IB or Cybertrader for E Minis?

Quote from goodfellow:

RCG offers 500.00 Emini contracts. And yes, they are safe.
They put your money in customer segregated accounts. Seperate from everybody elses money.

Is there some reason why we should believe a broker offering $500 E-mini margins is as safe as a more conservative broker? Do not these low margins increase the chance of large customer losses collapsing any broker in an unusual market event, so that the other customers won't get their money back? Can you support your assertions with evidence, or with rational arguments, to counter the information already offered in this thread? Or are you just making unsupported assertions, and expecting people to believe them, as though they were little more than mindless sheep?

I believe your claim that RCG segregates each customer's futures trading account from the accounts of other customers is totally false. I believe it is not permitted by United States futures regulators. US regulators mandate that the funds and property, in your futures trading account, must be pooled with those of other customers, and must be seized, if necessary, to cover the losses incurred by other customers in your pool, in the event the broker goes bankrupt. These pooled customer accounts are called "segregated" because they are segregated from the broker's assets, and cannot be used to pay the broker's debts, except for covering losses incurred by other customers in the same pool. Assets of customers, however, are not segregated from assets of other customers; they are instead pooled. I have already posted a CME link confirming this information.

I therefore challenge you to provide proof that RCG's "segregated" accounts provide the type of segregation between individual customers you claim, instead of the different and far weaker type of segregation which I have explained.
 
Hopefully nobody will have to never deal with their broker going bankrupt and having to worry about how to get their money out or if they even get it out.
 
Which moderator CENSORED my honest post?

Be a man, not a mouse and send me a PM please.

This is getting out of control.
 
Quote from jimrockford:

Can you support your assertions with evidence, or with rational arguments, to counter the information already offered in this thread? Or are you just making unsupported assertions, and expecting people to believe them, as though they were little more than mindless sheep?

I believe your claim that RCG segregates each customer's futures trading account from the accounts of other customers is totally false. I believe it is not permitted by United States futures regulators. US regulators mandate that the funds and property, in your futures trading account, must be pooled with those of other customers, and must be seized, if necessary, to cover the losses incurred by other customers in your pool, in the event the broker goes bankrupt.

Here is the link to show they are segregated customer funds. Look on page 3 of the .pdf account application.
http://www.globalfutures.com/documents/RCG/RCG-IndividualJointAcct.pdf

Now where is your link proving that it is not permitted by the US regulators? Are you just making stuff up? Or are you just making unsupported assertions, and expecting people to believe them, as though they were little mindless sheep? Where is your proof link?
 
I challenge all of you to challenge NFA Manual, where it states...

Section 6 – Customer Account Protections

Positions in security futures contracts may be held either in a securities account or in a futures account. Your brokerage firm may or may not permit you to choose the types of account in which your positions in security futures contracts will be held. The protections for funds deposited or earned by customers in connection with trading in security futures contracts differ depending on whether the positions are carried in a securities account or a futures account. If your positions are carried in a securities account, you will not receive the protections available for futures accounts. Similarly, if your positions are carried in a futures account, you will not receive the protections available for securities accounts. You should ask your broker which of these protections will apply to your funds.

You should be aware that the regulatory protections applicable to your account are not intended to insure you against losses you may incur as a result of a decline or increase in the price of a security futures contract. As with all financial products, you are solely responsible for any market losses in your account.

Your brokerage firm must tell you whether your security futures positions will be held in a securities account or a futures account. If your brokerage firm gives you a choice, it must tell you what you have to do to make the choice and which type of account will be used if you fail to do so. You should understand that certain regulatory protections for your account will depend on whether it is a securities account or a futures account.

6.1. Protections for Securities Accounts
If your positions in security futures contracts are carried in a securities account, they are covered by SEC rules governing the safeguarding of customer funds and securities. These rules prohibit a broker/dealer from using customer funds and securities to finance its business. As a result, the broker/dealer is required to set aside funds equal to the net of all its excess payables to customers over receivables from customers. The rules also require a broker/dealer to segregate all customer fully paid and excess margin securities carried by the broker/dealer for customers.

The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) also covers positions held in securities accounts. SIPC was created in 1970 as a non-profit, non-government, membership corporation, funded by member broker/dealers. Its primary role is to return funds and securities to customers if the broker/dealer holding these assets becomes insolvent. SIPC coverage applies to customers of current (and in some cases former) SIPC members. Most broker/dealers registered with the SEC are SIPC members; those few that are not must disclose this fact to their customers. SIPC members must display an official sign showing their membership. To check whether a firm is a SIPC member, go to www.sipc.org, call the SIPC Membership Department at (202) 371-8300, or write to SIPC Membership Department, Securities Investor Protection Corporation, 805 Fifteenth Street, NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005-2215.

SIPC coverage is limited to $500,000 per customer, including up to $100,000 for cash. For example, if a customer has 1,000 shares of XYZ stock valued at $200,000 and $10,000 cash in the account, both the security and the cash balance would be protected. However, if the customer has shares of stock valued at $500,000 and $100,000 in cash, only a total of $500,000 of those assets will be protected.

For purposes of SIPC coverage, customers are persons who have securities or cash on deposit with a SIPC member for the purpose of, or as a result of, securities transactions. SIPC does not protect customer funds placed with a broker/dealer just to earn interest. Insiders of the broker/dealer, such as its owners, officers, and partners, are not customers for purposes of SIPC coverage.

6.2. Protections for Futures Accounts
If your security futures positions are carried in a futures account, they must be segregated from the brokerage firm's own funds and cannot be borrowed or otherwise used for the firm's own purposes. If the funds are deposited with another entity (e.g., a bank, clearing broker, or clearing organization), that entity must acknowledge that the funds belong to customers and cannot be used to satisfy the firm's debts. Moreover, although a brokerage firm may carry funds belonging to different customers in the same bank or clearing account, it may not use the funds of one customer to margin or guarantee the transactions of another customer. As a result, the brokerage firm must add its own funds to its customers' segregated funds to cover customer debits and deficits. Brokerage firms must calculate their segregation requirements daily.

You may not be able to recover the full amount of any funds in your account if the brokerage firm becomes insolvent and has insufficient funds to cover its obligations to all of its customers. However, customers with funds in segregation receive priority in bankruptcy proceedings. Furthermore, all customers whose funds are required to be segregated have the same priority in bankruptcy, and there is no ceiling on the amount of funds that must be segregated for or can be recovered by a particular customer.

Your brokerage firm is also required to separately maintain funds invested in security futures contracts traded on a foreign exchange. However, these funds may not receive the same protections once they are transferred to a foreign entity (e.g., a foreign broker, exchange or clearing organization) to satisfy margin requirements for those products. You should ask your broker about the bankruptcy protections available in the country where the foreign exchange (or other entity holding the funds) is located.

To view this online...
http://www.nfa.futures.org/nfaManual/entireManual.asp

This section of the rules are in the "View Entire Manual" link
 
Quote from osorico:

I challenge all of you to challenge NFA Manual, where it states...



To view this online...
http://www.nfa.futures.org/nfaManual/entireManual.asp

This section of the rules are in the "View Entire Manual" link

osorico,

the material you posted is not relevant to our discussion. We are talking about futures contract trading. The material you posted does not govern futures contract trading. It applies, instead, to securities futures contracts, which are not the same thing, and are covered by a different set of laws. Securities futures contracts, furthermore, have extremely small volume and are traded by only an extremely small minority of traders.
 
Quote from jimrockford:

osorico,

the material you posted is not relevant to our discussion. We are talking about futures contract trading. The material you posted does not govern futures contract trading. It applies, instead, to securities futures contracts, which are not the same thing, and are covered by a different set of laws. Securities futures contracts, furthermore, have extremely small volume and are traded by only an extremely small minority of traders.

Ummmm? The link he posted is from the "NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION". I think the material he posted is very relevant to this discussion. Emini contracts are considered futures. Emini future brokers should be listed on that website, along with customer complaints which is viewable to the public also. If your futures broker is not listed on that website, then I would not sign up with that futures broker.
 
Quote from jimrockford:

osorico,

the material you posted is not relevant to our discussion. We are talking about futures contract trading. The material you posted does not govern futures contract trading. It applies, instead, to securities futures contracts, which are not the same thing, and are covered by a different set of laws. Securities futures contracts, furthermore, have extremely small volume and are traded by only an extremely small minority of traders.

Well well, you are correct, regarding THIS blurb. Reading glasses need cleaning.

Your segregated funds challenge stands, for now... you will be proven wrong. :p
 
Quote from goodfellow:

Here is the link to show they are segregated customer funds. Look on page 3 of the .pdf account application.
http://www.globalfutures.com/documents/RCG/RCG-IndividualJointAcct.pdf

Now where is your link proving that it is not permitted by the US regulators? Are you just making stuff up? Or are you just making unsupported assertions, and expecting people to believe them, as though they were little mindless sheep? Where is your proof link?

goodfellow,

I am surprised by the persistently misleading character of your posts in this thread.

I first raised the issue of "segregated" futures customer accounts, by explaining the meaning of the word "segregated". It means that customer accounts are pooled, and they are not "segregated" from each other, but that the pool of customer assets is "segregated" from the broker's assets. If margin deposits don't cover losses by other customers in your pool, and your broker is bankrupt, then your account assets must be siezed to cover the losses of other customers in the pool. Your assets cannot, however, be used to pay the broker's OTHER obligations. This definition of the term "segregated" is standard for the futures industry, and is confirmed on the CME website.

You then gave false information. You falsely stated that RCG segregates each customer's account assets from those of all other customers. You falsely stated that this is contained in the RCG account agreement, for which you provided a link. The truth is that no such information is in the agreement to which you linked, which states only that customer accounts are "segregated".

You then claimed that since the account agreement does confirm that customer accounts are "segregated", this supports your position and disproves mine. The truth is quite the opposite. The RCG agreement merely states that customer funds are "segregated", but nowhere does it contradict my definition of the term "segregated".

Our disagreement centers on our two conflicting definitions of the term "segregated". You are now misleading people to think that I was claiming that customer funds are not segregated at all, and that this was the focus of our disagreement. Of course I agree that customer accounts are segregated! The question is what does "segregated" mean? It does not mean what you falsely claimed it means. "Segregation" does not provide the level of protection which you claimed. Please admit that you were wrong on this question, so that others will not be misled by your misinformation.
 
Back
Top