the broker's strange condition to prohibit certain strategies - page 3
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
Where do you make the minimum contract - the interbank? The interbank operates the exchange without any leverage and makes money on commission - an exchange transaction of 1000 quid between banks in different countries will bring them profit on a commission of how many fractions of a cent?
Banks have nothing to do with it, they set their own exchange rates, which are much worse than those of brokers and make money on it. This is already an inter-broker technology, without the participation of banks... or partial participation
Banks have nothing to do with it, they set their own exchange chickens, which are much worse than those of brokers... This is inter-broker technology.
The forex market is an interbank market. All quotes for brokers come from liquidity provider banks
What inter-broker technology?
The forex market is an interbank market. All quotations to brokers come from liquidity provider banks
What inter-broker technology?
Quotes != spread and commission and contract size...in essence there should go from less to more, brokers will contribute to forex pricing, now it is not so, they just take interbank quotes essentially and organise their kitchens
I mean there has to be some kind of clear, mutually influential hierarchy
In general, you should sue them, for good reason... I think they have already been sued for manipulation... but, apparently, there is no critical mass of appeals to influence somehow... in theory, these bans are artificial and explicate the unfair work of such organisations, when transactions are not being taken anywhere, otherwise there wouldn't be a conflict of interest
What kind of manipulation? If it is a dealer, not a broker, he does not have to withdraw anything. It is the client's counterparty to the transaction and nothing more. Therefore, there is always a conflict of interest between the dealer and the client.
So all this alleged "arbitrage" is de facto cheating. With all the ensuing consequences and reprisals for the client. Of course, there are decent companies, which simply tighten the terms of trade or terminate the contract with the client. But there are also decent offices that will at best cancel all the profit and at worst recalculate all the transactions at real market prices, as a result of which the deposit will go from surplus to deficit. I have already experienced this in my own experience.
So the potential user of such "arbitrage" must be aware of what he is dealing with and what the possible consequences are.
It's strange to me how the Market administration allows cheating products. This is not only a headache for dealing, but also misleading naive buyers who (even according to this thread) think that they will deal with some lawful arbitrage. But in fact they will be blacklisted and risk losing their money - but they are not warned about these consequences.
And even more surprising is the insolence of those who put up such products. So, you drink it slowly - drink it at your own risk. But when it's in the public domain... Let others sort out conflicts with DCs.
What kind of manipulation? If it is a dealer, not a broker, it is not obliged to withdraw anything. It is the client's counterparty to the transaction and nothing more. Therefore, there is always a conflict of interest between the dealer and the client.
So all this alleged "arbitrage" is de facto cheating. With all the ensuing consequences and reprisals for the client. Of course, there are decent companies, which simply tighten the terms of trade or terminate the contract with the client. But there are also decent offices that will at best cancel all the profit and at worst recalculate all the transactions at real market prices, as a result of which the deposit will go from surplus to deficit. I have already experienced this in my own experience.
So the potential user of such "arbitrage" must be aware of what he is dealing with and what the possible consequences are.
It's strange to me how the Market administration allows cheating products. This is not only a headache for dealing, but also misleading naive buyers who (even according to this thread) think that they will be engaged in some lawful arbitrage. But in fact they will be blacklisted and risk losing their money - but they are not warned about these consequences.
And even more surprising is the insolence of those who put out such products. So, you drink it slowly - drink it at your own risk. But when it's in the public domain... As if, let others sort out conflicts with DC.
you're overreacting, sir.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%80
The rest of the text is all bullshit except for the fact that the account can be banned, it's true. But here's a tiny nuance - any profitable trading system can be banned without trial and assistance, and get banned :) so where are the legs growing from? Welkom tank to trading on the phone? )
People have been deprived of their deposits by drawing pins for no reason at all, and there are still those who practice it... What are you thinking and writing about?
And you should not discuss Market products here, the topic is different.
What kind of manipulation? If it is a dealer, not a broker, it is not obliged to withdraw anything. It is the client's counterparty to the transaction and nothing more. Therefore, there is always a conflict of interest between the dealer and the client.
So all this alleged "arbitrage" is de facto cheating. With all the ensuing consequences and reprisals for the client. Of course, there are decent companies, which simply tighten the terms of trade or terminate the contract with the client. But there are also decent offices that will at best cancel all the profit and at worst recalculate all the transactions at real market prices, as a result of which the deposit will go from surplus to deficit. I have already experienced this in my own experience.
So the potential user of such "arbitrage" must be aware of what he is dealing with and what the possible consequences are.
It's strange to me how the Market administration allows cheating products. This is not only a headache for dealing, but also misleading naive buyers who (even according to this thread) think that they will be engaged in some lawful arbitrage. But in fact they will be blacklisted by dealing and risk losing the invested money - but they are not warned about these consequences.
And even more surprising is the insolence of those who put up such products. So, you drink it slowly - drink it at your own risk. But when it's in the public domain... Let others sort out conflicts with brokerage companies.
trading is essentially altruistic activity... maybe you're a dealing agent of a broker) so you defend them ... I think there is nothing illegal in arbitrage ... a trader uses all publicly available information ... For some it is the crossing of stochastic lines, for others it's comparing quotes from different sources ... no one forbids me to look at several sources and compare them to each other and make a decision based on this .... or what, I use the fastest source, it's quite legal, I know where quotes will go but I do nothing because it does not turn out well ...)
There are slow quotes and fast... but both are publicly available information that can and should be used... and if a broker can't provide fast quotes, it's his problem... why should i think - poor guy, he doesn't have enough money for fast infrastructure, let's support him and lose his money so he can get rich and not use it for his own purposes, the main thing in trading is to help others to get rich, not ourselves.... trading is essentially altruistic activity....
trading is essentially altruistic activity... maybe you're a dealing agent of a broker) protecting them ... I think there is nothing illegal in arbitrage ... a trader uses all publicly available information ... For some it is the crossing of stochastic lines, for others it's comparing quotes from different sources ... no one forbids me to look at several sources and compare them to each other and make a decision based on this .... or what, I use the fastest source, it's quite legal, I know where quotes will go but I do nothing because it does not turn out well ...)
There are slow quotes and fast... but both are publicly available information that can and should be used... and if a broker cannot provide fast quotes for his business, that's his problem... why should i think - poor thing, he doesn't have enough money for fast infrastructure, let's support him and let's lose money so he can get rich and not use it for his own purposes - the main thing in trading is to help others to get rich, not yourself.... trading is essentially altruistic activity -....
Dilling desk is by default a kitchen structure. Such a company does not benefit from traders working against their algorithms + the business model of such a company is built on a loss a priori. Instead of improving their algorithms for quotes and order execution, they just wrote in their documents that you cannot make money, but in other words. What claims can there be? You just don't need to work for such companies and that's it.
i completely agree ... You may not work with such brokers but they say it's forbidden... One thing they say is that you cannot make profit with arbitrage ... I do not think it's not profitable for us because we will lose because we are playing against you ... If you have such a strategy you cannot make money ... and you don't care about it ... it's not profitable ...
but in pro accounts you can...
and arbitrage itself has always been part of stock trading and absolutely legal and even necessary for price alignment...arbitrage != insider. these are totally different things...
You are overdoing it, sir.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%80
And the rest of the text is nonsense.
Let's not make unsubstantiated invective, let's have an argument. What exactly in my text seemed to you to be nonsense and why.
But here's a tiny nuance - any profitable storage system can be banned without trial, and banning :) so where are the legs growing from? Welkom tank to trading on the phone? )
People have been deprived of their deposits by drawing pins for no reason at all, and there are still those who practice it... what are you thinking and writing about?
I am not dealing with scalping systems, but with earning on knowinglynon-market quotes. So do not confuse the concepts. We don't have to worry about the difference between the market and our brokerage services.
We don't have to worry about the fact that the dealers are so shady, and they should be punished for it...
By the way, I myself went through all this about 8 years ago, but I never had the slightest thought to put such things in the public domain.
nowi:
and if a broker failed to provide his business with fast quotes, it's his problem... why should i think he doesn't have enough money for a fast infrastructure?
You certainly don't have to think about it. I'm only telling you about the practical realities, the consequences that await you. You can prove to the dealing room as much as you like when it recalculates your trades at market prices. These are your risks and you need to be prepared for them.
So the point of my post was not that earning this way is bad, but that you need to understand the risks you are taking on yourself. But when an inexperienced person is sold a bunker as if he is trading on an arbitrage TS (bearing only market risk), although in fact he is engaged in non-market cheating (and therefore has other risks), then it is wrong.
Let's not make unsubstantiated invective, but rather make an argument. What exactly in my text you thought was nonsense and why.
We are not actually talking about a scalping system, but about making money on knowinglynon-market quotes. So do not confuse the concepts. Any brokerage company has clearly stated in the regulations on