Fuck Forex Factory.Wake up people.
- #443
- Mar 27, 2012 10:17am Mar 27, 2012 10:17am
- | Commercial User | Joined Nov 2011 | 1,267 Posts
FXGears.com
- #445
- Mar 27, 2012 11:22am Mar 27, 2012 11:22am
- | Commercial User | Joined Nov 2011 | 1,267 Posts
FXGears.com
- #447
- Mar 27, 2012 7:48pm Mar 27, 2012 7:48pm
- | Joined Apr 2008 | Status: Trader | 1,040 Posts
Good Trading
- #458
- Edited 9:12pm Apr 1, 2012 8:13pm | Edited 9:12pm
Who cares? If you trade forex, you are taking risks anyway. Since 90% of the Traders lose anyway, the probability of losing Money during "normal" trading is a Million times higher than losing because of the broker.
I get what you are saying. But at some point something like this might matter.Interesting. Especially the part where you say that they rented their license. What do you mean by "rented"? Is this something you can legally do?
Thanks for warning us!
I actually like Pepperstone a lot. Don't know why i do, but i do. They have been nothing but professional and gave me excellent service every time i contacted them. (Plus live chat responds very quickly). I like knowing that there is someone there when i need them.
I have no ill will against them.
I am actually hoping that it is a "who cares" sorta thing.
Hope Jack will chime in his thoughts on this one.
Cheers!
Fuck Forex Factory.Wake up people.
- #459
- Edited 11:46pm Apr 1, 2012 11:24pm | Edited 11:46pm
- | Commercial User | Joined Nov 2011 | 1,267 Posts
[...]
I am actually hoping that it is a "who cares" sorta thing.
Hope Jack will chime in his thoughts on this one.
Cheers!
Yeah, it is a 'who cares' sorta thing... but let me be clear, this isn't about shrugging off potentially alarming info, it's simply not something that mattered in the first place.
The people pushing this as an issue want to alarm potential clients with something that's factually true but way out of context.. .. but more on this in a bit *** see below ***
Firstly, we've already talked about Axi and Pepper having the same "Standard" account price feed a long time ago in this thread. It was clear the quote feed was exactly the same, and the LP (through Integral) was exactly the same.
So let's break it down practically:
The start up costs for a new brokerage (should you go at from scratch) are huge. Most new brokers, or existing non-FX brokers, choose to go through a service/technology provider to launch their services.
Even if you're not a start up, running every aspect of your infrastructure is a huge and expensive undertaking...so even existing brokers are choosing to work with companies who will take care of some aspects of their business, so they might focus on their strengths (like business development, or customer service.)
Want some examples?
- FXCM first went to Boston Technologies to get MT4 trading accounts up and running. Running up to within this last year, if you were trading with FXCM on MT4, you were trading on BT servers and systems.
- Deutsche Bank (DBFX) wanted to go retail, so they partnered with FXCM, not only to use their platform, but even their support reps in white label fashion.
- ETrade Financial just recently broke into the FX brokerage market -- and they are a huge retail stock broker in the US with the means go at it alone if they really wanted to -- but instead of starting from scratch, they partnered with FXCM (and both call it a white label.)
- Questrade here in Canada (another large retail stock broker) uses Gain Capital's services and technology to provide "Questrade's Forex devision."
This list can go on for quite some time...
These are all big name brokers.. not some fly-by-night operations..
It all comes down to an economy of scale problem. Established service providers have a price advantage over the cost of starting from scratch. It simply makes more sense to go through a service/technology provider who can get you up and running cheaper than do it yourself and risk failure with higher costs.
Practicality aside, what do we know:
- Pepperstone's customer service is excellent, fair, and very level headed. We aren't talking to Axi's people here (not putting Axi down, just saying.)
- Pepperstone holds client funds in their own accounts, segregated, at two major banks. When you wire in a deposit, it's to an account in their name. CC deposits are processed to their merchant ID. Axi isn't involved here.
- Pepperstone made their financial business license, regulatory adherence, and corporate structure very clear to the public.
- Pepperstone is offering (right now at least) a very unique package with their razor account. Axi doesn't have anything like it with a $200 min deposit (and most brokers offering an Integral price feed want initial deposits in the 5 figure range.)
- Pepperstone (not Axi) has experienced recent tremendous growth.. they even posted on their website around mid-February that they are "increasing client equity at around AUD $1,000,000 every two weeks"...
So really, what does it matter that they work with partners to help deliver their services?
Or maybe we should lynch Axi as well since they use Integral as a technology provider (platform, price feed, etc..) as well?
What makes this instance any different than the common practice found throughout the financial industry (and in business in general?)
Are you guys starting to see how this doesn't matter, and is, in fact, quite a common thing?
What matters is how Pepperstone treats their clients, they are regulated, they deliver on what they promise... and on that note, I see no issues at all.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Recently I got pitched by another Australian fx brokerage, and when I mentioned the brokers I use (Oanda - my main broker, and Pepperstone) they ignored the Oanda remark and jumped right into the "but Pepperstone is just a whitelable of Axi" line.
The rep was very happy to give details on how I can "prove" the Axi/Pepperstone relationship and whitelabel. And he went on about it as if I should be afraid to do business with Pepper. The rep even mentioned the license status thing...
I had to stop the guy and explain to him, very clearly, why a rep conducting "personal selling" doesn't win clients by bashing the competition. How he should have been talking about the strengths of his own brokerage instead. (In my former career as an IT engineer, I worked closely with professional salesmen and began to respect sales and customer service etiquette, which this rep from the other broker had none.)
This was at the end of February.. the broker had just started calling a lead list of hundreds of traders and (if the other calls were anything like the one I got) spreaded this 'fear' around to people who said they traded with Pepper.
It's very interesting that this kinda stuff hits forums within a month from when I got that sales call with the same info... Isn't it also interesting how this comes after Pepper has scooped up so much market share within Australia?
I'm not saying they are related (and as you've noticed, I didn't mention the other broker's name for that reason)... It is just a coincidence, and quite one at that. I think everyone should just keep objective when viewing anything being spread around about any broker (since there are other parties who would be financially motivated to spread it.)
Just sayin'
FXGears.com