Call for Regulations regarding Liquidity Providers | Page 3 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

List of all forex liquidity providers? 34 replies

Aggregate FX Liquidity Providers DataFeed 1 reply

How Brokers and Liquidity Providers rip you off 11 replies

Public and Private Liquidity Providers 0 replies

see the ibfx post?access to all liquidity providers 18 replies

Attachments: Call for Regulations regarding Liquidity Providers
Exit Attachments

Call for Regulations regarding Liquidity Providers

  • #41
  • Jan 17, 2015 4:20am Jan 17, 2015 4:20am
If anyone thinks LP's don't have to be there when we need them there is no point in having them. That's their job...to ensure a market DURING A CRISIS. When President Kennedy got assassinated, the market makers did their job, kept their cool and bought up every share being panic dumped. They make billions on the "inside" and for that PRIVILEGE, they SHOULD take the risk or stay out.
  • #42
  • Jan 17, 2015 4:39am Jan 17, 2015 4:39am
After reading all this thread, i think everything really worked smoothly, it is clear that there are so many retail so called "traders" that have no knowledge of the market at all, have no idea what they are doing, and the market cut them off.

All you can do now is just try to study, study how the market works, study about risk management, become a responsible trader, and eventually come back in the business.
  • #43
  • Jan 17, 2015 4:47am Jan 17, 2015 4:47am
Yeah, that's just what we need, more regulations .... ... How about we learn to "regulate" ourselves?

Two of the best posts in here. (there are more folks so don't feel left out)

http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...32#post8000932

http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...87#post8001487
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #44
  • Jan 17, 2015 4:59am Jan 17, 2015 4:59am
Quoting goldfinch
{quote} No, what needs to be investigated and changed is how retailers got themselves into this situation, change the minimum deposit to 100k and reduce the leverage to 10:1 and force traders to always have a minimum margin level of 90% in their account. Here fixed it for you. No need to "investigate" the LP's, they did exactly what they are supposed to do yesterday. The market worked, just not in your favour, tough luck.
I have to say goldfinch I'm impressed and agree with most everything you say. (as evidenced by my post above)

Have to disagree on your minimum requirements to trade however. Just because some of us don't have that kind capital to "play" with shouldn't preclude us from learning the business, assuming the risk and working our axe off to build an account we can one day live from. It's not the open door to trading that needs to be investigated or closed. Just those walking through it.

I understand the business, the risk, and the rules (ever changing as they may be at times .. lol) and I'm quite capable of "regulating" myself. Don't punish the little guy, just because he's little.

EDIT: In fact the second cup of coffee brought a small thought. Leave the structure the way it is. How about an Entrance Exam? Apply for an account with a selected br0ker, Have to demo with said br0ker (real feeds and true live action required here) for say ... I don't know ... 3 to 6 months or so? Prove you have a clue and open with whatever amount you can and go for it. Or .... maybe I need a third cup?
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #45
  • Jan 17, 2015 5:09am Jan 17, 2015 5:09am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} Those liquidity did not "dry up"; they were stopped on purpose by irresponsible and greedy and unscrupulous "prime banks" who took $billions of bailout money from all of us in our tax dollars when they f***'ed up, when they were on the "wrong side of the market" with their MBS's. Did they admit they were wrong? Did they admit they were highly leveraged? No they took our money in strides and paid their top executives handsomely. How we ask is for them to stay in the market to provide quotes during all time and all of sudden they are crying...
Agree on your point Forexia.

Currencies are supposed to have a fair market value based on fundamentals, with a small degree of deviation right? How is it possible that a few big banks living on taxpayer charity can arbitrarily decide to assign a 40% loss on a market, then close shop? Especially when the fundamentals havn't changed significantly.

The Swiss Crash stinks of a well oiled collusion in rigging the market, and it's common knowledge that the FX markets are being heavily manipulated.

What is stopping LP's pulling this stunt again and bankrupting FXCM and other ECN brokers next time?
...
  • #46
  • Edited 5:45am Jan 17, 2015 5:18am | Edited 5:45am
Quoting albchr
{quote} I have to say goldfinch I'm impressed and agree with most everything you say. (as evidenced by my post above) Have to disagree on your minimum requirements to trade however. Just because some of us don't have that kind capital to "play" with shouldn't preclude us from learning the business, assuming the risk and working our axe off to build an account we can one day live from. It's not the open door to trading that needs to be investigated or closed. Just those walking through it. I understand the business, the risk, and the rules (ever...
You need a third cup of coffee!

But i think the idea of some sort of exam is right, but simply a set of let's say 50 multiple choice/answers questions regarding the market structure and knowledge, if somebody don't have any market knowledge, just deny him the account.
This can either force young kids to study something about the markets before they put their mom-and-dad money at risk, or simply cut them off if they are not willing to do so.

As for the liquidity providers and slippages etc., everything is always being acknowledged by clients the moment they fill all the papers required to be filled during the account opening process, so this whole "LP stole my money" don't make sense.

Hey i have an idea, why don't we open a 100x leverage position on usd/hkd? it is pegged like eurchf was, why don't we all buy, isn't it a great idea?
And then if the hk cb decide to unpeg it, let's blame the liquidity providers.

All this nonsense is just damaging the already low image that we retail traders have in the eyes of the world, it would be better to really shut up.
  • #47
  • Jan 17, 2015 5:29am Jan 17, 2015 5:29am
Quoting spaceduck
{quote} You need a third cup of coffee! But i think the idea of some sort of exam is right, but simply a set of let's say 50 multiple choice/answers questions regarding the market structure and knowledge, if somebody don't have any market knowledge, just deny him the account. This can either force young kids to study something about the markets before they put their mom-and-dad money at risk, or simply cut them off if they are not willing to do so. As for the liquidity providers and slippages etc., everything is always being acknowledged by clients...
LOL ... Brewing as I type. Literally.

Sounds like a fair test to me SD. Perhaps it could be given in addition to the demo. Knowledge of market structure is one very important thing. Trading it successfully still another. My point (to the thread) is simply let's not go calling for the typical "one size fits all" regulations that crush many in favor of a few. In my humble view, we're buried beneath far too many (in the name of "protecting" us from ourselves ... lol) already.
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #48
  • Jan 17, 2015 5:58am Jan 17, 2015 5:58am
Quoting albchr
{quote} LOL ... Brewing as I type. Literally. Sounds like a fair test to me SD. Perhaps it could be given in addition to the demo. Knowledge of market structure is one very important thing. Trading it successfully still another. My point (to the thread) is simply let's not go calling for the typical "one size fits all" regulations that crush many in favor of a few. In my humble view, we're buried beneath far too many (in the name of "protecting" us from ourselves ... lol) already.
Of course, every regulation is surely not good, i see americans had the 50x leverage cap, the fifo rule, the anti-hedge rule, the anti credi-card funding rule, now probably they will ask for a 5x max leverage rule, or for make retail fx trading illegal, i mean good for them if this can help them to save some money.

Luckily the rest of the world don't really care about what american people ask for, so who really cares about all this regulation screaming (unless you are from the land of the free, in such case well i'm very sorry for you).

The thing is, financial speculating is a riskious business activity, forex, stock market, bond market, futures markets, in every and each of these markets people get rich and people get poor everyday, if you want something safe and secure there are plenty of normal dayjobs that will give you a modest salary every month and that's it.

If you want to be a speculator, you have the right and the duty of study what's going on in the world (take this eurchf for example, the ecb will launch QE next week, it was not really surprising the idea of snb to remove the peg, it was a possibility), to learn how to manage your risk, how to read the charts, etc.

The price you pay for gambling is the loss of your capital.

And nobody is born with the knowledge and experience needed to make it good in this business, so it is normal that in the first few years you are going to lose your capital, more than one time.

If everytime you lose you blame something and ask for regulations, i mean it is a childish way of acting isn't it?
You are basically asking your government to close the forex retail trading because you have lost your money with your irresponsible gambling.

I am speechless.

(i'm referring here to the thread starter)
  • #49
  • Jan 17, 2015 6:30am Jan 17, 2015 6:30am
Quoting spaceduck
{quote} Of course, every regulation is surely not good, i see americans had the 50x leverage cap, the fifo rule, the anti-hedge rule, the anti credi-card funding rule, now probably they will ask for a 5x max leverage rule, or for make retail fx trading illegal, i mean good for them if this can help them to save some money. Luckily the rest of the world don't really care about what american people ask for, so who really cares about all this regulation screaming (unless you are from the land of the free, in such case well i'm very sorry for you)....
Absolutely to the whole post SD. ... Yes, I'm from the US ... apology accepted

The path in this business is long and the journey fraught with danger. It takes a commitment and dedication more rare than some others. But then, perfecting ones craft always does .. eh?

I've never blown an account (knocking wood) but I've driven it so close, so many times, in the end it's rather the same thing.
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #50
  • Jan 17, 2015 6:39am Jan 17, 2015 6:39am
Quoting grin
{quote} Huh! Many are conversant in theory, but still cannot trade. How can it help with fundamentals based trades where it took one word to turn things around? Even if one thinks about ECB, everyone had less than one week to assess possible impact of anticipated QE announcement. It is doubtful that even SNB could anticipate action of such magnitude. Has anyone ever heard of options? Buy one for protection. It costs, but it is largely fail proof unlike freebie stop loss. You get what you pay for. Brokers are capable of stopping people...
Too many I'm afraid grin. The structure of the market IS risk. If we cannot control the only thing we can in this business, there's no chance at any level of success. No one can predict (other than them) what words a talking head will spill tomorrow. But knowing how to trade includes expecting the unexpected. Can we at all times? Probably not. But we can at least mitigate the risks by learning how to read the market.

I also agree. I don't think the SNB could have known fully the effects of taking what I feel was simply a step in trying to protect themselves.

I say, what's done is done. NEXT!
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #51
  • Jan 17, 2015 6:48am Jan 17, 2015 6:48am
Well, next week I am off to Las Vegas to double up on the profits I made this week, I have a system that is closely related to how I trade the currency markets, it is simple, if the EU is going down I will only put my money on Red Numbers if the EU is going up I put my money on the Black numbers, it is a little more complicated than it sounds because I also take into account if the EU price is near a Big Round Number.

I am not sure if environmental factors or fluctuations in temperature affect how the wheel spins or if they equally have an effect on the density of the Ball making it heavier or lighter, perhaps some one with more experience of conditions in Las Vegas could advise me.
If I do not win it will not be my fault and if I can prove that the casino did not control the environment correctly I should be able to get my money back, OH! I just had a thought, is there a regulation controlling environmental conditions? I had better check and see before I buy my ticket. better Safe than Sorry.
Cut your Losers short and let your Winners run.
  • #52
  • Edited 2:32pm Jan 17, 2015 6:50am | Edited 2:32pm
Quoting Forexia
With all focuses on brokers, I believe the cause of this turmoil is the failure on the liquidity providers' part on making and maintaining an orderly market; they are the real culprit in causing all this calamity
No.

We are here due to a central bank(SNB) failing in its mandate.. that of maintaining price stability.
In terms of achieving price stability and meeting their mandate, I give them a - 10 out of 10.FAIL

Do not ever trust/rely on anyone in terms of financial promises and stay well clear of manipulated markets.
For 3 years the CHF currency had been manipulated by the CB.
If you were leaning on the SNB without downside protection you need to work real hard on understanding how the market actually works and have a serious think about risk.
The real question though is who the hell thought they were going to exit on the stop without someone to offset that trade with a limit?
Nobody was under there limit bidding and why should there be? Unbelievable

If everyone knew what they were doing,the only loser here would have been the SNB itself.
Rgds
  • #53
  • Jan 17, 2015 7:05am Jan 17, 2015 7:05am
Quoting dee50
Well, next week I am off to Las Vegas to double up on the profits I made this week, I have a system that is closely related to how I trade the currency markets, it is simple, if the EU is going down I will only put my money on Red Numbers if the EU is going up I put my money on the Black numbers, it is a little more complicated than it sounds because I also take into account if the EU price is near a Big Round Number. I am not sure if environmental factors or fluctuations in temperature affect how the wheel spins or if they equally have an effect...
... The weather isn't much of a factor as it's a very dry climate dee. Just keep two things in mind when you go.

1) Don't spin until after 12:00 noon because the desert gets very cold at night and things need a spell to warm up.

2) Just bet red cause EU is going down. If near a round number just sit out a spin or two and it will resume soon enough ...
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #54
  • Jan 17, 2015 10:53am Jan 17, 2015 10:53am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} Yup that's the problem. We ask for the right regulations and they always end up giving us more crap like forbidding us to use credit cards to fund the account, anything to stop us retail traders to succeed so the "big boys" who bailed out on us this time can continue to make millions with our bailout money.
  • #55
  • Edited Jan 18, 2015 12:57am Jan 17, 2015 2:17pm | Edited Jan 18, 2015 12:57am
Quoting RobertCorey
The problem is that a central bank thought it knew what was best for its country and maybe even the world, so it manipulated the market single handedly. In a free market the EURCHF longs would lose money gradually over the 3 years. When SNB removed the peg, the market just did what it wanted to do all along
I agree SNB is the cause of this whole debacle that really wreaked havoc unnecessarily on an otherwise normal orderly foreign exchange market but that still does NOT serve as an excuse for the liquidity providers to stop providing liquidity and making markets. This is not the first time that any central banks has manipulated the market and caused volatility in foreign exchange market nor will it be the last. BoJ has intervened in the currency market numerous times before but NEVER this kind of abrupt market disruption. And if not for the central banks, there will be other extreme events that causes volatility in the market. What are we going to do? Shut down the market every single time when there is an surprise event? What then? What's the point of trading? What's the point of having a market? We are traders; our job is to weather anything that comes our way, albeit unjustified. We actually have important job functions; we provide 1) Price continuity and 2) Price completeness to the economy as a whole. By stopping their price quotes, those liquidity providers basically abandoned their job posts, interrupted price continuity and erased price information for one of the major currency. Now we have no idea how much CHF should be valued at during that one hour of time from 4:30 AM to 5:30 AM on Jan. 15, 2015 thanks to those greedy and irresponsible liquidity "providers" who had absolutely no integrity.

Quoting RobertCorey
{quote} A couple things here. During the fall, there were few quotes because no one wanted to buy. Who would be long EURCHF when everyone knew that CHF was way undervalued? A liquidity provider does just that. It provides liquidity. It does not create liquidity (in this case EURCHF buyers) out of thin air. That they didnt provide quotes for an hour afterward is irrelevant, since it took 3 mins for the price to fall to where it did. The equity in all the accounts was already long gone by the time they shut off trading.
But what's ironic is that if those LP's had stayed in the market and continued to provide quotes, they could've actually mitigated their own losses too. It's NOT true that after 3 min. of price falling that all of the account balances are already negative. If you take a look at the 1 min. tf EURCHF chart on Jan. 15, 2015 from IC Markets below, from 4:30 am to 4:31 am when the rate changed, the price moved 500 pips yes, it was already a big move and on a standard lot that would've already been a loss of $4K+ USD, but that's on a standard 100K lot, the loss would've been smaller if for a micro lot or even on a 0.1 lot which would've been around $400+ loss or even smaller so it's NOT possible that ALL accounts are all negative at that time. And on top of that, the price actually bounced back 100 or so pips in the next 2 minutes and majority of the brokers would've wanted to close the positions by then because they would've already triggered the brokers' margin stop-out levels if the trader's account balance was small to begin. And by that time there would've been some negative balances already, I agree but it would've been in the number of negavie $1K, 2K, at most 3K, or smaller and that is LOT MORE managable than when the price finally hit the rock bottom at 1.01108, a difference of (1.20090 - 1.01108) 1,898 pips after one hour of price disruption resulting from liquidity providers shutting down price quotes. By that time, the negative account balances, for 100K standard lots had hit tens of thousands, this is where we are hearing stories of traders losing 10K+, 40K and various forex brokers becoming insolvent and etc. because by this time, all of the accounts are pretty much all in the negatives all because those stupid a$$ liquidity "providers" abandoning the market and leaving us holding the bag!! If the liquidity providers had continued to provide price quotes, this drop would NOT have been a precipitating drop like this; it would've been a gradual fall albeit with large candles but it would've provided brokers and traders ample chances to close their positions thus mitigating their losses if they didn't get a chance to close them before.

Liquidity providers don't create liquidity no but they need to provide means for people to GIVE them liquidity!! Without prices there, how can trades take place? With no trades taking place, of course there is no liquidity. So it's not right to blame on the market with no liquidity when it was those liquidity "providers" who didn't create the means to have liquidity! It's not right to blame on the central bankers, the correct idiots to blame is the greedy chicken s*** so called "prime banks" who didn't do their job when they were supposed to! Btw Goldman Sach, Citi, where is our bailout money that we paid you with our hard-earned tax dollars when you f***'ed up on your own leveraged trading??!!!

Quoting RobertCorey
{quote} I dont like the big banks but keep in mind they virtually all lost money too, and many lost money because their clients, like many here, could not close the position.
Ah yes they could've closed their positions IF there were prices. Without prices there, of course they couldn't close positions. These kind of central bank interventions happened before and NEVER this kind of havoc before until now. WHY? Because those liquidity providers stayed put all those times!! This time they decided to abandon the market and now they get to face the consequences of their own unscrupulous action.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: EURCHF_SNB.JPG Size: 240 KB


So now those liquidity stoppers are stuck with their "losses", a.k.a negative balances from the brokers (boo hoo) which would've been lot smaller if the brokers were able to close the losing trades at margin stop-out levels lot sooner and those liquidity stoppers' own trading losses would've been also lot smaller if they had stayed there providing quotes because some of the winning traders would've tp'ed sooner thinking the price had hit the bottom at 500 pips but no, they chose to walk away from the table and stop issuing quote maybe thinking they can make a bigger killing by drying up liquidity and let price free fall and then come back and bag more profits, well now it's backfired and they get to eat their own losses that they exacerbated themselves because 1) the winning traders got to wait until the price hit rock bottom and tp at 1898 pips instead of 500 pips and 2) the brokers could only wait until the price to hit rock bottom to close trades which increased the negative balances which they might not be able to pay up. LP's lost money too? Well it's their own doing so they are gonna have to suck it up and eat their own s***! Maybe next time they will remember to stay in the market! Bunch of f***ing greedy irresponsible f***ers!
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #56
  • Jan 18, 2015 12:36am Jan 18, 2015 12:36am
Quoting albchr
Yeah, that's just what we need, more regulations .... ... How about we learn to "regulate" ourselves? Two of the best posts in here. (there are more folks so don't feel left out) http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...32#post8000932 http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...87#post8001487
We are perfectly capable of "regulating" ourselves and we are doing it everyday. It's those unscrupulous liquidity "providers" those so called "prime banks" that need to be regulated and closely monitored so they the same s*** again in the face of next extreme market condition. I agree it's SNB who caused this s***storm but it IS those liquid "providers"' selfish and greedy action of bailing on the market that made it worse, 100 times worse than when it should be. That is a fact (See my analysis below/above). And this needs to change. We cannot have a untradable market every single time when there is a "special" market condition.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #57
  • Edited 1:34am Jan 18, 2015 1:16am | Edited 1:34am
Quoting r41225
{quote} The only "correct price" for any given transaction is the one where buyer and seller agree to make that transaction. Accordingly, the "correct price" after the 1.2 floor broke was the one where buyers & sellers agreed to transact, that's just the basics of how markets & prices move. Again, LP didn't cause the crash, government's meddling in the markets & the resultant uncertaity caused it, the whole thing wouldn't even have occurred if SNB hadn't been artificially manipulating the markets. I believe in equal rights & individualism, if you...
Well how about the buyer/seller first offer the price FIRST to the other party and then to see if they are agreed upon? If you shut down the price quotes, HOW do you know if your prices will be agreed upon or accepted or rejected?? No, they didn't stop quoting the price because the price weren't been agreed upon because there were trades happening within the first 3 minutes of the news (see my price chart in my previous posts), there were traders' stop-loss levels getting hit, orders getting executed so there were trades happening when they were posting prices; their prices WERE getting "agreed upon". They stopped the price feed because they were greedy; they wanted to let the price free fall so they can come back when the price hit absolute rock bottom because of their artificially stopped liquidity and make a bigger killing, bagging more profits. I don't know why all of you refuse to see this and instead choose to blame on the leverage, bad trade and SNB as if we have always been trading with no leverage, and have always been putting in "good trade" and we never had SNB-like central bank intervention before. LOL

We traders have always had s*** "regulations" shoved down our throat like not allowed to fund our account with credit cards, no hedging and FIFO. It's time we put in the good regulations on the ones that really needs regulations and monitoring, the "prime" banks!!

Well I hope they enjoy their potentially uncollectable killings and their own losses from those traders who were on the right side of the market and got to bag 1k+ pips against them thanks to their liquidity stopping!!
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #58
  • Jan 18, 2015 1:19am Jan 18, 2015 1:19am
Quoting grin
{quote} Have you heard the term delusional? Who is in their right mind going to average down?
So I was right. They did stop liquidity because of greed. Thanks for proving my point.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #59
  • Jan 18, 2015 3:34am Jan 18, 2015 3:34am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} So I was right. They did stop liquidity because of greed. Thanks for proving my point.
You seems to not have really understood what happened last week.

The magnitude of the event, just imagine the stock market (not a particular stock, but the whole stock market index) fall of 50% in a minute, unimaginable isn't it? Even the worst crash do take months to make such a big move, well imagine it would happen in a minute.
That would be an event!

With the swiss franc, something as big as that has happened.

Now, if we look at it from the liquidity providers point of view, we can see two things:

1) Most of traders (not only retails, i know of many hedgefunds gone burst too) were short on chf (long eurchf), for reasons that, let's just say hopefully they learnt now the lesson of never trust a banker or a politician.

2) The eur has depreciated of 2k pips against the usd and other pairs in the past months, it's clearly crashing, due to the negative interest rates, the deflation, the ecb QE looming, the possible greece exit from the EU, things are going very bad in the last year and the future looks even worse.

What the liquidity providers realized from these two points is that:

1a) All the majority of these eurchf buyers(and chf sellers in general) are on margin and have a stoploss just below 1.20, soo many stoplosses soo leveraged, all in a relatively small space, with nobody on the other side (nobody willing to buy eurchf below 1.20 because if it get there it mean the floor is broken and shit is happening, so really there was no buyers below 1.20, only the snb was buying).

2a) The fundamental value of eurchf considering the eur action of the past year(s), would be probably around parity, aka 2000pips lower of the pegged value.

Now, knowning that there was a hell of sellstop orders looking for liquidity, and that the real value of eurchf was thousands pips below 1.20, why the hell should they offered to buy it at let's say 1.19?

Knowing that the eurchf even with all the liquidity of the would would have reached 1.000 (and below) in a few hours, would you buy it?
Of course not, you would just put your liquidity where you think it's a fair price, and every liquidity provider did it, some stepped in at 1.000, some at 0.9, etc.
They just made their job diligently and professionally.

LP are not to be blamed, brokers too, and the snb too they just had to do what they had to do for protect their interests.
If we really want to blame somebody, i think the chf speculators are the ones to be blamed, they wanted to make a free lunch from an artificial market at the expenses of a central bank, and that's it, it didn't ended well.
  • #60
  • Jan 18, 2015 6:21am Jan 18, 2015 6:21am
Quoting Forexia
{quote} We are perfectly capable of "regulating" ourselves and we are doing it everyday. It's those unscrupulous liquidity "providers" those so called "prime banks" that need to be regulated and closely monitored so they the same s*** again in the face of next extreme market condition. I agree it's SNB who caused this s***storm but it IS those liquid "providers"' selfish and greedy action of bailing on the market that made it worse, 100 times worse than when it should be. That is a fact (See my analysis below/above). And this needs to change. We...
Hi Forexia,

I think others here have explained the reasons, mechanics and results of what took place in the market completely. (and I've learned a few things too ) So there's little point in saying anything more about how and why the market works. It "worked" exactly how it should and one should expect it to under such an event. The hardest part is not knowing such a major event is about to happen. When it does? BAMM!! and EVERYONE involved in the market is affected.

Effectively 15 years of liquidity in 35 seconds? Yeah, that surprised everyone from the banks to us. The ones from the banks, to the brokers to us that suffered little or no effect are the ones who were/are structured properly (or not involved i.e. lucky). The ones that got hurt need to work on things a touch. It's a perfectly natural human response in such situations to look for reasons (especially if one of the hurt) to find "those responsible" to point the blame at and "do something" about it. Even when there is no blame to point to.

So it's perfectly understandable how you feel. I just think you're taking a bit too far. In my life's experience, every single time the public cries out for more regulations, we get them! Ohhhh Boy! Do we get them!! Invariably they result in exactly the same thing. Choking the little guy while protecting the big guy. Be careful what you ask for. When you get it, it affects us all.

Even though the SNB kicked over the first domino, they were doing nothing less than any of us would. Trying to protect themselves. As did every other domino in the line from there. From the banks right down to us.

If we want a free market we have let it be free. So in true trader fashion, shake it off brother! NEXT!
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
0 traders viewing now