Emini's for $500 margin?
- Thread starter dowsallwet
- Start date
FYI, these wire instructions are awefully wrong:
EURO WIRE INSTRUCTIONS
* Lloyd Bank, London
* Swift: 50913098
* Harris Trust and Savings Bank
* Chicago, IL
* Swift: HATRUS44
* Account holder REFCO, LLC
* Account # 30089-263-9375
* Customer Name & Account #
www.daytrade4less.com/wire_transfer.html
EURO WIRE INSTRUCTIONS
* Lloyd Bank, London
* Swift: 50913098
* Harris Trust and Savings Bank
* Chicago, IL
* Swift: HATRUS44
* Account holder REFCO, LLC
* Account # 30089-263-9375
* Customer Name & Account #
www.daytrade4less.com/wire_transfer.html
This one, too ...
EURO WIRE INSTRUCTIONS
* Lloyds Bank
* London, England, U.K.
* Swift Address: LOYDGB2L (MT202)
* Acct #: 59013089
* Harris Trust and Savings Bank
* Chicago, IL, U.S.A.
* Swift Address: HATRUS44 (MT100)
* FAO: Rosenthal Collins Group 30.7 Acct
* Account # 30089-396-438-4
* FFC: Customer Name & Account #
EURO WIRE INSTRUCTIONS
* Lloyds Bank
* London, England, U.K.
* Swift Address: LOYDGB2L (MT202)
* Acct #: 59013089
* Harris Trust and Savings Bank
* Chicago, IL, U.S.A.
* Swift Address: HATRUS44 (MT100)
* FAO: Rosenthal Collins Group 30.7 Acct
* Account # 30089-396-438-4
* FFC: Customer Name & Account #
About their commissions :
I contacted them before I when I was looking for a firm and they matched my current rates. ($4.90 RT on the eMini´s) and this is not too long agoo, so if I read their commissions you state here, then I would surely say they are negiotable.
Low commissions AND good customer service make the difference.
I contacted them before I when I was looking for a firm and they matched my current rates. ($4.90 RT on the eMini´s) and this is not too long agoo, so if I read their commissions you state here, then I would surely say they are negiotable.
Low commissions AND good customer service make the difference.
The lower the deposit the best it is. Deposit is just money that sleeps or rather pocketed by the market organizers. Brokers who say that they don't do low deposit are just using your own excess deposit for their own trading.
It doesn't mean that you can trade with more contracts FOR ME IT IS DANGEROUS TO THINK THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE INCREASING YOUR LEVERAGE. It rather means that you have more room to manoever without being sacked by the market and be out of the ring when market spikes ... and then recover (remember Friday
). But before the market recover it can be too late if deposit and margin call was more than you expected in normal days. Globally the higher the deposit for every non institutional traders the more manipulative the market will be since the big commercials who belong to the same party than the market organizers hedge against them.
It doesn't mean that you can trade with more contracts FOR ME IT IS DANGEROUS TO THINK THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE INCREASING YOUR LEVERAGE. It rather means that you have more room to manoever without being sacked by the market and be out of the ring when market spikes ... and then recover (remember Friday
). But before the market recover it can be too late if deposit and margin call was more than you expected in normal days. Globally the higher the deposit for every non institutional traders the more manipulative the market will be since the big commercials who belong to the same party than the market organizers hedge against them.
def
Sponsor
Harry,
You are blatantly wrong on this account. By law, brokers must segregate client funds from house funds. This includes separate bank accounts. Any broker using client funds to trade their house account as you suggest would be violating the law.
IMO $500 margin for inexperienced or unhedged traders is too small as it puts undue risk on the clearing firm and hence a brokers clients. It also doesn't allow much room for error - ie. if you can only fund an account with $500 or $1000, how long can one realistically expect to be around. Ofcourse it is up to each firm and each trader to make their own decisions but you might want to look at the entire picture before making comments.
"Any broker using client funds to trade their house account as you suggest would be violating the law."
I dind't want to say that they trade directly with it of course. I mean that when you have high level accounts you have more business advantages and I won't enter the details of business. You should remark that for example many brokers lower the commissions when you deposit more money don't just ask why huhu. As for law as usual it is just fake. In 1929 brokers can not trade themselves they just use their wife and children account haha ! And today ? THEY ARE AUTHORISED BY LAW TO TRADE AGAINST THEIR OWN CLIENT so it is even worse than in 1929 as for law. It is known that some Brokers having very low fee or even "no fee" are front end for mother firms that trade against their clients account.
And don't make me believe that brokers ask more than legal deposits just for the sake of their clients at least not the majority of them, I should believe in Angels rather : this is just a global but sure argument
.
>if you can only fund an account with $500 or $1000, how long >can one realistically expect to be around. Ofcourse it is up to >each firm and each trader to make their own decisions but you >might want to look at the entire picture before making >comments.
Do you confuse deposit with fund account ?! Sure I dind't mean to fund only $500 or $1000 since I said that you shouldn't use that pretext for more leverage ! It is not a secret that the problem of futures for the majority of novice traders and even less novices when the market behaves "unexpectedly" for them are capital. Even LTCM did have that problem do you remember ? So high deposit and margin don't just facilite that.
I dind't want to say that they trade directly with it of course. I mean that when you have high level accounts you have more business advantages and I won't enter the details of business. You should remark that for example many brokers lower the commissions when you deposit more money don't just ask why huhu. As for law as usual it is just fake. In 1929 brokers can not trade themselves they just use their wife and children account haha ! And today ? THEY ARE AUTHORISED BY LAW TO TRADE AGAINST THEIR OWN CLIENT so it is even worse than in 1929 as for law. It is known that some Brokers having very low fee or even "no fee" are front end for mother firms that trade against their clients account.
And don't make me believe that brokers ask more than legal deposits just for the sake of their clients at least not the majority of them, I should believe in Angels rather : this is just a global but sure argument
.>if you can only fund an account with $500 or $1000, how long >can one realistically expect to be around. Ofcourse it is up to >each firm and each trader to make their own decisions but you >might want to look at the entire picture before making >comments.
Do you confuse deposit with fund account ?! Sure I dind't mean to fund only $500 or $1000 since I said that you shouldn't use that pretext for more leverage ! It is not a secret that the problem of futures for the majority of novice traders and even less novices when the market behaves "unexpectedly" for them are capital. Even LTCM did have that problem do you remember ? So high deposit and margin don't just facilite that.