Like I said my friend, it's NEVER stated implicitly. It's always done in a roundabout way so it's harder for you to spot. So if you add points 2.1, 3.4, 5.6, and 7.8 in your contract you will come to a shocking conclusion, rather than it saying it in one point so that you soil your pants!
The Shocking Truth about 'Segregated' Accounts
- Thread starter Joovenile Jatt
- Start date
Like I said my friend, it's NEVER stated implicitly. It's always done in a roundabout way so it's harder for you to spot. So if you add points 2.1, 3.4, 5.6, and 7.8 in your contract you will come to a shocking conclusion, rather than it saying it in one point so that you soil your pants!
No, that practice has been around forever, and it is not universal by any measure. And for the FCMs and Brokers who do have that language in place, they cannot switch you unilaterally unless you have violated the agreement's margin funding parameters. There is a reason why some brokers do that - because it makes little business sense to guarantee an account when in turn the customer has issues guaranteeing the account.
Much ado about nothing.
The only "Shocking" thing here is the stupid premise of the OP.
Let's say a hypothetical situation occurs where the total loss is >100% of customer segregated account funds. What happens then to US clients? I thought there was a 500k per account limit on claims?
That would be anyone's guess. Keep in mind that the clearing firm, the CFTC, and the NFA all get daily reports on the banking positions for segregated funds. I am not implying that the system is fair or just or bulletproof. Having traded for 20 years, and having experienced a firm imploding with my funds in it ( Griffin Trading in the late '90's ), I am just communicating what I have come to learn over the years.
Have you ever done dot to dot? If you only look at one dot you'll never see the picture will you? Everyone has been warned, over and out
The "shocking" truth is that you are manufacturing a fake conspiracy here by starting this retarded post, and then you have the bad form to lob personal insults at rational explanations.
If FCMs could unilaterally switch customers over to non-segregated fund status, then nobody would truly have segregated funds now would they ? Why bother ? The fact of the matter that this is NOT up to the FCM - customer funds segregation is a regulatory mandate and not an option. The only legal out that an FCM has in terms of regulatory compliance is if the client has demonstrated issues guaranteeing the financial solvency of the account on their end.
Over and out. Pure nonsensical hysteria.
The shocking truth is that you are trying to sound credible whilst selling/begging for customers for your spread professor. Your a bit like these FCM's saying what the client wants to hear and glossing over the truth, must be like your SpeadProfessor thing. Go sell your snake oil elsewhere mate because nobody here is buying
Bone, I'm hearing that traders that got checks from MF last week are now bouncing.
I think the issue here is not "if" traders are going to get their money but "when". If all your money is with MF and you trade for a living and you can't get your money back until the bankruptcy process is over, that could last 3 to 5 years. How do you trade in the meantime? This is absolutely devastating to a lot of traders.
I think the issue here is not "if" traders are going to get their money but "when". If all your money is with MF and you trade for a living and you can't get your money back until the bankruptcy process is over, that could last 3 to 5 years. How do you trade in the meantime? This is absolutely devastating to a lot of traders.
Technically and legally, they could NOT. No different than stealing from customer accounts.
If your broker does this, not sure what recourse you'd have as a customer to recover your money... besides the standard "file suit and queue-up".