who, supposedly, know what they're on about. Working for a hedge fund / bank is a good clue, IMO. Think of Martingoul and Jack O Clubs - two examples off the top of my head. Arabianights is another, but often he descended into lulz and hid any pearls of wisdom he might have had to offer in quagmires of brown sticky stuff. Anyway, I hope you take my point - even though you don't agree with it.
Tim.

I think this is an interesting topic and I guess my point is that altho you get to know who has content and who is numb. I still dont like to dismiss the guy with 1 post who asks a good question or makes a good comment. There is always the chance he will trigger a thought to improve my trading / approach. Who's to say that it isnt Bruce Kovner or maybe, the next Bruce Kovner..........

Ps. I dont know the 3 guys you mention but will try to remember their names incase I see a post from them.

Pps. Maybe a new vetting system is needed. Reps per post count? (Getting rid of post count which for me is someones dribble factor).
 

timsk

Legendary member
Hi D70 (again!),
I think this is an interesting topic and I guess my point is that altho you get to know who has content and who is numb. I still dont like to dismiss the guy with 1 post who asks a good question or makes a good comment. There is always the chance he will trigger a thought to improve my trading / approach. Who's to say that it isnt Bruce Kovner or maybe, the next Bruce Kovner..........
Oh, I completely agree with you on this front. I'm not for one minute suggesting that someone with a low post count or without experience with an IB should be ignored. By the same token, it would be unwise IMO to accept something as fact, and without question, simply on the basis that the poster claims to work at an IB and can talk a good talk.

Ps. I dont know the 3 guys you mention but will try to remember their names incase I see a post from them.
The first two only post quite rarely and arabian fell out with us a while back and hasn't been seen for quite some time.

Pps. Maybe a new vetting system is needed. Reps per post count? (Getting rid of post count which for me is someones dribble factor).
Yes, broadly speaking I agree with you about the post count. It's especially true in my case! I've been pushing for a new rep' system since the demise of the old one. Unfortunately, it's a bit like trading. Seemingly very simple, but devilishly difficult for most people to implement. But that's a topic for another thread . . .
Tim.
 

chinabean

Active member
Can I just correct something here. Investment bank traders DO NOT trade for a living. They are paid a salary to turn up each day. They may possibly get a % bonus of any proprietary trading they do on their book but most bank "traders" are actually just market makers and take very little proprietary risk, if any at all. Having worked at banks and hedge funds. I can quite happily say that a 'trader' at a bank yields zero interest and is just as idiotic as your average Joe. A 'trader' at a hedge fund on the other hand. He's the guy you want to be talking. He IS trading for a living.

Sell side vs buy side.


Whilst I do kinda agree that there's a lot of crap in front office, the traders that I know that work for hedge funds ALL worked for investment banks before that so clearly some "traders" at banks are the real deal. A good example is one (HF) fund manger I know and have worked with who used to work for an IB as a flow trader. When him and his team left the bank, it left a $1bn hole in the bank's p/l that year yet pure flow accounted for less than half that amount.

Also, surely it depends on what desk you are on? eg if you work on a money markets trader or a repo trader, from what I have seen you are likely not half the trader that works on the dollar (IR) swaps desk, just seemed to be the way it worked, they don't get to take as much risk and their product universe can be pretty dull.

It's not coincidence that the "rogue" traders have all been delta 1 or f&o traders.

I can only speak about the one bank I've worked at but the vast majority of traders I knew I would class as trading for a living. Most were flow traders, some prop but the vast majority of the time, their book was never flat (although this was 08-09) and they took on prop risk.

Additionally, as I've said on a different thread, I don't neccessarily regard quant (systematic) traders as actual traders if they build a system that trades but do not trade themselves. That is not to say they are not f**king good at making money as a lot of them do I just don't see that as trading. The model trades, you don't.

But, to be a good flow or prop trader in a bank, I think you do end up trading as a living. Yeah you get a salary but when your bonus is 10 - 50x that and is based on your p/l then IMHO you are trading for a living.

Am curious which banks you've worked at? I've only worked at one US IB and the traders I came into contact with were far smarter and more clued up than your average bod.

Anyway, just my opinion but I got to disagree based on who I have encountered, worked with and in some cases have got to know pretty well.

ps don't get me wrong, I've also met some real f**king idiots but on the bigger trading desks, they are much fewer and farther between.
 
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

But it's thanks to our sponsors that access to Trade2Win remains free for all. By viewing our ads you help us pay our bills, so please support the site and disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks