GlobalPrime is a dishonest scam broker too. Please don't fall into their trap.

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
Just to be fair!
Why do you blame them for losing trades on the non-ECN products?
What kind of manipulations exactly did they do that's affected your trading results?
Slippage, stophunt behaviors, delayed execution, or something else?
Maybe all of the above? I wasn't alert enough to fend against such experienced crooks right from the beginning. Now that everytihng has already happened, it would be too late to try and catch them in the act now.

However, and fortunately too, they have been caught in the past for similar dishonest acts and misconducts:
Market Manipulation.png


Order processing misconduct.png


The same question could be asked: why didn't any of the investors caught them doing it? Only after the company had made a big mistake and is about to collapse and the adminstrators took over with its investigation teams, having full access to the company's internal records that they were able to uncover such acts, and charged them for it. It shows how experienced these crooks are in doing such underhanded acts and not getting caught by regular people who do not have access to such information.

Like previously mentioned about Vidarr, did you see the explanation they gave about why the Director of Gleneagle and Vidarr formed a offshore entity together? To facilitate payment. Yes, really. Why would they need to incorporate a new company just for receiving payments, and have both the director of Vidarr and Gleneagle on it, if they are not related in some way? It's to "pass money around" as it is harder to detect if the money is passed around within the same company, as compared to passing it between the bank accounts of different companies which would have to go through the bank and leave a record of the transaction.

Vidarr is a LP to the clients of Globalprime FX, which is owned by Gleneagle Securities. If the client's trade is executed with a bias for the LP they are affiliated with, then there is a conflict of interest. If there is such conflict of interest, it has to be disclosed. They do boast about being a honest and transparent broker. So where's the transparency in this?

If anyone would like to learn more about a company's obligation to make proper disclosures. You can read more on this very informative article here: https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2015-283.html
 

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
Just to be fair!
Why do you blame them for losing trades on the non-ECN products?
What kind of manipulations exactly did they do that's affected your trading results?
Slippage, stophunt behaviors, delayed execution, or something else?

I've made a reply answering your questions a few hours ago, but the thread cannot be seen yet as it is still pending approval, probably due to the post having images and links in it that needs to be checked by the admin. You will see my reply appear above this post once it is approved.
 

Trader09

Private
Messages
22
Maybe all of the above? I wasn't alert enough to fend against such experienced crooks right from the beginning. Now that everytihng has already happened, it would be too late to try and catch them in the act now.

However, and fortunately too, they have been caught in the past for similar dishonest acts and misconducts:
View attachment 65869


View attachment 65870


The same question could be asked: why didn't any of the investors caught them doing it? Only after the company had made a big mistake and is about to collapse and the adminstrators took over with its investigation teams, having full access to the company's internal records that they were able to uncover such acts, and charged them for it. It shows how experienced these crooks are in doing such underhanded acts and not getting caught by regular people who do not have access to such information.

Like previously mentioned about Vidarr, did you see the explanation they gave about why the Director of Gleneagle and Vidarr formed a offshore entity together? To facilitate payment. Yes, really. Why would they need to incorporate a new company just for receiving payments, and have both the director of Vidarr and Gleneagle on it, if they are not related in some way? It's to "pass money around" as it is harder to detect if the money is passed around within the same company, as compared to passing it between the bank accounts of different companies which would have to go through the bank and leave a record of the transaction.

Vidarr is a LP to the clients of Globalprime FX, which is owned by Gleneagle Securities. If the client's trade is executed with a bias for the LP they are affiliated with, then there is a conflict of interest. If there is such conflict of interest, it has to be disclosed. They do boast about being a honest and transparent broker. So where's the transparency in this?

If anyone would like to learn more about a company's obligation to make proper disclosures. You can read more on this very informative article here: https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2015-283.html


I have accounts with various brokers including some very popular bucket shop brokers in town.
So, I'm quite familiar with the tricks they use to cause our trades to lose.

The most often trick is negative slippage used to undermine our profit.


I have an account with Global Prime too.
Although they have the most high rating reviews on FPA, I still have my doubts.

So, after 6+ months trading with them, I use a tool to check slippage for all trades and the result is:

Most of the time I got Positive slippage.
The Negative slippage happened some time, but not much at all.

The money I got from Positive slippage - Negative slippage is quite significant.


I trade all kinds of instruments:
As you can see here: Zero slippage.

1623381078887.png


Lastly, there are no threads or reviews on FPA stating issues regarding withdrawal difficulty or scam acts.

OK, let be honest!
There's nothing wrong noticeably with your losing 1,046 trades on the non-ECN products, right?

No slippage, stophunt behaviors, delayed execution, right?

So, you can't blame your loss on them. They didn't do anything to affect your trades
 

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
Hi Shilo,

Vidarr does not hold client capital. We provide liquidity to plenty of large scale brokers who use the pricing from Vidarr and comment that the depth and pricing is the best they’ve seen.

Vidarr is also disclosed on our website along with other Liquidity providers here: https://www.globalprime.com/best-execution/

Certainly Vidarr doesn't hold clients' capital. We all know that. What most people don't know, is that Vidarr Capital is the Bucket Shop which Gleneagle pass their all their clients' indices and XTIUSD trades to. Clients' capital are held by Gleneagle. The only thing Vidarr is holding to, is the profits from client's losses that is passed to them by Gleneagle.


As for Global Prime FX UK entity and Mark Davison from Vidarr being attached to it – the company was incorporated to assist with payments services and since a UK director was required we chose Mark. It is a dormant company and no business has run through there since it was created.

Regards,
Jeremy

Of all the people you could have picked, you just had to go for the Director of the counterparty which you execute your clients' trade with, huh?

Now as promised, let's look at one of the other shady company that this Mark Davison was also a previous Director of, X Market Trading.

IMG_20210611_104152.jpg

This company closed down with a debt of over $200,000 GBP:

IMG_20210611_105940.jpg

Based on the reviews of X Market Trading on a reputable website, Glassdoor, X Market Trading very likely owed employees and creditors money and phoenixed the company to avoid paying up.

IMG_20210611_111504.jpg
IMG_20210611_111439.jpgIMG_20210611_111549.jpg

There are a few other equally bad reviews about this company. You can click on the image to expand it and get a better view.

Now, liquidating the company once their game is up, leaving creditors with all the debt and employees unpaid, running with the money to go start another company. Doesn't that sounds familiar? Didn't the same thing happened to BBY and Tricom that Lance Rosenberg was a part of too? And now this 2 guys have established globalprime FX to start another operation?

Is this guy gathering all the other fraudsters with similar style of scamming to form a syndicate together or what?
 

Trader09

Private
Messages
22
The tool I use to check is Tradefora.
I'm quite impressed with the Positive slippage I got from Global Prime, a significant amount of bonus from our won trades.

Unfortunately, Tradefora is experiencing problems, so I can't show the Positive and Negative Slippage Dashboard.

At first I'm not a profitable, so I can't raise my voice whether they are truly good or not.
Because you know, some brokers treat you very nicely when you constantly lose and then modify your trading conditions badly when you start to win.

But now I have withdrawn all capital and trade using profit, I don't notice anything change. The execution is still fast and the slippage is still positive for most of the time. I monitor these things very strictly.
 

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
Despite pages upon pages of concrete, solid evidence that proves the misconduct of these companies and the masterminds behind it, there will still be people who would continue to bring businesses to, and transact with such scam companies, and such outcome is not unheard of.

There is a form of cheating, known as small cheats, or low level cheating. There is a piece of essay written by a Professor of Law that describes this very well. I will share it here and hopefully it will shed some light on this, and let people be informed of such phenomena so they can make better informed decision when deciding which company to do business or invest with.

I will copy a short extract of the article in this post, and anyone interested can give it a read.

"INTRODUCTION
On May 29, 1622, the English Court of Star Chamber found the London grocer Francis Newton guilty of a nearly decade-long pattern of cheating on the weight of wares and containers. The court fined Newton the enormous sum of £1,000 and required him to make a public apology before the Grocers’ Company, the London guild to which he belonged. The men who heard this confession on July 26, 1622 were his trading partners, customers, friends, guild brethren, enemies, and neighbors. They were part of a network that ran from the import merchants and local manufacturers from whom the grocers bought wares, to the provin- cial middlemen and retailers to whom the grocers in turn sold those goods. These men all knew about the allegations against Newton. Three lawsuits over the previous four years had involved deposition testimony from over 100 individuals, including some of the men in that room and many of the men and women who sold to and bought from Newton. Gossip about his misdealing had spread through the grocer community of London and well out into the countryside. The organization of Newton’s trade encapsulated the prerequisites of public- and private-ordering explanations for cooperation in contract- ing. He engaged in repeat, bilateral transactions with a large number of other traders. All of these traders together existed within a dense net-work in which reputation-creating gossip could flow almost costlessly. A powerful guild could, in theory, impose and enforce boycotts, and an extensive and sophisticated court system provided a state-sanctioned means of punishing defectors. And yet, despite the existence of the presumed preconditions for cooperation, Newton cheated. He cheated a lot of people, each a little bit, and he got away with it for a long time. And then, even after he was
caught and very publicly punished, he continued to do business within the same network, in the same location, for the rest of his life. He died in 1630, a man of property, perhaps not as successful as he would have
been but wealthy enough to leave land in the countryside and a going concern in central London to his heirs. Fathers continued to place their sons with him as apprentices, and none of his existing apprentices left him after his sentence, though they could have done so under the rules and practices of the guild. Merchants continued to sell him expensive goods. His old customers did not abandon him. And not- withstanding the fact that his nephew, the eventual heir to his business,
had been his apprentice during the time of his trial and punishment and testified on his uncle’s behalf, no stigma seems to have attached to him in his career. The nephew became a governor of the Grocers’ Company,
a knight, and a very wealthy man. Private-ordering theories would likely not predict this outcome.
These theories hold that merchants have an incentive to act honestly because they will get a bad reputation if they act dishonestly, and this will damage their future business prospects. This Essay argues that
reputation-based private-ordering theories predict the wrong outcome in the Newton case, and in similar cases of low-level cheating both historical and modern, because they fail to recognize that not all opportunistic behavior is the same. Reputation-based private ordering that creates a disincentive for individuals or firms to commit big cheats may not effectively prevent the sort of small cheats in which Newton engaged. The difference between big and small cheats lies primarily in the difficulty of discovery, the cheater’s plausible deniability, and the victim’s willingness to suffer the flawed performance in silence. The big cheat— failure to deliver or to pay, delivery of unusable goods, hold-up, or signifi-cant misrepresentation—will rarely pass unnoticed. But victims of small cheats—the chiseling, shirking, and taking advantage at the margins— may never detect the cheating. And if victims discover the breach, the cheat may be minor enough that they may not be sure whether a trading partner had merely made a mistake she will happily correct, committed
an inadvertent breach that will never happen again, or deliberately wronged them. In addition, even if victims discover what they believe is low-level cheating, they may still prefer not to publicize it. Doing so may
be too much effort; victims may want to continue to do business with the cheater; or they may not be certain that others will believe their claims that the cheater cheated. If victims do not realize they have been cheated or prefer not to impugn the cheater’s reputation, they cannot leverage either private ordering or the courts to discipline the cheater.
From the cheater’s perspective, therefore, honesty may not pay when one can profit from small cheats without suffering future consequences.
Small cheats thus appear to raise governance challenges that neither public nor reputation-based private ordering can solve. Today, firms
with bargaining power can put monitoring and verification terms into their contracts to try to prevent shirking and punish small cheats with
liquidated damages. Consumers, by contrast, facing contracts of adhe-sion and unable to monitor the performance of the companies with which they transact, have limited options."
 

Trader09

Private
Messages
22
So you admit 2807 trades of yours were executed correctly and properly with GP, right? :)
It seems like you lost because of your poor trading skills with very low R:R ratio.

If your conspiracy were true, then how come there's no complaints regarding withdrawal problems.
I mean TRUE problems.

Like if a guy win 100,000 USD and decide to withdraw all, that would be the broker's loss if the broker runs B-Book model like you are implying. They would probably make it very difficult for him to get his funds.

If they were that horrible like you said, how come they have got the most good reviews on FPA and no Scam alert threads on here???


In my experience, most corrupted brokers would offer very high leverages like 1:500+ or even 1:2000.

The brokers that offer low leverages like 1:100 or 1:200 like GP are the ones to be trusted more, not completely, but more reliable.
 

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
There's nothing wrong noticeably with your losing 1,046 trades on the non-ECN products, right?

No slippage, stophunt behaviors, delayed execution, right?

So, you can't blame your loss on them. They didn't do anything to affect your trades

My post may have been too lenghty and I know most people wouldn't read through all of it. Which may be the reason why you missed out on some very important pointers.

There are many ways a broker can cheat or scam a person, and it is not just limited to slippage or execution. It is illegal to lie about the type of service a company provide. If the service provided is different from what was advertised, the company have to be held accountable as well. Or else anyone could just literally lie about anything in order to get customers.

I had shared an article in one of my previous post about how a bank got fined over $200 million for not properly disclosing information that is an important factor when making investment decisions. Do you think they got fined that much because it is a minor problem?

Disclosures is important because clients make decisions based off of it. Do you condone a company calling itself an ECN broker but behind your back is acting as a market maker? Or worst, advertise as being transparent and honest, but behind your back pass your trades to an affiliated party without informing you of such preference?

Like the essay I just shared on small cheat, low level cheating is not only difficult to detect, but even harder to prove if you do not have the resources to detect such cheats.

I have also previously already provided an explanation of a similar nature, which I will quote here:
they have been caught in the past for similar dishonest acts and misconducts:
View attachment 65869


View attachment 65870


The same question could be asked: why didn't any of the investors caught them doing it? Only after the company had made a big mistake and is about to collapse and the adminstrators took over with its investigation teams, having full access to the company's internal records that they were able to uncover such acts, and charged them for it. It shows how experienced these crooks are in doing such underhanded acts and not getting caught by regular people who do not have access to such information.

Like previously mentioned about Vidarr, did you see the explanation they gave about why the Director of Gleneagle and Vidarr formed a offshore entity together? To facilitate payment. Yes, really. Why would they need to incorporate a new company just for receiving payments, and have both the director of Vidarr and Gleneagle on it, if they are not related in some way? It's to "pass money around" as it is harder to detect if the money is passed around within the same company, as compared to passing it between the bank accounts of different companies which would have to go through the bank and leave a record of the transaction.

Vidarr is a LP to the clients of Globalprime FX, which is owned by Gleneagle Securities. If the client's trade is executed with a bias for the LP they are affiliated with, then there is a conflict of interest. If there is such conflict of interest, it has to be disclosed. They do boast about being a honest and transparent broker. So where's the transparency in this?

If anyone would like to learn more about a company's obligation to make proper disclosures. You can read more on this very informative article here: https://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2015-283.html

They have been caught in the past, but not by regular investor or clients of the company like us. It is well-concealed enough that it was only discovered in the end by investigators that have access to the entire company's records.
 

Shiro21

Private
Messages
59
So you admit 2807 trades of yours were executed correctly and properly with GP, right? :)
It seems like you lost because of your poor trading skills with very low R:R ratio.

If your conspiracy were true, then how come there's no complaints regarding withdrawal problems.
I mean TRUE problems.

Like if a guy win 100,000 USD and decide to withdraw all, that would be the broker's loss if the broker runs B-Book model like you are implying. They would probably make it very difficult for him to get his funds.

If they were that horrible like you said, how come they have got the most good reviews on FPA and no Scam alert threads on here???


In my experience, most corrupted brokers would offer very high leverages like 1:500+ or even 1:2000.

The brokers that offer low leverages like 1:100 or 1:200 like GP are the ones to be trusted more, not completely, but more reliable.
How would you know what R:R ratio I have? Unless you are from globalprime with access to my trade records. ;)

I'm going to quote myself so we can reference it again.
"Self Traded Losses", that's a really bold claim for you to make, knowing full well the condition my trades were executed under.

I'll take you up on your challenge and prove to everyone here if those were indeed "self traded losses".

There is a total of 2807 trades executed on my trading account:

View attachment 65854

1,761 trades were made on currency pairs (ECN products). 1,046 trades was made on Indices and Commodities (Non-ECN products)
1761 + 1046 = 2807, not a single trade missing.

Now let's take a look at how the profit and loss is distributed, and if it is really self traded losses.

First, the 1,761 trade on the ECN products:
View attachment 65855


Next, the 1,046 trades on the non-ECN products, which were all executed through the shady Vidarr Capital:

View attachment 65856


If it was indeed entirely caused by "self-traded losses" as you have claimed, I would have lost more on the ECN products already, seeing as how I've traded much more on those products. But instead, the result and evidence once again speaks for itself. All the losses where concentrated on their so-called "Non-ECN products". Coincidence much?

If my R:R ratio is so bad, it would show across the board, on both ECN and non-ECN products. But that's not the case now, is it? It glaringly obvious how the non-ECN product is the only side making a loss. The reason for that is clear as day. Non-ECN means market-maker. Market-maker makes a profit from your loss. Is there any further need to explain how this works all over again?

Why are representatives from Globalprime not the one replying here? And instead is dispatching some member who recently just joined and posted a good review about Globalprime to come over here and fight their case for them. Or is this guy a representative from globalprime hiding behind a normal member's account? Because the replies seem exceptionally targeted. Pardon me if I'm being overly sensitive.
 
Top