Proposed NFA Capital Requirement - page 22
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Fxlq
No wonder I couldn't trade on my demo account with them earlier tonite.
Pawn Shops keeps better records than Forex Brokers! Scary Business.
No wonder I couldn't trade on my demo account with them earlier tonite. Pawn Shops keeps better records than Forex Brokers! Scary Business.
I agree, I doubt that a Pawn Shop will miss 41 millions
The question is :
FXLQ said in the email:
But NFA said:
1 - The customers money, is there ?
2 - If yes, how long customers have to wait to get their money ?
Who uses them as an IB? Any other brokers?
The guy sitting at the top with the money wont even have his name on any of it hes laughing like an evil bastard.
I guess FastBrokers are IB for FXLQ
I guess FastBrokers are IB for FXLQ
I know a bunch of IBs for FXLQ but I don't know what will happen to those white label brokers.
Read page 3, 4 and 5 of the NFA document.
I will request Newdigital to merge theother threadabout FXLQ with this one.
....
Merged.
Redirection will be kept for one week (old located link will be kept for one week).
Guau!!!
I know a bunch of IBs for FXLQ but I don't know what will happen to those white label brokers. Read page 3, 4 and 5 of the NFA document.
Unbelievable
Not only about IB question, is the whole thing.
A guy could "create" or "invent" 41 millions and with a few luck it can be included in the CFTC reports as top broker with a lot of capital.
Amazing.
Merged. Redirection will be kept for one week (old located link will be kept for one week).
He He He.
Give some time to PM you
All Hell Breaking Loose
The NFA also took action against another firm that wasn't meeting its capital requirement- Solid Gold. This is starting to seriously call into question the validity of these cftc reports. Turns out the $30 million + in excess net capital FXLQ claimed to have on deposit derived from a bond that in all likelihood never actually existed? How the hell does NFA and CFTC allow a firm to get away with that for almost a year?
The feared meltdown of the poorly capitalized is happening right on schedule. I'll have more on these firms shortly. Also, the latest CFTC report is coming out this week (for what its worth). Stay tuned as a lot of stuff is happening right now in the U.S. forex retail market.
Turns out the $30 million + in excess net capital FXLQ claimed to have on deposit derived from a bond that in all likelihood never actually existed? How the hell does NFA and CFTC allow a firm to get away with that for almost a year?
That's the question.
Who verify that the excess net capital really exist?
What happen to those customers who didn't open accounts with smaller and untrusted FCM brokers because of the CFTC report and went to the topcapitalized company ?
As a customer, how I can trust again on a CFTC report ?
This another Refco case ?
If I remember fine 1 or 2 months before Refco went down they had over 500 millions in the CFTC report.
Something need to change here. I hope that FXLQ customers can get their money back, I don't have an account there, but I was just at the point to open one of their institutional 1 pip spread accounts. I didn't submitted the application just because I was busy during previous weeks testing their demo platform and I delayed that because I detected some inconsistencies like the replacement of previous day data with new data, this happened most days at 20 hours broker time in their institutional demo server, this tactic is like changing the past, and I wondered many times why they did that. This issue can be a technical without relation with their financial status, but I didn't like it either.
I have friends with some hundred of thousand in deposits there.