Who do regulators really work for?

FraudKiller

Private, 1st Class
Messages
50
FACT: All regulators pretend to exist for the sole purpose of protecting clients. Now, does that make sense when all economic systems are based on "Caveat Emptor"? So, how does a regulator regulate companies in an economic system based on Caveat Emptor??

The primary criteria by which a company chooses a regulator a balance between the prestige of the regulator and the cost of getting regulated. All companies KNOW that the regulator will rarely bother them.

Indeed, regulators exist to protect the companies that steal client money. The Dubai Financial Services Authority is robably the best regulator in the world, but.... the maximum leverage is 1:50 for personal accounts and 1:200 for professional accounts.

That said, better to use a broker that is regulated by the UK FCA, Dubai FSA, and the Australian ASIC. Forget about CySEC (kings of "no-touch" regulation). CySEC regulates companies that offer binary options which is completely corrupt and pure gambling.

FACT: Every broker in the world steals client money either using the front door or the back door. HOW? All broker software platforms are designed to help brokers "maximise their profits"! (ahhh hmmmm what exactly does that mean?). Brokers steal money using several tactics:-
- Re-quotes
- Look backs
- Slippage
- Withdrawals delayed for fake fictitious reasons
- Fake exchange rates for different currencies
- Fake spreads that allow the broker to close your trades and to make a profit doing so
- Conflicts of interest i.e. broker is a "Market Maker" which means they take a profit when you close a loss-making trade (ONLY use TRUE ECN/STP accounts)

Traders should understand that what they do not KNOW will definitely destroy their account so I suggest that all traders properly educate themselves. Or..... suffer the GUARANTEED horrible consequences

I have two trading accounts. One with an Exchange and one with a broker. I've known the CEO of the broker for many years and I am friends with the owner. The CEO told me this: "IF I don't want to pay you, you will NEVER get paid and, if you sue me, I will counter-sue you and you will pay me damages. Read my contract you signed because you signed your life away. If you do not have COMPLETE TRUST with your broker, do NOT open an account."

Welcome to the world of Forex brokerage houses. Caveat Emptor. You have been warned here and in many ther places on FPA website and the sheer volume of complaints on FPA prove my point..... If you get burnt, you only have yourself to blame.
 
FACT: All regulators pretend to exist for the sole purpose of protecting clients. Now, does that make sense when all economic systems are based on "Caveat Emptor"? So, how does a regulator regulate companies in an economic system based on Caveat Emptor??

The primary criteria by which a company chooses a regulator a balance between the prestige of the regulator and the cost of getting regulated. All companies KNOW that the regulator will rarely bother them.

Indeed, regulators exist to protect the companies that steal client money. The Dubai Financial Services Authority is robably the best regulator in the world, but.... the maximum leverage is 1:50 for personal accounts and 1:200 for professional accounts.

That said, better to use a broker that is regulated by the UK FCA, Dubai FSA, and the Australian ASIC. Forget about CySEC (kings of "no-touch" regulation). CySEC regulates companies that offer binary options which is completely corrupt and pure gambling.

FACT: Every broker in the world steals client money either using the front door or the back door. HOW? All broker software platforms are designed to help brokers "maximise their profits"! (ahhh hmmmm what exactly does that mean?). Brokers steal money using several tactics:-
- Re-quotes
- Look backs
- Slippage
- Withdrawals delayed for fake fictitious reasons
- Fake exchange rates for different currencies
- Fake spreads that allow the broker to close your trades and to make a profit doing so
- Conflicts of interest i.e. broker is a "Market Maker" which means they take a profit when you close a loss-making trade (ONLY use TRUE ECN/STP accounts)

Traders should understand that what they do not KNOW will definitely destroy their account so I suggest that all traders properly educate themselves. Or..... suffer the GUARANTEED horrible consequences

I have two trading accounts. One with an Exchange and one with a broker. I've known the CEO of the broker for many years and I am friends with the owner. The CEO told me this: "IF I don't want to pay you, you will NEVER get paid and, if you sue me, I will counter-sue you and you will pay me damages. Read my contract you signed because you signed your life away. If you do not have COMPLETE TRUST with your broker, do NOT open an account."

Welcome to the world of Forex brokerage houses. Caveat Emptor. You have been warned here and in many ther places on FPA website and the sheer volume of complaints on FPA prove my point..... If you get burnt, you only have yourself to blame.

One thing you need to know, Forex is still on grey side not like those other financial instruments which is listed on exchanges. Hence, regulator is full of shxt if the broker wanna scam your money. For instance you can see 1.0885 EUR/USD on your broker and I might see 1.0890 on mine. That's my view.
 
I'd say I have to agree that the bulk of regulators are less than helpful. Still, I do see the CFTC, NFA, as well as the UK FCA & FOS making enough rulings forcing repayments of money owed to say that regulators are all solely in the business of actively assisting scammers.

Most seem more indifferent - They just want to collect money from brokers for registration and do little or nothing until enough complaints come crashing in.
 
Yep. Capitalism is the short-form of the full term which is "Red-Claw Capitalism". Now, governments want RCC because every time money changes hands, the government wins. You could say the every government is non-business equivalent of the forex "market maker". Caveat Emptor is good for government and even good for insurance companies that give compensation and then people buy replacement goods. A wonderful economic circle of ups and downs. Now, what government would want to regulate such a wonderfully profitable system as Caveat Emptor.

And, forex is the perfect system to transfer wealth from dumb money to smart money. BTW, let's say that all clients found the 5 honest brokers and there was no more theft of client funds and no more destroying client accounts that become very profitable such that (formerly) "smart money" started to transfer the (formerly) "dumb money"..... Ahhhhow long do you think that would last? Yep! About one day, but the smart money would give it a week at most just to be sure they should believe what they are seeing is a potentially permanent shift. Enough said.

A world to the wise is enough. Go ahead and trade forex and don't give up looking for those 5 HONEST brokers who will protect your interests not destroy your account.
 
As per my view regulators are not helpful at all, latest example BDB is still in the Open Business :(
 
One f the principal reasons I think forex remains on the grey side is because the dynamics of forex investing and traditional investing by High Net Worth Individuals (HNWI) have nothing in common i.e. you can open a forex account with as little as zero and start trading with usd$10 whereas Goldman Sachs requires usd$10,000,000.

The typical HNWI (and, there are a few million in the world) goes to an asset manager and invests say usd$1m and is put into investments that have a 3-year lock-up and terminates in 7 or 10 years. A LOT can go wrong in this time.
FACT: The minimum amount is high and the time-horizon is long.

The typical forex investor (and, there are tens of millions in the world) goes to a broker and invests say usd$10,000 and he trades and some traders win and some traders lose. A forex-hungry person will not find many platforms open to the public (ZuluTrade is the best known) whereby the investor can join a PAMM platform and make money every month until the end of time.
FACT: The minimum amount is LOW and the time-horizon is SHORT.

Let's say a trader opens a forex account with usd$100,000 and he discovers it is more difficult than he thought so he asks his chum to "trade my account". ALL the rules and systems and processes that govern the investments made by HNWI do NOT work in the forx world. For example, by the time a typical asset manager would finish his KYC onboarding process, the account is probably wiped out! And, what asset management company will have an interest in helping some poor chap with a usd10,000 forex account when the cost of KYC exceeds any possible profit.

And, it is most likely that the asset management company is trading forex for their own account (leveraging -- using -- client money) so they can make big profits and then give the client as little profit as possible so why would any asset manager want to trade forex for anyone else.

I have concluded that the best model for the forex industry is for the role of trader to not be a regulated activity up to say 10 clients whereby the investor can give the trader a Limited Power of Attorney, but after say 10 client, it is defined a regulated activity.

Brokers know that the current system of regulation is NOT properly skilled or sufficiently knowledgeable to regulate the forex industry. One only needs to look at the pure criminality of binary options -- both in terms of the fact that they are pure gambling and the fact that every options broker is a criminal organisation. I mean, all CySEC needs to do is to be sure that clients can withdrawal money from the options broker and that would be a BIG IMPROVEMENT. No chance. the regulatory mafia protecting the petty (or, not so petty) brokerage criminals.
 
As per my view regulators are not helpful at all, latest example BDB is still in the Open Business :(

That's because Cysec saw selling forex licenses as an easy way to make money. Now they've got half the world complaining about their BS regulations.

On the flipside of the coin, EVERY penalty ruling from the CFTC I've seen which involves abuse of clients says clients get paid first and any additional fines to be collected go to the CFTC only after clients are paid.
 
That's because Cysec saw selling forex licenses as an easy way to make money. Now they've got half the world complaining about their BS regulations.

On the flipside of the coin, EVERY penalty ruling from the CFTC I've seen which involves abuse of clients says clients get paid first and any additional fines to be collected go to the CFTC only after clients are paid.

You are right but I saw some news that Cysec fines some broker as well.
 
Cysec can do a maximum fine of 350,000 Euros. That's less than some of these brokers steal in a day. Cysec also hasn't ordered a single penny to be returned to traders. So far, I've seen only 1 or 2 Cyprus Financial Ombudsman rulings in favor of traders.
 
Yep! I have a policy of AVOIDING all companies based in Cyprus and Australia. As you said, Cyprus saw it as fast money and british empties our jails and sent them to australia so it doesn't take a genius to work out why we should all avoid australia. UK FCA is the best of a very bad bunch
 
Back
Top