NFA bans locking from 15 May 2009 - page 17
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
who says there has to be one position?
Said legislation, accounting and so on. Maybe you want to rewrite international interbank laws? It is worth noting that expert trading (if you contract with a bank rather than a betting agreement with an office) is also in question and most likely banned for Russian banks. In the primary forex market all trades are made by humans only.
-//- read above.
What is the legislation and what is the accounting???
(referring to the processes in the trading platform and not the settlement of the results)
*
Not everywhere, Russian banks allow EAs, because there is NO reason to ban them apart from the bank's personal ambitions.
And this is the tenth question...
I am only talking about the technical side of the issue!
There is always a choice - to trade according to the rules (legal regulations) or as you have to. Everyone understands the difference between exchanging currency in a bank and exchanging currency with dubious individuals on the street. Doubtful individuals have a lot of good new technology to offer.
2 kombat
There was a case where a man lost a deposit (on the MICEX, I think), sued and proved that the trades were made by a robot. He won the trial and the bank gave him his money back. I don't know if there are any more of these mistakes in the contract.
I am only talking about the technical side of the issue!
There is always a choice - to trade according to the rules (legal regulations) or as you have to. Everyone understands the difference between exchanging currency in a bank and exchanging currency with dubious individuals on the street. Doubtful individuals have a lot of good new technology to offer.
Which side? What's wrong with MT?
The fact that a) there are no legal regulations, b) the staff of banks and some DCs have no idea how the platform works
It's not the trading companies problem, it's the platform and moreover the traders...
*
Of course, if there are such "lovers of kicking the lock" in the company who have learned only that 1-1=0
The problem is that the market is not good, but the market is bad...
*
And also... i.e. with their statement: trade by the rules (legal) or as you have to
you are clearly and directly saying that MT is a sham? is that it?
Which side? What is wrong with MT?
The fact that a) there is no legislation, b) the staff of banks and some DTs have no idea how the platform works...
That is not a problem of the trading companies, but of the platform and the traders ...
*
Of course, if there are such "lovers of kicking the lock" in the company who only know that 1-1=0
If the company and the Authorities are such "lovers of kicking the lock" who have only studied 1-1=0, then it's obvious that this lock is not good, but it will be a proverb among people for a long time...
*
And another thing ... i.e. with your statement: trade by the rules (legal rules) or as you have to
You are saying explicitly that MT is a bummer, aren't you?
MT4 is a genius platform, all you have to do is remove lots and everything will improve dramatically, I think all banks will move to it. Lot trading is a step in the wrong direction, my IMHO.
2 kombat
There was a case where a man lost a deposit (on the MICEX, I think), sued and proved that the trades were made by a robot. He won the trial and the bank returned his money. There are probably no more of these things in the contract now, I don't know.
I'm more than sure it was blackest PR...
So, for more details, bank, platform, etc...
The robot is a robot, but I haven't seen any other agreement that doesn't have this clause:
- the client agrees to retain access to the terminal.
The court ruling, if there was one, is absurd and could easily be reversed by tangential decision.
Let me explain. If not the client traded, he broke the clause of the contract, so what can be his indulgence?
You might as well blame it on your neighbour or even better your mother-in-law... ;))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
I am only talking about the technical side of the issue!
There is always a choice - to trade according to the rules (legal regulations) or as you have to. Everyone understands the difference between exchanging currency in a bank and exchanging currency with dubious individuals on the street. Doubtful individuals have a lot of good new technology to offer.
then a technology and platform that doesn't have loca in principle is just more flawed
compared to the technology and platform that loc has!
--
you have a lock when you have an mt4 platform - but you don't have to use it.
and in another "flawed" technology you can't use loco, so you're obliged to trade only swing
--
So in one case there is a choice in another case there isn't.
You're a reasonable person and you're not going to argue,
If you don't have a choice, you are "inferior", not specifically you, because I understand you don't have a lock...
--
thats the difference in terms of choice...
MT4 is a genius platform, just remove lots and everything will improve dramatically, I think all banks will move to it. Lot trading is a step in the wrong direction, my IMHO.
Ahem... Do you even understand what lots are and what you are asking for anyway???
The whole beauty of MT apart from its informational and graphical component is its much more important part
trading: the trading itself and the excellent, transparent reporting
*
With the removal of "those nasty lots" we'll dive into the same Primus from FC or another netoplatform.
If you are not afraid of reporting roulades, the day after tomorrow it is unclear where you opened yesterday, etc.. then the flag in your hands,
but I don't want to switch from a Mercedes to a hand-operated Zap...
...
that's me citing the difference in terms of choice...
By the way YES!
A trader coming from netplatform just need not open the counter (lock) and he won't even notice the change.
(Except for for the better, in terms of usability of MT info part ;)
*
But the MTs ??? what ??? go for the Primus ???
Sorry... I could have done it myself years ago...
However, here's the MT because of its greater appeal and overall usability.
2 kombat, 2 YuraZ
There was no such line in the contract.
Indeed, it makes it harder for clients to visualise reporting.
There is no need to argue, what the client wants is what he chooses according to his preferences and the size of the deposit.