IKON GM Nailed by the NFA for Using a Virtual Dealer Plugin

[Pharaoh]

In fact, even in the NFA case, the customers involved in this matter amounted to less than 0.2% of the Ikon Group clients and no more than 3% of the Ikon GM trading volume (as referred to and confirmed in the NFA complaint).

We say this to make it manifestly clear to our dear clients that the number of the Ikon Group clients involved in this matter are minimal and comprise a minute fraction of our client base of, as we stated earlier, no more than 0.2%. This is practically so because we at Ikon Group hold the highest standard of trading integrity and trustworthy industry standards and further we are proud to say that we always strive to supply our customers with the most competitive pricing and best possible price fills.

While this matter does not involve the vast majority of the Ikon Group clients, however, we feel it incumbent upon us, to deny the allegations of the NFA, albeit it they are not significant considering they only relate to circa 0.2% of the Ikon Group clients.

So, it looks like you are saying that IKON feels that it's perfectly ok to have cheated traders as long as it's only a small percentage of traders. Can I borrow your lawyers? I was thinking of robbing a bank and want your guys to defend me on the basis that I obviously am not a criminal and don't deserve any punishment since I didn't rob all the rest of the banks in the world.

Why can't big brokers just strap on a pair and admit that they did something terribly wrong and are making sure that nothing like it will ever happen again? These weasel-style denials only further undermine what little confidence traders might have in such companies.


So, can IKON's rep swear that NONE of IKON's subsidiaries around the world are now using the Virtual Dealer Plugin? Can IKON's rep swear that IKON will take all necessary steps to make CERTAIN that no IKON subsidiary will every use any software like this to cheat traders again?

If yes, post IKON's pledge here for all to see. If no, just ignore the questions and everyone here at the FPA will know what the real answers are.

 

[tehilla]

can any one suggestet a good forex broker one

i would be grateful if some one can suggest to me a good forex broker. recently a friend of mine who trades with fxpro is having some serious problems with them, they have refused to release his withdrawals for over 6 months now. i don't know if the NFA can do any thing about brokers who refuse to release withdraws to their clients. this has almost crumbled his biz.

 

[Pharaoh]

Remember to be very careful of anyone pushing a "one size fits all" brokerage. You need a broker that works for your trading style and personal needs.

These should help:

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore.../11411-so-there-any-brokers-anyone-likes.html

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore...ns-competitions/4474-best-forex-broker-s.html

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/forex-forum/forex-basics-boot-camp/2333-how-select-forex-broker.html


And, getting back on topic, I wonder if Ikon's rep has the nerve to leave an official company reply. As far as I'm concerned, a non-response will be the equivalent to saying "IKON GM and its subsidiaries may currently be using cheating software and/or may start using cheating software on any platform at any time."

Hey IKON! Give us an answer. Does your company promise that no subsidiaries are currently using the Virtual Dealer Plugin? Does your company promise that steps will be taken to make sure that this software or any software like it will never be used by IKON GM or any of it's subsidiaries?

 

[LEHayes]

YEAH!!!! I got my IKON check today in the mail. Now although I lost several thousands of dollars using their system, I am proud to say, (sarcastically) I got my check in the mail from them today. It came in an envelope all by it's lonesomes, no explanation, no apology, no clarifications on why they cut me a check. I got a whole whopping $4.95 USD. Not bad considering the money I put into their pockets from the bad trades that took place. Not on my part.

Anyway, I stopped doing business with them when this happened and I have suggested folks avoid them like the plague. Now this documentation proves I was right. The check in itself is my proof of admition of guilt for their actions.

Thanks for the heads up here, I never would have known why they sent me a check otherwise (heh heh).

 

[Laurie Gold]

Hey Pharaoh,

Just came across this post, (don't know why I didn't see it before) and after reading it, I came up with an interesting thought. Since the virtual dealer plugin is, after reading the NFA finding pseudo illegal, could we subpoena Boston Technologies for a list of Brokers who purchased it.

I have this stirring in my head and have to figure out a way, and I will, to get Boston Technologies to produce the list. Another thought is, and I don't know if the FPA has a contact person at the NFA, have the NFA obtain the list. Considering the NFA is practically strangling us in an effort to protect us, I think disclosing a list of Brokerage's that purchased technology that has the ability to manipulate prices or allow for asymmetrical slippage would be in their mandate.

Thoughts?

 

[Pharaoh]

I don't see any reference to BT in the case documents. Do you have some info that they are one of the sources for the plugin?

Assuming any US company supplied plugins like this, I'll wager the NFA already has a list. The issue would be offshore sources that are beyond their reach.

 

[hyper]

I don't see any reference to BT in the case documents. Do you have some info that they are one of the sources for the plugin?

Boston Technologies claim that they are just a reseller of the plugin.

You can clearly see their logo on the documentation, as I wrote 2 years ago in the Virtual Dealer Plugin thread:

 

[Pharaoh]

Nice to know that there are companies that are proud resellers of a product that can be used to break NFA rules and rip off traders.

 

[RahmanSL]

My thoughts!

Isn't/aren't there law(s) holding sellers & re-sellers accountable for selling product(s) that they knowingly or unknowingly know can be used for frauds???

BT is well aware of the product potentials for fraud by openly publishing that information, but it still doesn't absorbed them from being held accountable as they willingly participated in selling/pushing a product that can be used to cheat consumers.

This could potentially be a huge case if someone has the necessary financial means and time to file a case against BT.

 

[Pharaoh]

BT is a reseller. We don't know if Ikon and the others using this in the USA got it from BT, another reseller, or directly from MetaQuotes.

It would be interesting if clients of brokers caught using this in the USA asked the NFA to disclose who sold it to the brokers and also asked the NFA to demand a list of purchasers from MetaQuotes, BT, and any other resellers.