And, what does that tell you about the actual trading platform, not the demo?
Just 4 The Naysayers
- Thread starter Veyron 16.4
- Start date
And, what does that tell you about the actual trading platform, not the demo?
You don't even have the numbers correct. That notwithstanding, you don't even have the concept correct. To make matters worse, you don't even know what a demo account is supposed to be used for - for crying out loud.
You are still sitting here proudly pounding yourself on the chest over something you apparently don't get.
Furthermore, who said that you were supposed to be learning anything from this? A personal story of success is exactly that - a personal story of success. What it inside your both hemispheres of your brain that won't allow you to get that concept/idea, I'll never know. You seem to think that somebody is on a mission here, to sell you something.
LOL - you guys are way too funny! :eek:
Obviously many people on this forum still don't believe you. Presumably, if your system is so wonderful and proven, you must be trading real money with it, correct? I mean, why wouldn't you if it works like you say?
So why not just take some account statements showing how much you made over the past few weeks or whatever, black out all the relevant information about your account and so on, and post it here? That will at least be some indication that you are actually making real money with this, and will probably quiet down some of the naysayers.
First, the name is Autobahn FX - so get that correct. Second, trading through dbFX DOES NOT mean you are trading through FXCM. Third, you clearly misunderstand what the term "white label" actually means and are confusing a white label contract with an ASP model. Fourth, what's the point to your post? The AFX platform offers unlimited trade sizes, while the dbFX platform limits each order to $50 million notational. Fifth, you will NOT get 100:1 on AFX, so only a really "smart guy" would make the mistakes you've just made here.
Lastly, I specifically said in a previous post that I will approaching my bank's single order size limitation, sooner rather than later. That should have clued you in - but, as usual, you DON't/CAN't read.
So, why all the pretense that you are actually dialoging something of substance, here?
So you trade with the white-label... FXCM. Understood. DBFX is not using FXCM in simply an ASP-capacity. The shit flows through the Old Slip FXCM servers, so it's a true white-label. Please stop using notational. It makes you sound even less knowledgeable, if that's possible.
RBS MarketIndex/Oanda is a true ASP-limited relationship. The pricing is RBS, but utilizing Oanda's front-end.
Yeah, but you see, it matters not what anyone believes to my bank account(s) or my trading.
But, what's the point of saying that???
And, fulfill the very prophecy that some clowns on this board have been holding on to for dear life - to what end? One clown already determined for himself that the report posted was photoshop'd. So, why not just continue using photoshop with bank statements?
You mean more like an invitation (not indication) for more photoshop comments, right?
Look, the post reflected my best effort to respond to requests for live trades. Can't do live trades and I've already stated why half a dozen times. And, I'm certainly not going to post official business records online, in public and in full plain view - redacted or not redacted, that's nuts to even contemplate. So, the only thing left for to to consider, in trying to comply with the request, is a demo account - still, heavily redacted.
The forum got exactly that - like it or not - believe it or not - it really matters not. I did the only thing I could do under the circumstances and if someone does not like it, they are going to have to figure out a way to get over it.
I took it straight from the platform and posted it here through photobucket's online depository. That's it - done.
No, but it obviously matters to you from the way you have started a third thread about this after 2 were already closed down. If it didn't matter to you, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
The more evidence you post, the more likely it is that what you are saying is true. Yes it could be photoshopped... but posting it would still help to indicate that you are the one who is likely telling the truth. Not that I personally care too much, I'm just trying to help out here.
Maybe so, but as I said, the more evidence you post, the more it's likely that people will believe you. I personally find it hard to believe that someone would bother photoshopping all this stuff.
Hey it's no skin off my nose. Anyways, feel free to keep arguing with people... but if you really don't care what people think as you say, now would be a pretty good time to walk away. I would.
"Understood?"
Is that some kind of joke. Are you dyslexic? I mean, seriously - who do you think reads this and follows a word you are saying. Someone, intelligent, maybe?
Who do you trade with, btw?
Oh, really?
Oh, really?
Do I have to correct you here, or will you self-correct like a naked trade gone wild?
Oh, don't wait for the translation. If the "shit" (as you call it) flows through the Old Slip location (which is not what it used to be in the earlier days of FXCM), then by definition it would be an ASP model as dbFX would be using FXCM's back-office.
That statement, however, would be complete horse puky as dbFX is NOT using FXCM's back-office, whatsoever. Furthermore, to what end would dbFX route its transactions through an FXCM server?
Please stop pretending to know things you don't. You might use Notional Value, but I might use Notational Value for a reason or set of reasons that YOU don't yet understand. I realize the standard term is Notional and not Notational. I've always used Notational for my own reasons without explaining the why behind doing so - nor will I take the time to educate you on the why, now.