apex, jim please take a deep breath, lean back and consider where YOU might have gone wrong in this discussion. i promise that this step back leaves you with more insight and positive feedback than another hundred of your bashing posts. you are much nearer too each other than you might think ... do not waste time. then time will not be wasted. peace
yes please guys do yrselves, and baron, and all of us this favor... idea being, if u have a point, it shld stand by itself without the need to systematically cite / refer to such & such other poster's inputs... it doesn't matter whether a poster has an axe or not, at the end of the day we all make our own decisions, ET is only one (pretty informative) amongst other sources of info, views, etc one might want to use to form his/her opinion on a particular matter... plus i don't believe ET hands out chocolate medals anymore to reward "debunking prowess" - baron? - therefore what purpose those incessant war of words??? peace
are all accounts at Refcofx treated the same way or does the dollar amout play any role? Also what are the finacials on Refco fx are they making money, do you think that courts will treat refco as a whole or as individual corporations ? Anyone
fwiw by pre-Oct 10 accounts, if i recall correctly RCM (incl RefcoFX) used to be the most profitable unit, 2 or 3 times more than the regulated businesses - search posts from rufus_4000, there is one on the subject... - now unfortunately thats no guarantee of anything, otherwise refco's debt wld be trading at full face value... not at 70c on the $... any other REAL info, if and when available, will be in the hands of the creditors committee people, their legal counsel, see other posts in related threads...
where did i say anything else than "i don't believe"??? don't be libelous willya, please GO BACK to my earlier post, i am led to believe Baron has deleted it under direct pressure from Willy Zonka, then reinstated it in view of the cost implications
I am only giving you this answer as a temporary guess to tide you over until somebody more knowledgeable gives you a more informed response. The idea that the dollar amount would play a role probably only matters in a situation where there is deposit insurance coverage. No such coverage exists against bankruptcy of a retail spot FX broker. So dollar amount should not matter in this situation. Courts normally treat related separate corporations as separate, but there are two kinds of exceptions. Sometimes, there can be grounds to challenge a particular transfer of assets between corporations, and this is more likely when the corporations have some sort of ownership relationship between them. A transfer might be challenged, for example, if it was made for the purpose of depriving creditors of their rights. Sometimes, two corporations can be treated as one, where the very separate existence of one corporation was misused and abused as a way to perpetrate certain types of serious wrongs, such as fraud. This is called "piercing the corporate veil", and the courts make it very difficult to prove that the corporate veil should be pierced.
Interesting that our resident REFCO basher was unable to refute this post, as well as others on this thread . . . He speaks about the content of this particular thread having gone down the tubes once I entered the discussion, yet he doesn't seem to have any problem making unsubstantiated claims that are totally FALSE. He talks about ET helping REFCO to perpetuate a fraud, then he backs off as soon as someone shows him how absurd and unsubstantiated his claims are. He talks about how REFCO instigated censorship of people's posts on ET, which I believe to be a very serious charge since it goes to the heart of ET's integrity as an objective website and raises questions about how much leverage advertisers have in regards to website content. Yet, once again he is unable to substantiate his claim with facts, changes his logic into something even more bizarre, and disappears. He talks about how the bankruptcy and fraud at the holding company of REFCO has affected the futures division which deals in segregated accounts. He cites that the unregulated REFCO FX accounts have been frozen to support his twisted sense of logic. Yet, he conveniently disappears once again when shown that the segregated futures division still continues to trade to this day, is NOT FROZEN, and allows customers to withdraw funds from their account, as one of my family members did as late as OCTOBER 24th to the tune of $25,000. Apparently Mr. Rockford has no problem whatsoever de-valuing the content of ET with highly inflammatory claims and numerous misrepresentations that are not substantiated by any facts whatsoever. It's just one false statement after another, devoid of any rational logic or FACTS. Pretty easy to do on a website where no one makes you accountable for your accusations. You can grind your axe until the cows come home. And whenever a moderator deletes your libelous claims you can rant and rave claiming censorship. And should someone challenge your false claims with FACTS that are accurate and truthful as the ones that I have pointed out on numerous occasions regarding the segregated futures division of REFCO you can then simply hide behind cowardly remarks such as, "It was a simple misunderstanding . . ." or run and hide from the FACTS all together. How convenient.
My prior postings throughout this thread already refute this argument, so there is no need for me to refute it again. Anyone can read this thread and verify that my claims are true and substantiated, and that Apex Capital's claims are false and unsubstantiated. No, Apex Capital is not accurately describing what I said. I said that ET's careless censorship practices unintentionally helped Refco, but I didn't specifically say that they helped Refco perpetuate a fraud. I also said that ET's careless censorship practices helped frauds, by which I meant people who are frauds, like Refco is a fraud, Apex is a fraud, retail spot FX brokers are frauds, but I was not referring to particular fraudulent acts. I never said that ET helped to perpetuate a particular fraudulent act. I said that ET unintentionally helped people who are frauds. Apex Capital was also wrong when he said that I "backed off" from my statements. I already posted, in this thread, facts showing that Refco speaks unofficially through Apex, and that Apex threatened litigation and instigated censorship on ET. Apex claims that I have raised questions about ET advertisers influencing ET content, but the truth is that I have not raised any such question. Refco does not advertise on ET, so the suggestion that this dispute has anything to do with ET advertisers is just totally ridiculous. I never disappeared. I'm here to remind Apex Capital, yet again, that Jim Rogers and his clients cannot get their hundreds of millions of dollars back from their segregated accounts at Refco's regulated futures broker. Anyone can verify that this is pure BS, if they simply read through this entire thread. Apex Capital is not only making accusations which he knows to be false, he is also making them in a such a way as to distract from the topic of the thread, and he is deliberately creating an atmosphere of hostility and intimidation, which, I fear, tends to deter others from fully participating in EliteTrader discussions. I would like to be able to discuss Refco Fallout, the topic of this thread, without a constant stream of false accusations from Apex, and without censorship instigated by Apex. I suggest that all readers, who want this thread to continue without Apex Capital's harassment, should complain to Baron about what Apex is doing, but make it very, very clear, that you do not want this thread to be closed, and that you want it to be protected from interference by Apex Capital.
dude - get a brain, there r thousands of people with money frozen at RCM units (incl Refco FX) and for a couple $100mios perhaps more, honestly good for you if no damage at Refco LLC but do u really think anybody cares about yr little pride?? does "waste of space" come to mind??