Nice try, but it does not answer my question at all.
My post wasn’t in response to your question. It was posted as a courtesy to the questions posed in weeks past within this thread as people have been waiting for Donna to confirm our legitimate existence.
I’m not sure why you feel it necessary to take such an adversarial tone with your questioning. I was kind enough to take the time to furnish documentation to Donna in order to address the important questions of forum members. Given the fact that we never came here asking for anyone’s business, I didn’t really need to do that. I did it anyway as a courtesy.
If you can point out another brokerage which has done this on the public forum, I would be interested to know. I think I’ve been quite accommodating, despite how I’ve been treated.
If it’s not appreciated, I will stop participating in this thread. If you’re unable to extend a minimum level of courtesy in your future communications with me, I will also stop participating.
The last time I checked, Finland did have regulation for forex broker
Finland was unregulated until 3 months ago. As previously stated, FinFX formed a brokerage in an unregulated jurisdiction and operated as such for 3 years. Of course, they were attacked in similar fashion as you are attacking BDFX today. They proved everyone wrong, and we intend to do the same.
Many, many well-respected brokers, like CFH Markets, purposefully establish a framework which avoids regulation. For example, CFH only accepts ECPs, and thus, operates under exemption of the UK FSA. They purposefully do not accept certain clients in order to avoid the burden of regulation.
As I’ve previously explained, BDFX was a private broker operating similarly to CFH Markets until this year. We were established in 2009 and offered institutional quality liquidity to private traders and Fund Managers otherwise unavailable on the MT4 platform at the time.
We have chosen Belgium as our current jurisdiction in order to immediately offer our services to retail clients, without delay and further expense, as we undertake efforts to identify a more appropriate long-term jurisdiction.
Launching a retail brokerage is expensive and time consuming. Also, most regulated jurisdictions won’t issue a license for anywhere from 12-24 months. We aren’t interested in sitting idle during that period, and have launched to retail traders from Belgium in the interim.
There’s really only a few jurisdictions on earth that are even remotely respectable in terms of regulation which will actually grant a license these days:
(1) UK (FSA) – Extremely difficult to get a license as a new broker. Could take well over a year.
(2) Australia (ASIC) – Requires an Australian resident as director; none of our shareholders or directors are Australian.
Germany and Switzerland require you to obtain a banking license, and NFA is no longer issuing RFED licenses in the US.
We could have obtained a quick license in some nonsense jurisdiction like BVI, Cyprus, Belize, etc (like many other “regulated” brokers) but feel that is less respectable than actually sitting in a well-respected international city like Brussels, Belgium.
We’ve recognized a climate where many of the more clever and seasoned self-directed traders recognize that regulation is overrated, and that regulated firms are capable to steal their funds in much the same manner as unregulated companies. We understand there aren’t many of those at FPA, and never asked for anyone’s business here.
We understand many traders prefer the false security of regulation, and we respect that. We aren’t asking anyone for their business, but we’d certainly like to earn it over time.
I’ve seen ASIC and FSA regulated brokerages steal money from clients by modifying historical data, manipulating MAM plug-ins to cause accounting errors on managed sub-accounts, and filling orders at off-market pricing. Half of the people participating in this thread have most likely had their own money egregiously stolen by “well regulated” brokers, and don’t even know it.
The regulators can’t do anything about it because it’s virtually impossible to regulate a
price feed. Brokers are too smart to engage in obvious and heinous fraud these days. They do it subversively via an MT4 application no one understands the intricacies of.
Of course, if a broker goes under or disappears with your money, somebody goes to jail. Your money is still gone, and you lose anyway. And, no broker is dumb enough to steal money in that manner anyways. They steal your money by manipulating your MT4 accounts. Regulators don’t understand MetaTrader or the price feed structures to properly oversee this either.
I’ve operated regulated Forex entities on all sides of the business, including with the NFA. I’ve seen first-hand the fact that regulators still don’t fully understand Forex or the product they are attempting to “regulate”, and it allows these brokers to cheat and steal regardless of their so-called oversight.
Anyone with actual experience running a regulated FX business knows and understands this.
As a professional in the industry, it makes sense to follow this course in order to break into the retail market as quickly as possible. I don’t expect everyone to understand or appreciate this, but it is our motivation in launching from Belgium.
As I’ve mentioned, we’re not asking for your business. We’d like to earn it, and whether that happens sooner or later, we look forward.
I am wondering why Ryan doesn't seem to want to answer my question.
You posted on Friday. I don’t work on the weekends. Did you expect a response over the weekend?
As I’ve previously said: we are not asking anyone for their business. I understand the FPA operates on a “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” mentality. I’m happy to accept that.
So, maybe in time we will earn your business.
Bottom line: We’re offering raw interbank spreads and trading conditions competitive enough to gain the interest and attention of a certain segment of traders.
If you prefer a regulated broker, don’t open an account with us. If you want to try us out, we’re happy to earn your trust and your business.
