IC Markets margin call | Page 8 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Margin Levels and Margin Calls 23 replies

Margin/Free Margin/Equity 11 replies

IC Markets margin call level? 4 replies

difference between Usable Margin and Used Margin 9 replies

Understanding Margin and Margin Calls 0 replies

Attachments: IC Markets margin call
Exit Attachments

IC Markets margin call

  • #141
  • Feb 16, 2015 11:51am Feb 16, 2015 11:51am
The Press release announcement from IC Markets regarding covering the negative balances had not been effective for me. I'm being a victim of persecution by IC Markets because negative balance.

Although I am well protected and with a solid defense, any help will be greatly appreciated.
  • #142
  • Feb 16, 2015 9:42pm Feb 16, 2015 9:42pm
Dear Joshi, can you explain why you have icmarkets staff email address? What are you trying to prove here by pretending to be one of us retail traders?

For god's sake, be honest. And we all know how ECN works, thats why we say impossible ONLY they can quote such ridiculous price when no other broker worldwide does that. And yes, people were contacted and adjustments made only AFTER the article was published. Why dont u contact them and get the timeline too?

I saw the dates (all done finally in Feb while article in 29 Jan Sydney time) and this is precisely what I was talking about. If no article, do u think they will get adjustments done? NO!

Thank you
  • #143
  • Feb 16, 2015 9:44pm Feb 16, 2015 9:44pm
Thats what I been saying too. Why recover losses from retail traders? Shouldnt they be able to recover money from the LPs for the erroneous feed if what they say is true? And why no trade receipts to prove? That's why it is very dubious and suspicious especially since they are the ONLY one globally (so far, if there are other brokers with 0.05 USDCHF being no reported we wont know) to quote such low rate.

Thank you.

Quoting Forexia
I agree with IC Markets continuing to provide quotes in all time too (See my post explaining this in Post #124, all the way up/down before all the angry posts from MaryAnne) as I believe that is the right thing to do and so does many of the brokers who chose to provide ongoing streams. BUT what I don't agree is IC Markets not willing to make things right for people who had been taken advantage of with the bad fills because of IC Market's rightful business decision of continuing to provide quotes at all times. These prices were not just bad prices...
  • #144
  • Feb 17, 2015 2:02am Feb 17, 2015 2:02am
Quoting MaryAnne
{quote} Newspaper article http://www.smh.com.au/business/marke...#ixzz3Py4OV9EE so there should be no reason why u dont get favorable adjustments too. As for liquidity providers, it is always too easy for IC Markets to blame them?
This article is a complete joke. "Fake" margin calls!? seriously? Don't you understand what happened to the market that day? Banks, brokers and their clients all lost a lot of money and they are claiming fake margin calls. Unbelievably stupid press, They're just happy to print that traders lost money and blame their broker, but they didn't bother to figure out what this is really about.
  • #145
  • Feb 17, 2015 3:13am Feb 17, 2015 3:13am
Quoting Jlrobert
{quote} This article is a complete joke. "Fake" margin calls!? seriously? Don't you understand what happened to the market that day? Banks, brokers and their clients all lost a lot of money and they are claiming fake margin calls. Unbelievably stupid press, They're just happy to print that traders lost money and blame their broker, but they didn't bother to figure out what this is really about.
So are you saying this one broker which quotes rates as low as 0.05 USDCHF (based on what some members here mentioned) is correct to do so? Although no other broker worldwide was reported to have done this?

Pretty obvious you are the one who dont understand what really happened. If these traders were with other brokers, they would be stopped at a better rate (not that low).
  • #146
  • Feb 17, 2015 4:14am Feb 17, 2015 4:14am
Quoting MaryAnne
{quote} So are you saying this one broker which quotes rates as low as 0.05 USDCHF (based on what some members here mentioned) is correct to do so? Although no other broker worldwide was reported to have done this? Pretty obvious you are the one who dont understand what really happened. If these traders were with other brokers, they would be stopped at a better rate (not that low).
No one said what happened was correct, i guess IC Markets has acknowledged the fact that their platforms streamed prices lower than most other brokers due to feed from LQ providers and their business model supporting constant streaming. They did not deny these facts and adjusted the trades & accounts of the affected clients.

I just wanted to point out that the article you quoted is mentioning that the losses happened due to "Fake margin calls" and given the circumstances of when this happened, it is completely stupid. The press people have no idea what they are talking about. Buy you being a trader and having a better idea of what happened during the SNB crisis should not vouch for it.
  • #147
  • Feb 17, 2015 5:35am Feb 17, 2015 5:35am
would it be possible to have an SNB like move on EUR/USD, like boom ! 5000pip drop out of nowhere ?
i lose money for a living
  • #148
  • Feb 17, 2015 8:58am Feb 17, 2015 8:58am
thats where you are wrong, my friend. they only did adjustments AFTER the newspaper article was published. You can check with the victims here and the other forums, and take note of the dates.

and if it is not fake margin calls, what is it then? an honest broker would have adjusted before article was published (not after). before article, they were adamant that prices are "correct" and no further adjustments will be made. those were their words. How do their victims feel? they were afraid of negative publicity though (their big IB in other forum mentioned that), and I know some of those wronged victims did approach the media when it looked like there was no other option.

Dude, u arent a victim here, you do not know how high handed and terrible they are. lying so much time after time. this isnt the first time they have this crisis. previously it was NFP July 2014... that was server issues according to them. People were victims and lost huge money and left, new victims like me believing those false reviews joined. And then SNB happened. I am pretty sure the current victims now will leave, and new ones will come in and less than 1 year later u will see another such incident.

btw there are also people who got their profits shorting eurchf turned into losses if u look through the threads here and other forums... though honestly they should be raking in nice profits. and even before this SNB thing, there were already people who got profits voided for news trading, "arbitrage", and so on. its just we werent aware of it since they were in other forums. so why cant all these victims vouch for it? if not, there will be more false reviewers from them, to lure more sheep in.

Quoting Jlrobert
{quote} No one said what happened was correct, i guess IC Markets has acknowledged the fact that their platforms streamed prices lower than most other brokers due to feed from LQ providers and their business model supporting constant streaming. They did not deny these facts and adjusted the trades & accounts of the affected clients. I just wanted to point out that the article you quoted is mentioning that the losses happened due to "Fake margin calls" and given the circumstances of when this happened, it is completely stupid. The press people have...
  • #149
  • Feb 17, 2015 9:03am Feb 17, 2015 9:03am
Quoting Jlrobert
{quote} No one said what happened was correct, i guess IC Markets has acknowledged the fact that their platforms streamed prices lower than most other brokers due to feed from LQ providers and their business model supporting constant streaming. They did not deny these facts and adjusted the trades & accounts of the affected clients. I just wanted to point out that the article you quoted is mentioning that the losses happened due to "Fake margin calls" and given the circumstances of when this happened, it is completely stupid. The press people have...

Gotta point out to you they actually mentioned Barclays as the cause to some of their angry clients, but why do other brokers who still had live feed on from barclays, not have the same prices? doesnt make sense. so people asked them for transaction receipts to prove it, and until now we have yet to see any. unless they can produce it, we gotta call it a lie/bluff.
  • #150
  • Feb 17, 2015 9:42am Feb 17, 2015 9:42am
Quoting tylerbose
would it be possible to have an SNB like move on EUR/USD, like boom ! 5000pip drop out of nowhere ?
An event on the Eurozone, like Greece exiting or things like this could trigger such a move.
  • #151
  • Feb 17, 2015 5:36pm Feb 17, 2015 5:36pm
Quoting tylerbose
would it be possible to have an SNB like move on EUR/USD, like boom ! 5000pip drop out of nowhere ?
Absolutely. You can't ever rule anything out.
  • #152
  • Feb 17, 2015 8:13pm Feb 17, 2015 8:13pm
Quoting joshi90
IC Markets has decided to Cover for the Client Negative Losses from Swiss Franc Volatility. Please find the latest official Press release announcement made by IC Markets here: http://forexmagnates.com/ic-markets-...nc-volatility/
Utter rubbish.
I lost in excess of 14000 and my account went into a 95.00 deficit.
Not only did IC Markets not only not cover the defect but they made not attempt to make any adjustment to the erroneous trade.

In addition they would not supply me with data supporting the trade unless I signed a Non Disclosure agreement.
  • #153
  • Feb 17, 2015 9:51pm Feb 17, 2015 9:51pm
Quoting Jlrobert
{quote} No one said what happened was correct, i guess IC Markets has acknowledged the fact that their platforms streamed prices lower than most other brokers due to feed from LQ providers and their business model supporting constant streaming. They did not deny these facts and adjusted the trades & accounts of the affected clients. I just wanted to point out that the article you quoted is mentioning that the losses happened due to "Fake margin calls" and given the circumstances of when this happened, it is completely stupid. The press people have...
Well just like everything else there are always two sides to the story. One, yes IC Markets might have been a victim of unfair dealing by some unscrupulous liquidity providers like Barclays. And in this article below it does state that AT LEAST two brokers are affected. Just like brokers selectively forgive negative balances with different clients, liquidity "providers" may selectively give one broker more preferential treatment over another. And that unfortunately is privy information that nobody would be willing to share.

http://forexmagnates.com/banks-bucke...nc-volatility/

BUT having said that, the broker still has the choice to discard those obviously unfair prices when filling their clients' trades or not knowing that they were wrong and knowing that they were unfair, artificially created just as an excuse to get more money from their client. Just like many traders here pointed out, there are brokers who probably got the same unfair price from Barclays but chose not to use it to fill their client's trades with it. And obviously IC Markets did not choose to do so. They know the prices were wrong; they admitted that they were wrong and they even stated in their very first email that they were going to adjust the trades with fair prices but chose at the end not to. Whether it was a voluntary business decision or pressure from their liquidity "providers", we don't know.

BUT if they REALLY were under pressure from their liquidity "providers" to give us the bad fills then they should be more than willing to provide us the trade receipts which would show the counter-party as the evil liquidity "provider" Barclays that gave us the bad fills and that would've cleared their name in no time. The fact that they are not willing is very puzzling indeed.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #154
  • Feb 17, 2015 10:14pm Feb 17, 2015 10:14pm
Quoting HungryHound
{quote} Utter rubbish. I lost in excess of 14000 and my account went into a 95.00 deficit. Not only did IC Markets not only not cover the defect but they made not attempt to make any adjustment to the erroneous trade. In addition they would not supply me with data supporting the trade unless I signed a Non Disclosure agreement.
Why bother replying to Joshi90? He is a STAFF of icmarkets dude. Got caught by other forum admin trying to submit fake 5 star reviews.
  • #155
  • Feb 17, 2015 10:17pm Feb 17, 2015 10:17pm
Well said my friend. You summarised it all well.

And yes, do note the article says this:

Firms did state that Barclays and other banks ultimately did provide some price improvement, but often to levels below that of EBS’s low of the day. - See more at: http://forexmagnates.com/banks-bucke....zUGaEP96.dpuf

So... why cant they do the same. Agree they should be able to show the receipts if Barclays indeed did that. Right now its just accusation. I wonder if Barclays people are even aware of these accusations...


Quoting Forexia
{quote} Well just like everything else there are always two sides to the story. One, yes IC Markets might have been a victim of unfair dealing by some unscrupulous liquidity providers like Barclays. And in this article below it does state that AT LEAST two brokers are affected. Just like brokers selectively forgive negative balances with different clients, liquidity "providers" may selectively give one broker more preferential treatment over another. And that unfortunately is privy information that nobody would be willing to share. http://forexmagnates.com/banks-bucke...nc-volatility/...
  • #156
  • Feb 17, 2015 11:43pm Feb 17, 2015 11:43pm
Quoting MaryAnne
So... why cant they do the same. Agree they should be able to show the receipts if Barclays indeed did that. Right now its just accusation
I Don't think it would be that simple to display the receipts in public just like that when you are dealing with major banks like Barclays, probably that is why the request for a NDA to be signed. I am not supporting them in any way, it is a fact they streamed prices lower than most brokers and that they acknowledged the mistake and made efforts to adjust the account and trades to correct pricing. Of course, not everyone was happy about the adjustments made. Btw. Maryanne, Just curious to know, Were you affected by the CHF moves trading with IC Markets?. You only seem to continue talking about other members issues and are very biased with your views against IC Markets? Like Forexia mentioned, the story may have another end where the LQ providers are at fault which may not be that easy to be be disclosed in public.
  • #157
  • Last Post: Feb 18, 2015 12:24am Feb 18, 2015 12:24am
Quoting MaryAnne
Well said my friend. You summarised it all well. And yes, do note the article says this: Firms did state that Barclays and other banks ultimately did provide some price improvement, but often to levels below that of EBSs low of the day. - See more at: http://forexmagnates.com/banks-bucke....zUGaEP96.dpuf So... why cant they do the same. Agree they should be able to show the receipts if Barclays indeed did that. Right now its just accusation. I wonder if Barclays people...
Oh Barclays are aware, trust me. They KNOW what they did. LOL They are NO angels themselves. Take a look at this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29323483

After reading this, I wouldn't touch this bank even if my life depends on it. LOL
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
1 trader viewing now