Prop Firm Hub | Page 1007 | 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

  • #20,121
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:14pm Sep 2, 2023 2:14pm
Negativity at its best !
Intraday only.
  • #20,122
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:16pm Sep 2, 2023 2:16pm
Quoting navk
And how many challenge purchasers ? 300 millions ?
Yes, 135000 challenge purchasers spent ca. $310 million. All needs to be paid back, when it is illegal. And how it can be legal if the prop was not registered at all and had no license at all. That will be really difficult to explain, that MFF had a prop business where no regulation is needed and they do not need any license at all because of....too difficult to explain it to the judge (who was a former prosecutor and a Captain in the army). And again they see this case from the DUMB customer perspective!
  • #20,123
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:18pm Sep 2, 2023 2:18pm
Quoting TrAndy1
{quote} Yes, 135000 challenge purchasers spent ca. $310 million. All needs to be paid back, when it is illegal. And how it can be legal if the prop was not registered at all and had no license at all. That will be really difficult to explain, that MFF had a prop business where no regulation is needed and they do not need any license at all because of....too difficult to explain it to the judge (who was a former prosecutor and a Captain in the army).
You are right, that is what I meant too.

But i am seeing ather answers.

All 135000 challenge purchasers are to be sent to jail if Kasmi is sent to jail.

This is the best ever negative answer I ever saw in FF.
And I wish to see if this happens after 11 th september.

If that does not happen, we can brand as entirely negativity and or stupidity
Intraday only.
  • #20,124
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:23pm Sep 2, 2023 2:23pm
Quoting navk
{quote} If the owner is sent to jail, Investors or challenge purchasers are too sent to jail ? I wish to see if your statement is correct
I am not a lawyer.
MFF claimed that they were properly registered and licensed (right?).
That may be the type of defense that keeps people who trusted MFF out of jail but it might not be enough to get your money back.
  • #20,125
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:25pm Sep 2, 2023 2:25pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} I am not a lawyer. MFF claimed that they were properly registered and licensed (right?). That may be the type of defense that keeps people who trusted MFF out of jail but it might not be enough to get your money back.
enough.

Right advice is what everyone will be looking for, not negativity.
Intraday only.
  • #20,126
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:26pm Sep 2, 2023 2:26pm
Quoting dantpm
{quote} I am not a lawyer. MFF claimed that they were properly registered and licensed (right?). That may be the type of defense that keeps people who trusted MFF out of jail but it might not be enough to get your money back.
If you are not legal, do not answer then.

Because, advice is what everyone will be looking for here in this situation.
Intraday only.
  • #20,127
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:28pm Sep 2, 2023 2:28pm
Quoting navk
{quote} enough. Right advice is what everyone will be looking for, not negativity.
There was nothing negative about my comments or suggestions. I did make a suggestion that could be helpful and at least worth exploring to people out of jail.
  • #20,128
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:33pm Sep 2, 2023 2:33pm
Not worth exploring on unwanted negativity.

Look for and explore growth oriented schemes.

Look where to Invest

Look where to purchase challenges

Look how to win constantly

Look how to avoid losses.

++

Look how to get back your lost money thro the So called Protectors of your money.
Intraday only.
  • #20,129
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:44pm Sep 2, 2023 2:44pm
I have a plausible proposal.

It is true that in most jurisdictions, one cannot trade for others without having a proper license. However, if that person traded with someone they are official partner with, trading activity between them doesn't count as trading for someone else. By definition. they are partners with shared interests. They divide the responsibilities and expenses and profits between themselves already. The financial relationship between them becomes private and no regulator can't question anything unless the partners have a falling in. In that case they go to court and sue each other or whatever.

Now if a brand new prop opened and gave the company a gazillion shares which the owner owns most of them, then new customer comes and says I want to trade for you cause you are a prop. Prop says you have to be my partner and you need to buy 1 share to become my partner. Probably need to have the right legal forms to sell someone a share of your company. Once done, the trader can do the trading and whatever happens, stays inside the company. There, we just cut the regulator out and we can do anything in the prop.

So, in MFF's case there would be 135000 shares owned by clients but if the number of shares is a billion, 1 share per client doesn't have any value but it can close the door to the regulator.
  • #20,130
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:44pm Sep 2, 2023 2:44pm
I guess someone will organize a collective scheme or claim against MFF to get back all the challenge fees from the purchasers. That can happen right after 9/11.
And if MFF cannot pay back the responsible people at MFF there will probably go to jail. That would be kind of normal in such frauds or illegal business activities.
  • #20,131
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:50pm Sep 2, 2023 2:50pm
Quoting OutThere
I have a plausible proposal. It is true that in most jurisdictions, one cannot trade for others without having a proper license. However, if that person traded with someone they are official partner with, trading activity between them doesn't count as trading for someone else. By definition. they are partners with shared interests. They divide the responsibilities and expenses and profits between themselves already. The financial relationship between them becomes private and no regulator can't question anything unless the partners have a falling...
A) Pooling money from business friends also needs to be registered. You cannot get out of this so easily at all.

B) I think so that is okay, but the prop itself needs to be registered, then as customer/trader you would need to buy 1 share you just could trade with them and get your profit split.

(That is from what I know here in regulation, especially from the German side.)
  • #20,132
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:52pm Sep 2, 2023 2:52pm
MFFX no more new sign ups for Canadian residents with immediate effect
Intraday only.
  • #20,133
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:54pm Sep 2, 2023 2:54pm
Quoting TrAndy1
{quote} A) Pooling money from business friends also needs to be registered. You cannot get out of this so easily at all. B) I think so that is okay, but the prop itself needs to be registered, then as customer/trader you would need to buy 1 share you just could trade with them and get your profit split. (That is from what I know here in regulation, especially from the German side.)
You can call it a pooling of money if you want but say I have a partner and we are building something far away. I say I buy the materials if you put them in your truck and deliver them to the jobsite. The cost maybe around the same for each partner. They don't have to pool their money. They don't have to report to gov that one paid material expenses and the other paid for gas and used his truck and time to get the job done.
  • #20,134
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:55pm Sep 2, 2023 2:55pm
Quoting navk
MFFX no more new sign ups for Canadian residents with immediate effect
yes, I just read it. Here is the post as picture.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: image.png Size: 12 KB
  • #20,135
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:56pm Sep 2, 2023 2:56pm
Quoting navk
MFFX no more new sign ups for Canadian residents with immediate effect
Meh, they should just refund the current Cad traders and be done with it.
  • #20,136
  • Sep 2, 2023 2:58pm Sep 2, 2023 2:58pm
Quoting OutThere
{quote} Meh, they should just refund the current Cad traders and be done with it.
hehe, they are waiting that ca. 99% will fail their challenge before it can come to a payout for most of those Canadians. Then they can book those fees as profits instead of doing any refunds. They are clever businesmen of course. What will the regulators say later about their behavior ? Hmm....
  • #20,137
  • Sep 2, 2023 3:01pm Sep 2, 2023 3:01pm
Is it something they thought of jurisdiction or afraid of Canadian tax rules.
Intraday only.
  • #20,138
  • Sep 2, 2023 3:04pm Sep 2, 2023 3:04pm
Quoting navk
Is it something they thought of jurisdiction or afraid of Canadian tax rules.
I think 99% of the push is from the Cad reg agency. The US reg is just being nice and let Cad get it's wish otherwise the US reg would have extend this to all props in US.
Canada does want all Canadians to use licensed brokers approved in Canada but they can't force Canadians not to register with brokers anywhere in the world. To force Canadians to use home services, they go after brokers and I guess now props to drop their Canadian customers, so they come trade at home. In this case tho, MFF wasn't just another broker. It was conducting very shady business and very vulnerable too. They pretty much brought this upon themselves.
  • #20,139
  • Sep 2, 2023 3:04pm Sep 2, 2023 3:04pm
Fundedfx being US based, more changes likely to hit in the coming days.

This may not be end of change they announced.

They seem to work on warfooting basis being USA based.
Intraday only.
  • #20,140
  • Sep 2, 2023 3:05pm Sep 2, 2023 3:05pm
Some CEOs of props are panicking. Without knowing the facts after 9/11 and later in that week they are announcing such things, new wordings on their offers. It must real panic on the MFF titanic now. I mean if MFFX would already announce not to take any challenges from US customers that would be too big step for speculation as reason only what will be the case later mid September.
239 traders viewing now