Stop Hunting | Page 8 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Stop Hunting 11 replies

Stop Hunting? 18 replies

Stop hunting 1 reply

Stop Hunting and Demos 1 reply

damn oanda stop hunting my account 1 reply

Attachments: Stop Hunting
Exit Attachments

Stop Hunting

  • #141
  • May 21, 2006 1:16am May 21, 2006 1:16am
Quote from Gaylords Dictionary of Techinical Terminology:

scalp: (v) get in, get out, get pips.
Nolite dormiens pungere ursum. -- Latan Proverb.
  • #142
  • May 22, 2006 4:36pm May 22, 2006 4:36pm
Hello Everyone.

We've come to a point where I can reveal the name of this broker. After lengthy negotiations with this broker, they have proven themselves disreputable. In fact, at this point, I'd like nothing more than to see this broker go completely out of business and their executives charged with fraud. I may or may not ever get my wish.

If any of you encounter CFGTrader (cfgtrader.com) avoid them like the plague! This broker engaged in, and even openly acknowledged, that they manual fixed the price of an individual trader. They further acknowledged a complete unwillingness to fix the problem and told this trader to take their money and close their account.

Principals of this company are: Don Snellgrove, CEO, and Dr. Steve Janjic, COO. Following is the reply I received from Mr. Snellgrove when I initially contacted the company (my initial email is below his reply.)


On 5/11/06, Don Snellgrove <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Taylor,
>
> I appreciate your email and your concerns. I am not involved with the daily
> activities of the FCM and I will forward your email over to Dr Steve Janjic
> (364-9366) who will most likely be able to address each of the issues that
> you have spoken about in your email.
>
> Personally, I can say that I do personally monitor the activities of several
> US and European brokerages and I have found that the new CFGT has been
> extremely fair in all activities, especially in fast moving markets, with
> traders as compared to some of the brokers that I have ongoing business
> relationships with.
>
> I think that Steve would welcome a call from you at any time to discuss
> platform procedures as well as any other issue you may have.
>
> As a follow up, please let me know when you contact Steve or if he contacts
> you first.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don Snellgrove,
> 804-364-9366
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Taylor Stockwell" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:01 AM
> Subject: Platform Problem
>
>
> Dear Mr. Snellgrove
>
> My name is Taylor Stockwell. I'm a trader from Richmond, VA. I have a
> number of trader friends who are associated with your company as
> retail customers. I was happy to see that you opened a division
> trading with Meta Trader. In fact, I have been, up until yesterday,
> considering opening an account with your firm. However, based on what
> I saw yesterday with your feeds, I have reason to pause.
>
> Attached are several screenshots taken yesterday. The one that I'd
> like to point out to you is Stop_Hunt_CFGL.jpg. This was taken from
> one of your live accounts. On this chart, the price reached 1.2826
> before setting a new low, then returning to set a new high. The rest
> of the charts are from various other vendors' feeds, all of which
> confirm that yours is the only firm that traded the 1.2826 level at
> 2:15 PM EST. In fact, I've included a feed from your own demo server
> (Stop_Hunt_CFGD.jpg) which corroborates that the high at that time was
> 1.2809, consistent with everyone else in the market except for your
> live feed. Given that the preceding daily high was 1.2813, I would
> expect that a number of your customers placed protective or entry
> stops above that number until after the announcement. The fact that
> all the other feeds went to 1.2809 and yours went to 1.2826 is
> troubling.
>
> One would like to believe that this price, 17 pips beyond where the
> rest of the market was, was merely due to an errant feed. I figure
> there are several possible, reasonable explanations:
>
> 1. Your bank feed included errant data for 2:15 PM EST. If this is the
> case, you may wish to notify any of your customers who were negatively
> impacted and offer recompense.
>
> 2. Your bank, or someone within your company, unwittingly manipulated
> the price, in which case you may want to follow the same course as
> option 1.
>
> 3. Your bank, or someone within your company, knowingly, with intent,
> manipulated the price, in which you may want to change banks and/or
> take other appropriate action.
>
> 4. The price was accurate, even though three larger, more reputable
> brokers and your demo feed, did not reflect the price. I'd imagine it
> would be hard to find any others in the market who traded at 1.2826 at
> 2:15 PM EST. There were significant option defenses holding at that
> time which did not crumble until the subsequent 15 minute candle.
>
> Please know that my intent in providing you with this information is
> only to give you an opportunity to correct a potential problem which
> may be damaging to your company in the future. Since I didn't trade
> live with you, the issue does not impact me, although it has impacted
> those I know. Nevertheless, I have no other vested interest in the
> issue, other than I like to help people and I hope this helps you in
> some degree.
>
> Thanks for your time. I'd love to hear what you find, though, I don't
> expect to receive a response.
>
> Regards,
>
> Taylor Stockwell

And, the reply from Mr. Janjic:

Dear Mr. Stockwell,
Thank you for your concern you must realize that the market went 19 bid at FXCM at the same time we did and the market spiked up before going down then back to the same level and beyond, several large banks went 20 wide and others pulled prices all together, we just moved with the market instead of spreading the feed and also realize that our demo is just a demo and doesn't run on live bank feeds that offer liquidity issues. We let customers in and out of the market without any trouble and TIGHT SPREADS. You must understand that to trade into this type of a news situation is dangerous for everyone including all the dealers around the world and when they spread or completely pull their prices we have to quickly adjust to market conditions and this was the case yesterday. If your going to trade the news we all know how risky it could be. If you traded that move yesterday you noticed how volatile it was and how risky it is to trade certain news events. Non-Farm payroll as you know also moves the market as dramatic as yesterdays interest rate decision and these are not the best times to trade do to the volatility, we would like to work with you but we also have exposure to the markets just like you.

Thank You,

Dr Steve Janjic

Chief Operating Officer

Concorde Forex Group, Inc and CFGTrader,LLC

(888) 837-0671

(804) 364-9366

www.cfgtrading.com

  • #143
  • May 22, 2006 4:41pm May 22, 2006 4:41pm
These emails were followed up by the affected trader with a number of phone conversations with Mr. Janjic and others at the company. In several instances, employees of the firm were instructed to not speak with the trader, but to refer his call to Mr. Janjic. Mr. Janjic admitted that the price feed was manually altered at the time. As you may recall from my earlier post, other traders who were on the automated feed system did not have the same price - there was nearly a 20 pip difference between the manual and auto price. Mr. Janjic admitted that the normal difference was 2-3 pips.

When asked if, given these discrepancies, the company would refund the amount of the loss, Mr. Janjic responded to the negative and later suggested that the trader close his account and take his money elsewhere. The threat of legal action did not seem to curb their decision.

I'd welcome any solicitations from attorneys. It's likely, though, that this case may land in the hands of the State Attorney General first.
  • #144
  • May 22, 2006 4:45pm May 22, 2006 4:45pm
Incidentally, CFGTrader is a sister company and/or subsidiary of Concorde Forex Group, Ind. (cfgtrading.com). Both companies are located in Richmond, VA. Both companies share the same principals.
  • #145
  • May 22, 2006 5:27pm May 22, 2006 5:27pm
Quoting stockwet
Incidentally, CFGTrader is a sister company and/or subsidiary of Concorde Forex Group, Ind. (cfgtrading.com). Both companies are located in Richmond, VA. Both companies share the same principals.
Stockwet, I'd like to publicly apologize to you and commend your efforts. I made a few in appropriate posts prior to this, but it seems that you have handled yourself with honor and dignity and have followed through on your promise to help shield this community from further damage.

I don't know any lawyers, but I really hope someone on here comes his aid. Our friend here has been wronged in a most egregious way, and I hope anyone patroning this broker personally contacts stockwet for details on what happened exactly to make an informed decision about what to do next.

The information stockwet has provided is most disturbing, and it is my hope that we come together to ensure this type of behavior is limited. Now that we are aware of the possibility of individual feed manipulation, it will be in ALL of our best interest here to constantly monitor. It is obvious that the broker in question took advantage of the volatile situation to the extreme.

I think folks should take stockwets thread as an example of how to start an investigation into feed manipulation. We have learned, now, through our many mistakes how better to handle this situation in the future.

Thank you so much, stockwet...your information is invaluable.
  • #146
  • May 22, 2006 6:03pm May 22, 2006 6:03pm
I believe we, as customers of the brokers themselves (me being a customer of FXCM for 3 years!), should demand some sort of forum on the debate of whether price fixing and counter trading is an issue in the retail trading market.

I have been a customer of FXCM for 3 years now, and I'm proof that you can survive in the market.

However, I'm a little bit concerned from the people in this thread in particular who seem to have been brainwashed up to a point, believing that the brokers are trying to trade moves against them.

Brokers do take position's, yes - but so do the large investment houses, who can see marketdepth and who have the financial power to do so.

You must understand this is a few trillion dollar a day market, moves of size are imminent. Not a single house can move the market, it must be a collection of players in the market who can achieve such moves.

I guess - it comes down to, when someone loses something, they tend to want to blame someone or something else.

However, why dont we get an retail broker from one of the shabby retail broker firms online, for a online forum, where you and me and the rest of the traders in the universe can attend and slam them with the hard questions. Cause regulated or not, they will lose business if people dont have faith in the system, and with the ECN's now making lee-way in the marketplace of forex brokerage, I would think that being a counterparty, and blowing up every client account they can find would be somewhat counterproductive.

FXCM have an ECN now, I think its called PRforex or something. Whom allocate market depth to you, and allow you to view interbank feeds.

But really, if you play the market with a full account drawdown, during news...then you probably deserve to be blown up. I imagine if you go to court over such an issue, the judge would most likely throw the matter out of court.

Brokerage houses manually feed prices at times of high liquidity - this is a fact. However, they even admit this!!

In the contract you sign when you open an account!! Read it next time when you open the next account you are going to destroy! Its because the broker itself is not feeding you live interbank feeds, simply because, live interbank feeds during times of high liquidity are going nuts anyway (i know, i use to work for one of Australias top Investment banks) - the broker itself is not able to feed through a correct price. So the price is levelled till an appropriate price can be averaged, and their interbank broker who feeds the retail side, is able to give a consistent price.

So in effect you have two destinations for price to be delivered, when price moves on average 3 pips every second for about 2 or 3 minutes, your not going to get live feed you want, no matter how hard you try.

In saying this....try opening an account with an ECN - and I will guarentee you, trading during times of high liquidity will be just as hard.

So really, where does common sense lie in the marketplace ... ?? If your going to play this game, do it properly, or get out - or be forced out!

Making money out of forex is very possible, and very real - but it comes down to you, not your broker, on how your going to perform


Cheers

Rusty
  • #147
  • May 22, 2006 6:10pm May 22, 2006 6:10pm
Quoting mrmikal
Stockwet, I'd like to publicly apologize to you and commend your efforts. I made a few in appropriate posts prior to this, but it seems that you have handled yourself with honor and dignity and have followed through on your promise to help shield this community from further damage.

I don't know any lawyers, but I really hope someone on here comes his aid. Our friend here has been wronged in a most egregious way, and I hope anyone patroning this broker personally contacts stockwet for details on what happened exactly to make an informed decision about what to do next.

The information stockwet has provided is most disturbing, and it is my hope that we come together to ensure this type of behavior is limited. Now that we are aware of the possibility of individual feed manipulation, it will be in ALL of our best interest here to constantly monitor. It is obvious that the broker in question took advantage of the volatile situation to the extreme.

I think folks should take stockwets thread as an example of how to start an investigation into feed manipulation. We have learned, now, through our many mistakes how better to handle this situation in the future.

Thank you so much, stockwet...your information is invaluable.
No worries. We both did what we thought was best.
  • #148
  • May 22, 2006 6:18pm May 22, 2006 6:18pm
Quoting Rusty_forexman
However, I'm a little bit concerned from the people in this thread in particular who seem to have been brainwashed up to a point, believing that the brokers are trying to trade moves against them.

Brokers do take position's, yes - but so do the large investment houses, who can see marketdepth and who have the financial power to do so.

You must understand this is a few trillion dollar a day market, moves of size are imminent. Not a single house can move the market, it must be a collection of players in the market who can achieve such moves.

I guess - it comes down to, when someone loses something, they tend to want to blame someone or something else.
Hi Rusty,

I'm not quite sure of what you're aiming at here.

There's a difference between a broker staying in close proximity to the market and the market taking out your trade versus a broker targeting a single trader with a wide deviation from the market price in an arbitrary fashion. Manipulating a single trader's price in a way that causes that trader to lose a substantial sum of money to another entity that is not part of the general market is fraudulent price manipulation in my book.

We can argue whether or not this trader should have been in the trade or whether or not he should have traded in high volatility with a stop loss. That's not really the point. The true point is that we expert certain ethical standards from our brokers, mainly that they will give us accurate, market driven feeds to the best of their ability.

On the other hand, this is an unregulated environment, and we expect such risks. Hopefully, we can learn from this. But, I also hope that we can collectively weed out those brokers who act fraudulently and dishonestly. CFGTrader is one of these brokers who do not deserve our business.

Regards,

stockwet
  • #149
  • May 22, 2006 6:22pm May 22, 2006 6:22pm
Quoting stockwet
Hi Rusty,

I'm not quite sure of what you're aiming at here.

There's a difference between a broker staying in close proximity to the market and the market taking out your trade versus a broker targeting a single trader with a wide deviation from the market price in an arbitrary fashion. Manipulating a single trader's price in a way that causes that trader to lose a substantial sum of money to another entity that is not part of the general market is fraudulent price manipulation in my book.

We can argue whether or not this trader should have been in the trade or whether or not he should have traded in high volatility with a stop loss. That's not really the point. The true point is that we expert certain ethical standards from our brokers, mainly that they will give us accurate, market driven feeds to the best of their ability.

On the other hand, this is an unregulated environment, and we expect such risks. Hopefully, we can learn from this. But, I also hope that we can collectively weed out those brokers who act fraudulently and dishonestly. CFGTrader is one of these brokers who do not deserve our business.

Regards,

stockwet
Sorry Stockwet, I wasnt reffering to your original post.

I should have quoted the few posters i was directing the reply to.

However, I dont see, how a broker can minupulate one single traders feed.

Anyways, If you believe this is an act of deception on behalf CFGTrader, then thankyou for bringing up the issue.

Cheers

Rusty
  • #150
  • May 22, 2006 6:50pm May 22, 2006 6:50pm
Quoting Rusty_forexman
Sorry Stockwet, I wasnt reffering to your original post.

I should have quoted the few posters i was directing the reply to.

However, I dont see, how a broker can minupulate one single traders feed.

Anyways, If you believe this is an act of deception on behalf CFGTrader, then thankyou for bringing up the issue.

Cheers

Rusty
Rusty, my man...I didn't believe it either, but stockwet seems to have proof of that...regardless...you can't deny that the absolute worst case scenario occurred to stockwet here with the price going almost 20 pips higher than the highest price scene from the various charts posted.

I agree with you though...a lot of people post conspiracy theories here (and wrongfully so). I do believe brokers are entitled to "some" leeway at a customer base level...but an individual trader level is, in my book absolutely unethical...all ethics aside though, it's entirely technically possible to manipulate a single feed...I don't see why they couldn't (and for shady brokers, wouldn't) use that to their discretion...especially if they can claim volatility...it would be simple to add, wouldn't it (pseudocode below)

function getPrice() {
var client = system.connected_client();

if (client.account_number = "stockwet account") {
feed += (20.0 * pip);
}

return feed;
}

I disagree with the stockwet trade during NFP (or whatever it was), but that doesn't absolve the broker from raising the spread for an individual feed 20 pips higher than the average market anywhere else.

Regardless, though if it did or didn't happen on individual basis...doesn't matter...20 pips higher??? it was almost too easy to see...on a client base level...I wouldn't want to be with this broker so the information here is valuable...I'd be rolling the dice at this point, in my opinion.
  • #151
  • May 22, 2006 7:05pm May 22, 2006 7:05pm
Maybe it's about time to open a "Black List" thread with the names of these brokers.

I'm sure that such a list will affect their pockets – maybe the best way to get to their minds!

  • #152
  • May 22, 2006 7:33pm May 22, 2006 7:33pm
Lets try to keep things positive. A blacklist thread just invites negativity... I completely agree that there are dishonest brokers, but I feel we should not bring ourselves down to their level.

My pip on it, Scott


Quoting simonfx
Maybe it's about time to open a "Black List" thread with the names of these brokers.



I'm sure that such a list will affect their pockets – maybe the best way to get to their minds!

  • #153
  • May 22, 2006 7:38pm May 22, 2006 7:38pm
I mean here is a thought, If everyone who felt wronged started trashin brokers and services on the forum. And the Sponsors got annoyed with the comments and pulled their advertising, how long would the forum survive?

So we should be fair about it. This was a terrible case of felony fraud, no question, but just anyone with a beef listing brokers and services is not fair nor is it wise.

Scott
  • #154
  • May 22, 2006 8:34pm May 22, 2006 8:34pm
Quoting smjones
I mean here is a thought, If everyone who felt wronged started trashin brokers and services on the forum. And the Sponsors got annoyed with the comments and pulled their advertising, how long would the forum survive?

So we should be fair about it. This was a terrible case of felony fraud, no question, but just anyone with a beef listing brokers and services is not fair nor is it wise.

Scott
Agreed...I believe, however, there should be a collective here able to investigate these claims...it would be at least helpful...I mean, if an individual trader could do what stockwet did and posted his suspicions before posting the broker, I think that would be fair.

This particular case, I think would be rare...I mean everyone has gripes about brokers, but this broker clearly crossed the line, and I believe the negative publicity serves at least notice to other brokers engaging in the same practice.

Stockwet methodically asked people to contribute to his investigation and after coming to the conclusion that he was defrauded, he posted the broker's name and management team. This, I believe was a completely fair and particularly useful for all people in the forex community INCLUDING brokers...especially those trying to shed images of corruption and conspiracy.

There are plenty of positive threads about brokers, and one could easily assess after reading this that there ARE brokers out there worth trading with INSTEAD of the broker in question here.

I agree, we shouldn't just post negative issues in a blacklist column because anyone would just post problems, and they might be biased and their information tainted...but I think, perhaps a moderator administered (only mods can post after a thorough investigation) would actually do well to invite reputable sponsors to the forum. If we eliminate the turds, so to speak, we get a nice clean fish bowl to swim in...and the reputable brokers sponsoring this fine site would go a long way to 1) enhancing the credibility of this forum and 2) shrinking the options of forex brokers to the people who really do care about helping this community.

Wouldn't you agree, at least in some part?
  • #155
  • May 22, 2006 8:38pm May 22, 2006 8:38pm
There is a CFTC page where you can file a report and they'd investigate.
I believe it is www.cftc.gov
You can look up there information about brokerages, before opening an account.

Lietuve


Quoting stockwet
Hello Everyone.

We've come to a point where I can reveal the name of this broker. After lengthy negotiations with this broker, they have proven themselves disreputable. In fact, at this point, I'd like nothing more than to see this broker go completely out of business and their executives charged with fraud. I may or may not ever get my wish.

If any of you encounter CFGTrader (cfgtrader.com) avoid them like the plague! This broker engaged in, and even openly acknowledged, that they manual fixed the price of an individual trader. They further acknowledged a complete unwillingness to fix the problem and told this trader to take their money and close their account.

Principals of this company are: Don Snellgrove, CEO, and Dr. Steve Janjic, COO. Following is the reply I received from Mr. Snellgrove when I initially contacted the company (my initial email is below his reply.)


On 5/11/06, Don Snellgrove <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Taylor,
>
> I appreciate your email and your concerns. I am not involved with the daily
> activities of the FCM and I will forward your email over to Dr Steve Janjic
> (364-9366) who will most likely be able to address each of the issues that
> you have spoken about in your email.
>
> Personally, I can say that I do personally monitor the activities of several
> US and European brokerages and I have found that the new CFGT has been
> extremely fair in all activities, especially in fast moving markets, with
> traders as compared to some of the brokers that I have ongoing business
> relationships with.
>
> I think that Steve would welcome a call from you at any time to discuss
> platform procedures as well as any other issue you may have.
>
> As a follow up, please let me know when you contact Steve or if he contacts
> you first.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don Snellgrove,
> 804-364-9366
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Taylor Stockwell" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:01 AM
> Subject: Platform Problem
>
>
> Dear Mr. Snellgrove
>
> My name is Taylor Stockwell. I'm a trader from Richmond, VA. I have a
> number of trader friends who are associated with your company as
> retail customers. I was happy to see that you opened a division
> trading with Meta Trader. In fact, I have been, up until yesterday,
> considering opening an account with your firm. However, based on what
> I saw yesterday with your feeds, I have reason to pause.
>
> Attached are several screenshots taken yesterday. The one that I'd
> like to point out to you is Stop_Hunt_CFGL.jpg. This was taken from
> one of your live accounts. On this chart, the price reached 1.2826
> before setting a new low, then returning to set a new high. The rest
> of the charts are from various other vendors' feeds, all of which
> confirm that yours is the only firm that traded the 1.2826 level at
> 2:15 PM EST. In fact, I've included a feed from your own demo server
> (Stop_Hunt_CFGD.jpg) which corroborates that the high at that time was
> 1.2809, consistent with everyone else in the market except for your
> live feed. Given that the preceding daily high was 1.2813, I would
> expect that a number of your customers placed protective or entry
> stops above that number until after the announcement. The fact that
> all the other feeds went to 1.2809 and yours went to 1.2826 is
> troubling.
>
> One would like to believe that this price, 17 pips beyond where the
> rest of the market was, was merely due to an errant feed. I figure
> there are several possible, reasonable explanations:
>
> 1. Your bank feed included errant data for 2:15 PM EST. If this is the
> case, you may wish to notify any of your customers who were negatively
> impacted and offer recompense.
>
> 2. Your bank, or someone within your company, unwittingly manipulated
> the price, in which case you may want to follow the same course as
> option 1.
>
> 3. Your bank, or someone within your company, knowingly, with intent,
> manipulated the price, in which you may want to change banks and/or
> take other appropriate action.
>
> 4. The price was accurate, even though three larger, more reputable
> brokers and your demo feed, did not reflect the price. I'd imagine it
> would be hard to find any others in the market who traded at 1.2826 at
> 2:15 PM EST. There were significant option defenses holding at that
> time which did not crumble until the subsequent 15 minute candle.
>
> Please know that my intent in providing you with this information is
> only to give you an opportunity to correct a potential problem which
> may be damaging to your company in the future. Since I didn't trade
> live with you, the issue does not impact me, although it has impacted
> those I know. Nevertheless, I have no other vested interest in the
> issue, other than I like to help people and I hope this helps you in
> some degree.
>
> Thanks for your time. I'd love to hear what you find, though, I don't
> expect to receive a response.
>
> Regards,
>
> Taylor Stockwell

And, the reply from Mr. Janjic:

Dear Mr. Stockwell,
Thank you for your concern you must realize that the market went 19 bid at FXCM at the same time we did and the market spiked up before going down then back to the same level and beyond, several large banks went 20 wide and others pulled prices all together, we just moved with the market instead of spreading the feed and also realize that our demo is just a demo and doesn't run on live bank feeds that offer liquidity issues. We let customers in and out of the market without any trouble and TIGHT SPREADS. You must understand that to trade into this type of a news situation is dangerous for everyone including all the dealers around the world and when they spread or completely pull their prices we have to quickly adjust to market conditions and this was the case yesterday. If your going to trade the news we all know how risky it could be. If you traded that move yesterday you noticed how volatile it was and how risky it is to trade certain news events. Non-Farm payroll as you know also moves the market as dramatic as yesterdays interest rate decision and these are not the best times to trade do to the volatility, we would like to work with you but we also have exposure to the markets just like you.

Thank You,

Dr Steve Janjic


Chief Operating Officer




Concorde Forex Group, Inc and CFGTrader,LLC




(888) 837-0671




(804) 364-9366




www.cfgtrading.com

  • #156
  • May 22, 2006 8:50pm May 22, 2006 8:50pm
Yes I can see your point on this and a third party would be a good idea, but not me. I am a Moderator, but I am not qualified to do this kind of investigation... Also I would think this is something that should get Merlin's blessing first.

Thanks Scott


Quoting mrmikal
Agreed...I believe, however, there should be a collective here able to investigate these claims...it would be at least helpful...I mean, if an individual trader could do what stockwet did and posted his suspicions before posting the broker, I think that would be fair.

This particular case, I think would be rare...I mean everyone has gripes about brokers, but this broker clearly crossed the line, and I believe the negative publicity serves at least notice to other brokers engaging in the same practice.

Stockwet methodically asked people to contribute to his investigation and after coming to the conclusion that he was defrauded, he posted the broker's name and management team. This, I believe was a completely fair and particularly useful for all people in the forex community INCLUDING brokers...especially those trying to shed images of corruption and conspiracy.

There are plenty of positive threads about brokers, and one could easily assess after reading this that there ARE brokers out there worth trading with INSTEAD of the broker in question here.

I agree, we shouldn't just post negative issues in a blacklist column because anyone would just post problems, and they might be biased and their information tainted...but I think, perhaps a moderator administered (only mods can post after a thorough investigation) would actually do well to invite reputable sponsors to the forum. If we eliminate the turds, so to speak, we get a nice clean fish bowl to swim in...and the reputable brokers sponsoring this fine site would go a long way to 1) enhancing the credibility of this forum and 2) shrinking the options of forex brokers to the people who really do care about helping this community.

Wouldn't you agree, at least in some part?
  • #157
  • May 22, 2006 9:15pm May 22, 2006 9:15pm
Quoting Rusty_forexman
Sorry Stockwet, I wasnt reffering to your original post.

I should have quoted the few posters i was directing the reply to.

However, I dont see, how a broker can minupulate one single traders feed.

Anyways, If you believe this is an act of deception on behalf CFGTrader, then thankyou for bringing up the issue.

Cheers

Rusty
I see what you're talking about, now. Yes, there's a lot of conspiracy theories. I think most brokers are probably acting right most of the time. I also think that this one situation was more unique than the typical trade. Here are some things to keep in mind about this particular trade.

1. The lot size was extremely large - 100 lots.
2. This broker offers the same value proposition as InterbankFX. That is, they offer anonymous, straight through, automatic processing of orders unless the lot size is 100 lots or more. (Actually, that number may be 50, I'm not sure.)
3. As a result, the feed was placed in "manual" versus automatic processing mode, as admitted by the broker.

So, I'd say that most traders are OK until you start trading at levels where the broker can place you on a manual feed. Obviously, being in manual mode allows a broker a great deal of freedom with what they can quote the customer.
  • #158
  • May 22, 2006 9:54pm May 22, 2006 9:54pm
Stockwet increadibly disheartnening to read something like this about any broker that anyone trusts their money with.
As to show for your integrity and fairness I think you did great in following through this situation and not letting the name out.

But I think it is a great plus that we are all able to see what this particular shop is all about when it comes to having serious money.
They are a complete failure to provide a real market situation which is what we all expect.
I would expect the same behavior but on another scale from them when it comes to other people with smaller accounts. Since having used your account for this practice there is an 80% chance they do the same thing with smaller ones but on a lesser pip scale because there is more accounts.

Most we can do is applaud if you are able to pursue this in the court with appropriate legal counsel and prove in court their illegitemate dealings.

And we can all learn who to not work with.
  • #159
  • May 23, 2006 1:52am May 23, 2006 1:52am
Quoting stockwet
I see what you're talking about, now. Yes, there's a lot of conspiracy theories. I think most brokers are probably acting right most of the time. I also think that this one situation was more unique than the typical trade. Here are some things to keep in mind about this particular trade.

1. The lot size was extremely large - 100 lots.
2. This broker offers the same value proposition as InterbankFX. That is, they offer anonymous, straight through, automatic processing of orders unless the lot size is 100 lots or more. (Actually, that number may be 50, I'm not sure.)
3. As a result, the feed was placed in "manual" versus automatic processing mode, as admitted by the broker.

So, I'd say that most traders are OK until you start trading at levels where the broker can place you on a manual feed. Obviously, being in manual mode allows a broker a great deal of freedom with what they can quote the customer.

Thanks stockwet, to all those informations. I no have a clear sight on what's
meant with a fixed spread. - We don't widen the spread but just change the
whole feed. ;-)

However, who joines a company with so much movin' and blinkn items on there
website shouldn't expect too much. The pictures they show have nothin' to
do with forex and remind me heavily on some hyips on tha net.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice ...


--
I don't see any sence in a list with not reputable brokers.
You might even increase their google score by puttin' links
referin to their website. ^^
  • #160
  • May 23, 2006 2:13am May 23, 2006 2:13am
"CFTC Registered and NFA Member " is what is displayed in bold at CFG site. It's worthless in the long run i guess.

This case is so on and if we battle it out in court on ourselfs, we would win, common we got hardcore proof, what else we need just file the case stock, you have the edge.

Go for it...
0 traders viewing now