JC Trading/ Ocean View Capital LLC

Discussion in 'Prop Firms' started by Dominic, Jun 9, 2009.

  1. partly because people keep disseminating false information without knowing many facts.
     
    #41     Sep 3, 2010
  2. CQNC

    CQNC

    Doesn't matter. Every prop broker out there quotes Tuco as having destroyed the reputation of the industry, and like everything else in life, one bad apple ruined the bunch.

    Sorry, not convinced.
     
    #42     Sep 3, 2010
  3. yes, you're wrong. he didn't take any personal loans. the discrepancy came from 1) the majority from unpaid receivables. 2) a trader losing a lot of money past the amount he had in his account.

    the sec busted them because they were operating as a b/d without being a b/d. as a b/d, if you have customer accounts, they cannot be mingled with backoffice accounting or other traders accounts. this was the primary basis behind the injunction.

    problem is, they weren't pretending to be a b/d, and everyone knew their accounts were mingled. everyone knew they were sharing risk. that's the whole point of the hedge fund model. it was in the llc agreement when you signed up as a class B member, and you agreed to it when signed up.

    so, what happened then? when the sec shut them down, he consented to the allegations, ie he settled. why? i believe because it was a mixture of bad council (he later replaced them), and feeling that would be the most expedient means of getting everyone back their money. after replacing council, he tried to introduce the points above, but it was too late, the judge wouldn't allow the arguments.

    anyway, dragging the guys name through the mud without all the facts isn't the right thing to do.
     
    #43     Sep 3, 2010
  4. CQNC

    CQNC

    LOL. Dude, you just buried the guy with all that. Might want to edit/delete before the timer expires.

     
    #44     Sep 3, 2010
  5. no one is trying to convince you of anything. you made false allegations. i challenged and corrected them.

    fact check what you say or tone down the negative hyperbole if you want people to take you seriously.
     
    #45     Sep 3, 2010
  6. CQNC

    CQNC

    I could care less about being taken seriously by anyone who doesn't think this was a scam of the decade. We're done now.
     
    #46     Sep 3, 2010
  7. JBahn

    JBahn

    While I dont know any specifics of the case, it atleast sounds like everyone agrees that traders lost their capital.

    Call it what you want - Scam or Not traders lost money.
     
    #47     Sep 3, 2010
  8. how's that?

    the trials are over. all the facts i posted are in the public domain i gathered from court documents. all my opinions were from my experiences with them, since one of my accounts was there.

    i've traded in this industry for a long time, i may be presumptuous, but i'm going to wager you haven't. if you had, you would have appreciated the color i gave.

    some advice, i'd recommend not running around with the severe chip and the bent for disrespect you've got going. it's not that big of an industry.
     
    #48     Sep 3, 2010
  9. after your last few posts in this thread and definitely after your last one in the don thread, i don't think you need to worry too much about being taken seriously.

    but seriously, until you can actually present facts that show this was 'the scam of the decade', you're just uninformed.
     
    #49     Sep 3, 2010
  10. doug fredricks committed no fraud but who gives a shit as traders lost money and thats the bottom line. jc capital was under tuco to use lightspeed i believe but i don't know if any of there traders lost any money.jc is on this board and can answer these questions.but i think jc is under ocean view who is really an offshoot of tuco who has mike kessler affiliated with it. again if you want leverage you have risk and that means you can lose money if the company goes under
     
    #50     Sep 3, 2010