What are the safest futures brokers? MF Global and PFGBest have me worried!

Discussion in 'Retail Brokers' started by travelingtrader, Jul 10, 2012.

  1. Not for long I just learned today!! They are being sold to Gain Capital for $12 million. It's on the OEC website. As a long time account holder, I don't see this as a positive move. I hope I am wrong.
     
    #21     Jul 10, 2012
  2. emg

    emg


    [​IMG]



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysine_price-fixing_conspiracy






    <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DPXTsPS-hyw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
    #22     Jul 10, 2012
  3. tiddlywinks

    tiddlywinks

    Son of a bitch!! That being the case, I am initiating transfer to Dorman. Thank you.
    Gain is not financially stable (GCAP) IMO, and frankly, I'm not interested in working with a marketing-based
    forex shop that just so happens to offer futures. Son of a bitch! At least Tomsic will remain.

    http://ir.gaincapital.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=241648&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1710034&highlight=
     
    #23     Jul 10, 2012
  4. Hold treasuries, not cash in ur brokerage accounts.
     
    #24     Jul 10, 2012
  5. NO forex/futures broker can provide a guarantee they will not go out of business due to
    incompetence or theft

    until the CFTC and NFA make brokers anti up for insurance, Your funds are not safe
    it's only good faith you still have your money in your account next week

    Canada is the only country guaranteeing client funds up to C$1,000,000 which is why
    all MFG Canada clients got all their money the day after the MFG bankruptcy was declared
    thanks to the CIPF - Canadian Investor Protection Fund http://www.cipf.ca/HomePage.aspx

    balls to regulations and 'vigorous' bullshit, unless regulators are monitoring each and
    every transaction every broker is making 24/7 they will never know what's gone on until
    after the fact and client funds have been lost due to incompetence or theft

    the Only protection is insurance
     
    #25     Jul 10, 2012
  6. +1

    The solution is simple and cost effective:
    Require all fiduciaries that hold or handle client segregated cash to carry a surety bond for 110% of all cash marked to market each day. If the funds are held in client named accounts no insurance is necessary.

    Screw the arguments that the customer will bear the costs. The customer currently bears all the costs and risks and have little hope for timely r meaningful recovery.

    For now until these sureties are protections are established best to trade futures from outside of the US. AKA Canada or Europe where funds are not commingled in the segregated account sham. All segregated means is they hold the cash in their name and have a journal entry on some peace of toilet paper somewhere acknowledging the IOU. Interest free loan as they are allowed to use these funds to earn interest for their own benefit.

    In Europe all funds are held in Customer Named Accounts.

     
    #26     Jul 10, 2012
  7. I need to do this in IB, anyone knows how?
     
    #27     Jul 10, 2012
  8. southall

    southall

    Im thinking the regulators must have been applying the pressure on PFGBest after MF Global, that is why the guy tried to top himself.
    To attempt suicide must of meant he knew they were very close to getting him.
    With electronic checking of bank deposits, which is what they started to do on him, it will definitely get harder to pull of this scam.

    After the MFGlobal thing i was less worried in that i thought we wont see something similar until the regulators get complacent again. Probably 5 or 10 years from now.
    I still think that.
    It seems the missing money was gone from PFG even before MF Global blew up.
     
    #28     Jul 10, 2012
  9. yeah, that's the way I see it also

    no new rules are needed, and especially no new fees for insurance, the rules are already in place, but the regulators are slow and incompetent, because they are not accountable to any customer

    the sipc protection for futures and forex is open to a lot of debate, especially among those that have an axe to grind against ib

    you have two choices

    clear yourself or talk to Lloyds

    getting back to fees for insurance, why should I pay a fee because the broker is a crook and the regulators are too stupid to figure that out until it is too late?

    I however would pay a premium in management fees for an insurance policy against a bankrupt broker, but it aint none of the governments damn business if I want to pay that fee or not

    their job is to regulate the brokers who supposedly they are getting paid to regulate

    and so far, they did a piss poor job on mf and pfg
     
    #29     Jul 10, 2012
  10. regarding insurance:

    The fact that the Broker/Dealers can earn interest and make profits from funds held in your name but under their control and for their sole benefit is enough to require they provide Surety Insurance or FDIC pass through.

    Even Paypal has FDIC pass through insurance on their customer segregated cash. Their Client funds are deposited in a Paypal Bank Account annotating the client segregation. This arrangement costs Paypal zero and covers I believe up to the FDIC limits.

    The reason why Customer segregated funds held by your Broker Dealer are not receiving FDIC pass through is because these funds are not held in a bank account. They are in use by the Broker/Dealer...


     
    #30     Jul 10, 2012