Prop Firm Hub | Page 983 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Featured US Prop Firms

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 33 replies

So I accepted a Prop Trading job in South Beach Miami 44 replies

prop firm new model - my trading journey 871 replies

Attachments: Prop Firm Hub
Exit Attachments

Prop Firm Hub

  • #19,641
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:05pm Sep 1, 2023 2:05pm
Quoting Cryptosurf
{quote} Curious to what the SEC has to say. Need to find their notice as well. Pretty much every prop firm could be guilty of what they are stating in that notice. MFF got hit because they are within their jurisdiction. US authorities don't give a shit if they have jurisdiction or not. They just seize shit and let the people try to recover. At least the Canadian tool got his pronouns squared away. {image}
To be honest, i dont know why MFF has remained based in Ontario of all places. Am sure they have very smart lawyers who understand jurisdictions better than me but trading laws here are brutal and the regulators are almost as bad as the ones in US Even if they come out of this hearing unscathed, it'll only be a matter of time until another issue pops up. They could easily register the company in Dubai, or anywhere else in the Caribbean and as long as they pay out like FTMo, nobody would care because they aren't taking massive deposits that anyone would care to sue over.
  • #19,642
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:08pm Sep 1, 2023 2:08pm
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: IMG_0296.png Size: 92 KB

Read it over again.

Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Where is that mentioned ? In their announcement they only speak about Ontario hearing.
Trade with confidence, trade without fear.
  • #19,643
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:18pm Sep 1, 2023 2:18pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} Those aren't normal legal notice wordings. That is the language of pyramid schemes intended to defraud investors. An intermediary can charge you a fee for services or invest your money. It is either one or the other. They cannot use your 'money' for various purposes.
You do not get my point correctly.

Legal notice intended invite hearing.

How to invite ?

Accuse.

In a personal case..the tone will be same but the content will be different.

I have gone thro...and sent atleast ten's of notices. Sorry, not ten...may be 30, lol
And in one sentense..it says, the firm owner used challenge money for personal expenses.

lol. lol.

He is the company owner. He can not spend for dinner and charge on to company or what ??

And I hope you understand what i mean the " Tone " of legal notices.
Intraday only.
  • #19,644
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:26pm Sep 1, 2023 2:26pm
Thank God... the notice did not spell out.. the company owner spent challenge money for buying a Mercedez for his own use.

lol.
Intraday only.
  • #19,645
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:29pm Sep 1, 2023 2:29pm
Quoting navk
{quote} You do not get my point correctly. Legal notice intended invite hearing. How to invite ? Accuse. In a personal case..the tone will be same but the content will be different. I have gone thro...and sent atleast ten's of notices. Sorry, not ten...may be 30, lol And in one sentense..it says, the firm owner used challenge money for personal expenses. lol. lol. He is the company owner. He can not spend for dinner and charge on to company or what ?? And I hope you understand what i mean the " Tone " of legal notices.
You are describing fee for services. A company, brokerage, etc can use the fees for services to do whatever they want. They cannot use investors money or invested money to do whatever they want.
There are clear standards for the purposes that investors money (more flexible usage) and client money can be used (very strict).
  • #19,646
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:30pm Sep 1, 2023 2:30pm
The firm owner has his own business model in which he maintains financial planning of his own firm.

Can the notice accuse the owner of challenge money to some other trader who is profited ?

The firms of such models are not regulated.

The notice talks more of firm and not brokerage..paying fees etc.

Surprise.
Intraday only.
  • #19,647
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:32pm Sep 1, 2023 2:32pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} You are describing fee for services. A company, brokerage, etc can use the fees for services to do whatever they want. They cannot use investors money or invested money to do whatever they want. There are clear standards for the purposes that investors money (more flexible usage) and client money can be used (very strict).
MFF is regulated by Ontario securities to ask such questions.?

The notice talks about firm and firm owner.

If the notice talks about MFF as a broker and legal fees for brokerage..then it is correct.

MFF is a broker ?

MFF is prop firm ?

In what context, ontario securities sent this notice ?
Intraday only.
  • #19,648
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:34pm Sep 1, 2023 2:34pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} You are describing fee for services. A company, brokerage, etc can use the fees for services to do whatever they want. They cannot use investors money or invested money to do whatever they want. There are clear standards for the purposes that investors money (more flexible usage) and client money can be used (very strict).
This is what I said...Ontario securities accusing firm and owner for which no regulation given by them
Intraday only.
  • #19,649
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:38pm Sep 1, 2023 2:38pm
Quoting Cryptosurf
{image} Read it over again. {quote}
Sorry guys, my brain froze and skipped the US one. Those regulators even coordinate stuff... So nice to have such attentive people protecting us.
  • #19,650
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:39pm Sep 1, 2023 2:39pm
Quoting Takisd
If people think this is the last, they are sadly mistaken. Broker Armageddon 2.0 is here but for prop firms. Starting with anyone who sold coupons to US customers.
MFF,for you, is still numer 1 in the world ?
  • #19,651
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:41pm Sep 1, 2023 2:41pm
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Sorry guys, my brain froze and skipped the US one. Those regulators even coordinate stuff... So nice to have such attentive people protecting us.
The notice is unclear.

If you read again and again,,,you will notice that The securities blaming Prop firm model and the owner.

The prop firm according to all prop firm..needs no regulation. However, the notice talks about prop firm model.

They do not talk about brokerage surprisingly
Intraday only.
  • #19,652
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:42pm Sep 1, 2023 2:42pm
Quoting navk
{quote} This is what I said...Ontario securities accusing firm and owner for which no regulation given by them
There are however standards for working with client funds. I suspect that Ontario would classify MFF as a 'financial advisor' by default since they aren't a brokerage, or a bank and so on and deem them to be governed by those rules which are similar to what I described. MFF would be deemed guilty until proven otherwise.
  • #19,653
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:45pm Sep 1, 2023 2:45pm
Quoting dantpm
They cannot use investors money or invested money to do whatever they want. There are clear standards for the purposes that investors money (more flexible usage) and client money can be used (very strict).
-The things that MFF are being looked at for, are little different than what a broker already does. The question will be whether or not MFF is actually acting as a broker, in the business of trading securities and whether or not the business is structured in a way that legally constitutes a ponzi scheme. Terms like 'investor' and 'investor funds' were used deliberately, but are yet to be determined.

There is a lot to consider here. We do not actually know how MFF is structured nor what they are doing behind the scenes. Everything is done on a simulated demo account. We provide data, as contractors (not investors). We pay a fee (not an investment), just like you would to take an exam for a job or for college. If you pass, you are hired/graduated. If you fail, try again. In this case, the fee is actually refundable. Bad data needs to be screened out.

We will see how this unfolds. I'm rooting for MFF because we already have too much regulation in this space that is creating problems for people in my country.
  • #19,654
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:46pm Sep 1, 2023 2:46pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} There are however standards for working with client funds. I suspect that Ontario would classify MFF as a 'financial advisor' by default since they aren't a brokerage, or a bank and so on and deem them to be governed by those rules which are similar to what I described. MFF would be deemed guilty until proven otherwise.
No.

MFF ( or any other prop firm ) are private company for which no regulation needed until now.

So, they can not blame model or blam firm owner for having dinner at company expense.

The ontarian way of writing notices.

The court notices ( even by me ) are far better than this.
Accusing some one/some firm showing real matter ( broker matter ) is missing in the notice
Intraday only.
  • #19,655
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:51pm Sep 1, 2023 2:51pm
Quoting navk
{quote} No. MFF ( or any other prop firm ) are private company for which no regulation needed until now. So, they can not blame model or blam firm owner for having dinner at company expense. The ontarian way of writing notices. The court notices ( even by me ) are far better than this. Accusing some one/some firm showing real matter ( broker matter ) is missing in the notice
navk, I don't have access to all of the information however I do know that private companies that handle funds for clients are subject to rules about what can and can't be done with these funds, similar to the rules that govern financial advisors.

There is no umbrella of private company that lets you do what you want.
  • #19,656
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:53pm Sep 1, 2023 2:53pm
If you read..read again..you will notice, nothing special in the notice.

Just the tone.. that is what matters and at the end whatever is the quality of notice, hit seems ontario security has to give clearance. They without quality notice put the firm and as well as every investor in trouble instaed of protecting.
Intraday only.
  • #19,657
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:54pm Sep 1, 2023 2:54pm
Quoting navk
{quote} MFF is regulated by Ontario securities to ask such questions.? The notice talks about firm and firm owner. If the notice talks about MFF as a broker and legal fees for brokerage..then it is correct. MFF is a broker ? MFF is prop firm ? In what context, ontario securities sent this notice ?
MFF have clients from....USA. So...they must to be regulated in USA. That say Ontario securities... A lot of brokers,from.world, don't accept USA citizen to be customers, because they affrayed about USA regulated....
  • #19,658
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:55pm Sep 1, 2023 2:55pm
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-The things that MFF are being looked at for, are little different than what a broker already does. The question will be whether or not MFF is actually acting as a broker, in the business of trading securities and whether or not the business is structured in a way that legally constitutes a ponzi scheme. Terms like 'investor' and 'investor funds' were used deliberately, but are yet to be determined. There is a lot to consider here. We do not actually know how MFF is structured nor what they are doing behind the scenes. Everything is done...
So, if there are no actual investors, then they are considering us (the traders/ purchasers of challenges) the investors?
Three places the money comes from:
1. The owner(s) either provide the capital for the trading, in which case there is no crime. I recall in the beginning the owner claiming he started MFF with his winnings from bitcoin. OR
2. If there is no actual trading of any live funds, we (the traders) are the investors and the winners among us are paid from the fees of the failed challenges.....not much different than a broker, losers pay the winners
3. The only way I see any of the acusations holding up is if they were solicting funds from investors (outside money) and then intermingling and doing whatever they wanted with such funds.....if that is the case.....BIG TROUBLE
  • #19,659
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:56pm Sep 1, 2023 2:56pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} navk, I don't have access to all of the information however I do know that private companies that handle funds for clients are subject to rules about what can and can't be done with these funds, similar to the rules that govern financial advisors. There is no umbrella of private company that lets you do what you want.
You mean private company owners are not allowed to have dinner at company expense ? Or buy a car for company use ?

This needs to be proved in the court of law ?

Silly..i mean Ontarians way of writing notices.
Intraday only.
  • #19,660
  • Sep 1, 2023 2:56pm Sep 1, 2023 2:56pm
Quoting navk
If you read..read again..you will notice, nothing special in the notice. Just the tone.. that is what matters and at the end whatever is the quality of notice, hit seems ontario security has to give clearance. They without quality notice put the firm and as well as every investor in trouble instaed of protecting.
That is referred to as an exploratory notice that allows the Ontario Securities Regulators to investigate what you are doing and file charges later.
47 traders viewing now