The essence of the delusion – modern traders do not work at the spontaneous Forex market (according to Bill Williams, Alexander Elder, Eric Naiman etc. ), but at the well-organized and controlled market on currency exchange all over the world, which is carried out by the Consortium of the world's biggest banks EBS and the biggest broker company ICAP.
Forex and other exchange market game as a form of gambling business… and scam.
When any person chooses a future profession he/she always clearly see:
· all the important details of the market he/she is going to work at (as an economist, jurist, teacher, engineer, doctor etc.)
· his/her place at this market with the development perspectives of the field he/she is going to work in as well as his/ her professional advancement in the field.
· The algorithm of the problems, difficulties and advantages of the chosen profession as well as the experience in solving these problems, which was gained by the preceding generations.
The Forex market is the world's only market which is written and talked about only in the form of mysteries and reservations about it.
The questions are simple:
· Who provides the Forex traders all around the world with the market quotes of 150-200 currency pairs?
· Who can change currency price rates (of USD, EUR etc.) all over the world by 1.100 or by 1000 points and how can they do it?
· How does trader's money move (when they open and close positions) through the hidden chain of third parties (brokers) – dealing centers, banks, market-maker banks, brokers, exchange?
Instead of answering these questions DC analysts write:
1. About the world's richest market with daily turnover of more than 3 billion dollars , about the banks, national banks, investors participating in it, about the millionaires and billionaires who made the world's biggest fortunes at the very market.
2. The explanation of the mechanism functioning simply comes to the advertising campaigns of a broker company or dealing center, which can:
· teach you Forex trading (DCs offers free Forex training courses or train novice traders for their own account)
· call you back for free to any part of the world
· take your money via any payment system in any currency at any time of day and night
· deposit your money to the trading account in a second as long as you become their trader and a Forex participant (Have you ever seen a well-paid vacancy to be filled by everyone who applied for it? )
· When you (unlike Soros) start losing your money at Forex, you will be explained that the market is unpredictable… it can reverse any moment if the market (?) will consider (??) the price is underestimated/overestimated… yet you'll be told that the unpredictable abstract market is “always right” (??)
Doesn't it (such propaganda) sound familiar to you?
Casinos… lotteries… bookmakers… thimblerig etc.
All those who wish to become the well-off in short time are offered to gamble using their service.
With obligatory large-scale advertising campaigns of “happy winners” (see the following topic ”Just in a month Chen Kui got 61595%” of profit with ForexClub”
With a simultaneous game restriction of those who work at Forex instead of gambling
Can anyone beat the world casino on a daily basis?
· It is necessary to define the weak spots of the market as well as your own advantages over the market at specific points with a clear understanding of the algorithm.
· This is professional work, it is not gambling, whether it is a casino or Forex.
Something is unpredictable only when its algorithm is not understood or is deliberately hidden.
Whenther the mysterious fog over the Forex market is accidental or not? Let everybody decide it on his/her own.
2 opposite answers to the question who moves the currency quotes up-n-down, forms trends, pullbacks and flats.
There are two Forex theories:
· The classic theory about the spontaneous market
· MF's theory about the controlled market
The classic theory about the spontaneous market based on the anticipated demand and supply.
The most comprehensive description of this mechanism was given by Bill Williams.
Let us listen to Bill Williams, the classic of technical analysis ("Trading chaos", chapter 6):
…let's look at how trends are formed.
Years ago, the "market" and the "marketplace" occupied the same physical space. Most of the large grain commercials were on the trading floor. Their orders were of sufficient size to move the market and they had much more control over the market than they do today. During the past 20 years, the markets have become worldwide. Not only are Ralston Purina, Kellogg, and other large commercials trying to hedge their bets, but millions more small speculators and farmers all over the world are competing with them in anticipating the future prices of grain. This spells great opportunity for traders. Today, trends are not made on the floor. The floor primarily provides a liquid market by responding to "outside" orders.
The fact that trends are now made off the floor, rather than on the floor as they were previously, gives us an opportunity to anticipate what the market is going to do. The key is volume. Our only real-time information from this market is tick volume, time, and price. Tick volume is the number of price changes made during a specified period. It is not the number of contracts traded. A number of studies have indicated that there is no significant difference between the relationship of actual volume and tick volume. We use tick volume and can assume that it represents actual volume. This on-line volume is our best clue to what is happening in the trading pits.
In the pits are two basic species: floor brokers and locals. Floor brokers are the people who fill orders. They get paid a salary, a commission, or some combination of those two factors. Generally, they do not have their own money on the line. They are order fillers. Their financial future is not affected directly by the prices they get for orders filled.
Locals trade with their own money. If they don't get good prices, they pay out of their pockets then and there. Locals must be much better traders than floor brokers. Locals must make their own decisions; floor brokers generally follow someone else's orders. Locals' primary function is to make a market by taking the other side of a trade. They usually are not interested in any long-term positions. We have had dozens of locals at our private tutorials, and to some of them a 10-minute trade can be a long-term position. Remember that trends are made from orders off the floor rather than from the locals' taking longer-term positions. Because the locals' main job is to take the other side of outside orders, they have no future in trading with each other. They are after your money. Again, our key to understanding the action in the pit is tick volume. The locals do no significant amount of trading with other locals, and trends are made by outside paper. We must know, therefore, when and in what amounts outside paper is coming to the floor. This is signaled by a change in tick volume. (End of quote)
So, does it turn out that traders move the price, i.e. we do? Or is it moved by bank traders through the interbank market?
And as a result of the spontaneous (Brownian) movement based on the satisfaction of the unpredictable demand and supply, a conscious picture of currency price movement always comes into being. Is it really so? Is the match of all 200 Forex currency pairs accidental?
The 1st component of the inconsistency of the “independent Forex” theory is TECHNICAL ANALYSIS, as each Forex movement is determined by specific laws – see the example in the preceding chapter about the behavior of the currency pair at SHORT-TERM and MID-TERM trends
· The news work-off at the SHORT-TERM trend with completing the Fibonacci sequence of the impulse
· The work-off of all the waves of the SHORT-TERM bullish trend (before the news and a couple of minutes after the news release)
· A downward reversal to perform a pullback from the MID-TERM upward reversal.
· Reaching the aims and completing sub-waves by GPB/USD and by its numerous crosses.
· The LONG-TERM trend reversal
· Do floor brokers simply fill (execute) orders that come from us? So, did all of them (i.e. us) all of a sudden decide (on 1.04.2005) to reverse the trend and to SELL against all the rules, news and common sense while making profit by following the GBP/USD up-trend? I wonder if the classic is not ashamed about that.
· Shame on those analysts who tell the traders that the Fibonacci levels are “a proving algorithm of the nature of any movement” (I wonder why Fibonacci levels do not work when it comes to changing sale prices at factories, wholesale and retail prices at wholesale depots, petroleum storage depots, gas stations, supermarkets, when the salesmen of various stores and flea markets need to change sale prices. Probably it happens because their prices are not changed by (coded into) some computer software that control them from the world's single center. Yet it happens because levels are not used even partially (unlike during the real market trading), as the heads of supermarkets and factories, unlike the traders of commodity and futures markets, have never heard of the levels and never put them into practice. They form prices by adding other components, including VAT, income taxes etc. The components do not have anything in common with the Fibonacci sequence).
· Shame on those who gave an argument in defense of Bill Williams' quotation that I mentioned above (that's why I gave the quotation in such detail). They say:
This, you know, is related to futures markets, and for the currency market, we never say anything like that and we never apply it accordingly. These are the arguments of Williams' defenders rather than Williams himself. His book “Trading chaos” was written as “a world discovery” applicable to any market including Forex. That is why chart pictures and examples taken from different markets, including Forex, are mixed together. The author never mentions the difference in technical analysis between them.
It means that he himself either DOES NOT SEE them or DOES NOT WANT to tell us about those differences, differential peculiarities and nuances of each market. In addition, neither Williams nor his publishers have EVER mentioned in a foreword, or in any note that whatever is presented in the "Trading chaos" was not applicable to a currency market, meaning that it should not be used by a trader in his job at Forex. This is a peculiarity of Williams' (to correctly calculate a method for a particular case and apply it to wider coordinates) that I have met many times, and that made me write this book. The thing is that Williams presents the absolutely correct techniques and pieces of advice for traders of ONE section of Forex, as the all-purpose techniques suitable for the ENTIRE Forex market, without showing and indicating boundaries, where his techniques work and where they do not. The same is done by Williams' opponents and followers, each of them presenting only that part of Forex, where his techniques either work or not. For a trader, as opposed to Williams' analysts and bibliographers, a different thing is important: to understand a distinct limit between the possibility of using Williams' techniques and its absence. Hence, we have a logical question here: WHAT can be added to Williams' indicators, so that they are to work where they do not now (it has a more detailed description in the chapter about "the Alligator" indicator created by Williams).
2. The comparison of the quotes of various world's leading broker companies
· The quotes of over 150 Forex currency pairs are given simultaneously. Is it an accident? Even at the time when the markets and the banks are closed (for example, days off (holidays) in the USA, Europe or Japan) do all the brokers “in the trading pits” still get the same orders with a one-second difference in time, as Bill Williams wrote about in detail?
· Or maybe the quotes are given by somebody who is SENIOR to all the brokers, DCs, banks, and the interbank market, controlling the market with the help of “The Main Computer” (Is it possible to give the quotes of 200 currency pairs to thousands of banks, DCs, brokers any other way (by applying any other techniques)? The answer leads us to conclusion that the computer program operates (“works off” waves and sub-waves) (in) the way it was programmed to do. As opposed to humans computers cannot improvise).
3. The ECONOMIC component. The essence of any business is the profit rate. The higher the profit rate the stronger (tougher) the centralization and control.
· Look at the competitive struggle in other profitable fields of business, especially “blue chip” companies with a stable and high rate of profit – banks, community services, gas, oil, electricity etc. (illegal spheres – illicit arms and drug traffic –the system is tougher but the rules are the same ).
· Compare these “blue chip” companies to Forex. Do you really think that such a market can remain uncontrolled and the place (post) of its founder (manager, governor) can be vacant when daily turnover is over 3 trillion dollars and with win-lose ratio is 3% to 97% (even on condition that the spread from exchanging currencies is the only source of their income) ?
· In 2001 the powerful consortium of 3 banks - Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank (under the support of the German government) was among the first who tried to fill the vacancy of the Forex Boss. In 6 months they abandoned the idea (Was it their own desire or did somebody prevent them from becoming the monopolist of the world's currency quotations?)
· Can you imagine the “MONSTER”, which made them refuse to deal with THEIR business project?
4. POLITICAL component.
The exchange rate of all the national currencies in the world is the real economic and political power that is more powerful than the influence of any monarch, president or prime minister of any state.
Do you still believe that some individual traders or interbank market traders were given complete control over such a tremendous power? Those who have this power can easily depreciate any national currency (and bankrupt any national economy) as well as strengthen.
5. STATISTICS component.
I hope you don't think that 97% of Forex traders lose their deposits by accident at the world's richest market (with daily turnover of 3 trillion dollars)?
Ask specialists in statistics as a science
· If the tendency (97% result) recurs every day… every week, month, year, is it an accident or not?
· If the following movement can be calculated with the accuracy up to one point is it spontaneous or determined?
· After that re-read the arguments of those who defend the theory of the independent and uncontrolled Forex market… and discover the things they are afraid to discover and admit to themselves.
· The main thing is to follow the market, not analysts who are nothing but puppets in somebody's hands.
Why are they puppets and marionettes?
How would you act in their place if you were paid salary? Would you tell novice traders:
· That you company works as “a fair broker” at the “independent Forex market” which is unpredictable because of its huge volumes (and that is why “the market is always right”)?
· That your DC/broker company/bank works as one of the multiple elements of the world's centralized financial system that helps traders lose their deposits through the world's united system of currency quotes?
· That the Major “Predator” that eats all the lost deposits is not some abstract market, but our Main Computer (the secrets of which have never been told to any analysts, chief executives of DCs and banks… and will never be)?
Did you choose the answer? That is what they answer to everyone.
Masterforex-V's theory of the controlled Forex market.
And now the answer to the question, given to traders by the magazine "Currency profiteer" volume 11, 2002 in the article by Nadezhda Larina "Electronic broker systems at the currency market", which reads the following: "... a widespread electronic broker system at the inter-bank off-exchange currency market is an automated broker system intended for the currency dealing, Electronic Broking Service (EBS). It was developed by the syndicate of big banks-participants of the currency bargaining together with Quotron, an expert in information technology, and it was run in 1993. Today, EBS unites 13 big world market-maker banks, such as: ABN AMRO Bank, Bank of America, Barclays Capital, Citibank, Commerzbank, Credit Suisse First Boston, HSBC Bank PLC, J.P. Morgan Chase and Co.Lehman Brothers, Royal Bank of Scotland, S-E Banken, UBS AG – and Japanese corporation Minex, established by the syndicate of Japanese banks together with the Japanese telecommunication company KDD and Dow Jones Telerate.
EBS provides completely integrated range of dealing services for the professional inter-bank market. The EBS Spot Dealing System is one of the leading electronic anonymous dealing systems for the inter-bank currency trading. Today, more than 2500 dealers in 850 banks of the world use this system; the average volume of trades constitutes approximately USD $80 billion per day.
The same article reads: "In June 2001 three biggest dealers of the FOREX market – Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank together with Reuters Group PLC run Atriax system, which, however could not survive the competition and ceased operations in spring 2002."
The official site of Electronic Broking Service (EBS)
* 2002 $80 billions a day
* 2007 $145 billions a day
"The Financial Times" about the computerization of the financial market
All Larina's main theses were almost completely confirmed in 2 years in 2004 by the authoritative newspaper "The Financial Times" (UK) in the article by Jennifer Hughes "Computer occupies the trading spot" , where she indicated that turnovers of the Syndicate have increased for another USD $20 billion per day during the previous 2 years and reached USD $100 billion, at the same time, the average volume of operations at the biggest platforms, established on the basis of the internet resources, constitute from USD $15 to 20 billion.
Let us make some conclusions
1. the Forex market is absolutely NOT the same as it was before, specifically 11 years ago.
2. It is a well-known fact that there already exists "relative uniformity in price variation" (or practically similar currency quotations with all the brokers and traders in the world).
3. They have honestly mentioned the reason for that "uniformity" from the TECHNICAL point of view – "development of electronic exchange technologies" that allowed to accomplish the simultaneousness of currency quotes all around the world
4. Nothing was mentioned about other reasons, causing similar quotations at the absolutely different Forex trading platforms in the world. Namely: what connects those platforms and currency exchange rate at them from the point of view of the following reasons – financial, organizational, negotiated etc?
5. Here, in "The Financial Times", there is one interesting comment to all those changes that took place at Forex for the last years, by some anonymous former (?!) dealer, who compared Forex market of those 11 years: " It used to be damn noisy and damn great". That was the reminiscence of the former dealer, from whose point of view, the market got deprived of a big portion of its individuality with the introduction of high-end technologies. " Interesting phrase: "It USED TO BE... damn great". Moreover, I would like to add – “It was damn anxious”, when currency pairs would rise/fall by 400-500 points. Not these days.
6. Why did "The Financial Times" (UK ) interview ONLY representatives of the EBS Syndicate Jack Jeffrey and head of the UBS currency operations department Fabian Shey? Why didn't they interview the Reuters (UK) representatives? Why did they show such “disrespect” to their countrymen? Was it so difficult to find them in London, where headquarters of both "The Financial Times" and Reuters are situated? Moreover, after saying, "At present, both the sites (EBS Syndicate and Reuters) have strong positions and they dominate at the inter-bank market". Or probably "The Financial Times" has enough information about their countrymen from Reuters, allowing them to make their own conclusion that interviewing the 2 EBS Syndicate representatives would be sufficient without Reuters?
7. Please pay your attention to the next phrase by "The Financial Times": "Besides, there are other opinions. Under the rough estimates by Justyn Trenner from Client Knowledge, the total volume of the today's on-line trading equals to USD $100 billion per day, besides, an explosion is observed in this sector." "The Financial Times" turned out to completely acknowledge their incapability not only to trace (and tell to their readers about ) the financial flow at the Forex market between different trading platforms, but EVEN the TRADIG VOLUME of those platforms.
Hence, by the way, here lies the principal difference between stock market and Forex. Those who write about SIMILAR techniques of fundamental and technical analysis for both markets simultaneously (B. Williams, O. Demark, A. Elder, E. Naiman etc.) either do not understand that principal difference between the markets, or deliberately direct millions of traders into their trap of fraud.
"The Financial Times" mentioned that there exist other different electronic dealing systems (Electronic Broking Service, Reuters Dealing 2000-2 etc.) apart from the abovementioned Syndicate, but she has omitted a question about mutual relations between them. However, there arise lots and lots of questions: how and why between those Forex systems appears coincidence of trends, corrections of historical maximum and minimum of currency pairs on the same day etc.
How can the thesis on parallel existence of EBS and Reuters Dealing systems be correlated with their statement that "Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank together with Reuters Group PLC could not survive the competition? Can this be considered as the fact that the Syndicate has actually bought the Reuters Forex system and at the same time, they preserved their formal independence so that Forex would remain a “free” and “independent” market in the eyes of all traders all over the world? If this is true, then it is clear why the Syndicate of banks was not afraid to buy Euro when it was coming down versus dollar from 1.36 to 1.1860 (what should they be afraid of, if they know upfront an approximate bottom level where they themselves can bring Euro to and again, they will bring Euro back to the necessary level in several months. And what is more important – nobody can really do anything about this in your business).
The Forex Boss starts organizational reconstruction
The quote taken from www.icap.com
ICAP plc (IAP.L), the world's largest interdealer broker, has agreed to acquire all of the share capital of EBS Group Limited (EBS), the pre-eminent provider of foreign exchange trading and market data solutions to the professional spot foreign exchange community… The consideration for 100% of the share capital of EBS is US$775 million, payable in cash.
Assuming the maximum number of new ICAP shares being offered to EBS shareholders is taken up, the aggregate consideration would be $825 million, comprising approximately $517 million in cash and 36.1 million new ICAP shares (with an aggregate value of $308 million based on the closing price of an ICAP share of 477.25 pence on 20 April 2006, the day before the release of this announcement). Any new ICAP shares issued as part of the transaction will be subject to lock-up arrangements for a period of six months. (END OF QUOTE)
Daily trading volumes of EBS at the global financial market average 120 billion dollar
The quote taken from ICAP's website (2008)
We became the leading broker in the spot FX market with our purchase of the electronic EBS platform in June 2006. 2,800 traders on 800-plus floors in 50 countries around the world use EBS every day to gain fair, efficient access to the global spot FX market.
http://www.icap.com/markets/foreign-exchange/spot-fx.aspx
Pay attention to the list of the banks that use the VIP service of ICAP / EBS:
The quote
Barclays Capital, Bear Stearns, Citi Bank, Suisse Prudential, Credit Suisse, Rabobank , UBS, ABN-AMRO, HSBC, Ca Calyon (Credit Agricole CIB), JP Morgan, Standard Chartered, Banque AIG, Bank of America, Societe Generale , Deutsche Bank, RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland), RZB, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ,Ltd . (end of quote)
The EBS founders, the former business rivals of Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase Deutsche Bank, now are the united team that was managed to drawn together…. the broker called ICAP.
The humor of the situation is that:
· Each of the above-mentioned banks could found a broking service by itself (even a couple of such services)
· Instead of doing so, the EBS founders sell their fast developing exclusive (monopolistic) business at the price of… the daily turnover of their business.
· In 2002 the EBS founders managed to beat the rivals Deutsche Bank Ê, yet the ICAP broker united the worlds' leading financial rivals to make them a team.
· The world's leading countries (for example, China) gave ICAP an exclusive right to perform currency exchange operations in the country (China is one of the few counties where such things cannot happen accidentally as such exclusive rights are given basing on the decisions made at the highest level).
The quote is taken from “Shanghai CFETS-ICAP Int''l Money Broking Co., Ltd. officially launch” London and Shanghai, 13 September 2007
ICAP plc (IAP.L), the world's premier voice and electronic interdealer broker, and the China Foreign Exchange Trading System & National Interbank Funding Center (CFETS), today formally launched their joint venture – the Shanghai CFETS-ICAP International Money Broking Co. Ltd. (CFETS-ICAP). CFETS-ICAP is a 67/33 joint venture interdealer broking business, providing voice broking services to the money, bond and derivative markets in both the Renminbi and international markets.
Li Yu, Vice President of CFETS, said: “China is making great strides in developing its financial markets and the interbank market will continue to play a key role in this. Working with ICAP, the world's largest interdealer broker, in this joint venture will further support the growth of this market. This offers an excellent opportunity to apply current practices in the development of deep and liquid financial markets“.
(End of quote)
Yet, ICAP shows the world's leading stock exchange markets their real significanse (with their numerous traders (brokers) on the floor)
Quote 25 September 2006 - 09:53
ICAP has emerged as the latest suitor for the London Stock Exchange (LSE) after it confirmed that it had held exploratory talks with the UK market operator regarding a possible merger…
But Michael Spencer, chief executive of Icap, has reportedly halted discussions because at over £12 per share, he believes the LSE is too highly valued. (end of quote)
LSE is indeed “nothing” to a broker… if the broker is called ICAP. They can wait until the price of any exchange falls together with its real influence while they are aware of the fact who forms and gives the synchronous Forex market quotes to the whole globe, utilizing the centralized financial control of the largest Global Consortium of Banks.
Now, I hope, it is clear who reverses trends at Forex. This is done by the Syndicate of the biggest world banks, which can afford to reverse currency wherever and whenever they want it, against all the fundamental laws, published news, trends and common sense, as we can see if we look at 1.04.2005 history data on the chart. And those are not traders, as Williams assures us.
This is why
· Williams' MARKET FACILITATION INDEX (MFI) indicator does not work. It is based on the variation of volume of deals, time and the minimum variations of price. To be precise, he sometimes tells truth and sometimes arrogantly lies. Due to the reasons, explained above: the banks syndicate move currency in the direction, which is good for them, but not where traders open their deals, and this is how they form the volume shown on the screen. This is why traders loose when they follow the Bill Williams' MFI indicator.
· Williams himself says that his trading system is no longer suitable for Forex trading.
Why are the arguments about the controllability/uncontrollability of Forex not going to stop in the near future?
I'm not going to write about the controllability of Forex any more.
A separate book can be written basing on the material from the letters sent to me within the 4 years after the appearance of MF's book 1.
Why am I not going to mention the problem any more?
Real trading won't benefit from some extra knowledge about the Forex Founder itself.
The volumes of the off- exchange Forex market will grow while the role of specified exchange markets declines.
It is useless to argue with DC-and-bank analysts to find out whether Forex is controlled or it's an “independent and fair interbank market” where “honest-minded dealing centers and broker companies” are just a waste of time and money.
Time will put everything into place.
· I know that this thesis is rather inconvenient for DCs, banks and foreign brokers.
· During the 4 years after the appearance of book1, DC chiefs started conversations about different chapters of the book. Yet all of them asked to remove 2 theses, one of which concerned the chapter about the Boss of the Game (the Forex Founder). To find out what was the other one – see the title of the book and realize how DCs make the major profit.
· I don't care who control Forex
· It is important to realize what real benefits will any trader gain from this fact?
The 1st conclusion (based on the controlled Forex market). Which broking service company is the most secure: a dealing center, a bank or a western (European/American) broker?
· Any type of scam is based on using the stereotypes of the crowd.
· Keeping in mind the thesis about the controllability of Forex, try to look at the problem from a different standpoint.
· The current question about DCs, brokers and banks will be examined in a separate chapter. In the meantime I want you to pay attention to the following things implied by the algorithm of the controlled Forex market.
1. All the quotes are given from a single Center. Consequently, all the following companies get the identical market quotes:
· DCs
· western brokers
· market-maker banks
· provincial banks, which provide Forex trading service without even entering the Interbank.
2. Is there any essential difference for a Forex trader between a DC and a bank?
· Nowadays it is very “stylish” to discuss the following question, which was asked among the first ones in the book 5 years ago: Can all DCs be considered as scams? Or maybe DCs are not the only ones to be considered as scammers?
· The humor of the situation is that the process of trading via the majority of banks, DCs is identical. Read the following official announcement of a representative of Izhcombank about the services provided for traders by their bank and DC:
The quote (osmar92 @ 18.11.2008, 12:44)
Izhcombank never make deals with the clients. It gives them an opportunity to work with a foreign broker. As we do not make deals there is no need in hedging. If a client opens a position it is really performed by the broker and can be seen in our account with the broker. Consequently, we display the completely identical position in the client's account at our bank.
(end of quote)
Indeed, the thesis that any market-maker works against the client (trader) is proven. A broker is just a mediator that joins the client with the global dealer, yet the company, which is not a global dealer and wants to be market-maker, enters the conflict of interests. Izhcombank's work is based on the broker scheme. It just provides any trader with an opportunity to trade. It doesn't trade against the traders.
I'm not going to tell you about the schemes of various scam DCs because I don't know how they are performed. The only thing I know that from the technological standpoint anything is possible. I see that many of them cannot perform the incoming orders. Either the server is not responding, or something else is happening. In this field of activity there are many possibilities to cheat, up to holding up the quotes
· The trading platforms of banks and DCs (that can be re-programmed to do anything) are identical.
· The secrets of banks and DCs that they hide from their traders are identical too (trading volumes, the scheme of transferring the money to the interbank, the proofs of the transfers, the ways of getting the quotes, the costs they incur, the profit they make etc.).
· Do DCs and banks transfer any money to the Interbank at all? The information is kept secret.
· Read yourself what answer was given by the official representative of Liteforex in response to my request to show any document confirming that the Liteforex dealing center has ever transferred any amount of the clients' money to the Interbank within the years of work. (As one of the Academy moderators joked: “If I were him I wouldn't also know what to answer without making the traders laugh”)
· Address the same question to the representative of the bank you want to open an account with. Ask him to explain the process of transferring your open position (from a 100-dollar/2000-dollar/10.0000dollar account) via the bank to the Interbank….then listen to his answer carefully.
· Is there any difference between banks and DCs? Yes, it is. But the difference is not in favor of banks as the majority of Russian and Ukrainian banks have fewer traders than the leading DCs. (Consequently, they have less profit and fewer possibilities to hedge positions)
That is what the official representative of Izhcombank answered to the question about the amount of traders who opened real trading account with them (in the bank) and about the trading volumes of the traders.
The quote( osmar92 @ 18.11.2008, 12:44)
The amount of traders is not a secret, but I guess that the information about the trading volumes is never given to anybody by any DC. The only thing I can say is that we started the service not long ago, that is why we do not have many traders. There are mini-accounts as well as standard accounts open in our bank. There is not a single account deposit yet that exceeds 100.000 dollars.
Try to guess what the secret is.
As a result Izhcombank stopped providing the service in December 2008.
Other Russian and Ukrainian banks continue providing the service.
3. With the market quotes being synchronous (and identical) the main weapon of DCs, banks and brokers in the war against their traders remains “catching” traders' stop-losses.
The example of trading with SAXO BANK, one of the world's leading Forex market-makers that has a status of fully licensed European bank with the main office in Copenhagen.
· Stop-losses are caught by DCs as well as by banks, big western brokers and market-maker banks.
· The numerous facts of catching traders' stop-losses are given at the sub-forum The Black list of DCs and broker companies. The techniques of cheating Forex traders.
a) The facts of catching the trader's stops by DCs
* Alpari
* ( LiteForex ) Straighthold Investment Group (The solution of disputes with LiteForex, Why disappearing profitable for me trades during the auction?)
b) The facts of catching the trader's stops by banks
* Ukrsocbank (Ukrsocbank - what's this?)
c) The facts of catching the trader's stops by big western market-makers, which have international licenses
What is fundamental for any trader's successful trading at the controlled Forex market?
The following things are fundamental for the successful trading at Forex:
· Not the right choice of a DC/broker company/bank
· The trading methods (system) based on the conscious understanding of each market movement from the tick chart and m1 to the large-scale timeframes like d1, w1, MN
· If you do not understand these algorithms you will lose your deposit by yourself, even without the help of the DC/bank/broker.
The difference is
· That a whole number of DCs, banks and broker companies “assist their traders significantly” in losing the deposits (all the methods of cheating are described in the following chapter of book 1)
· Others proved themselves to be fair brokers, so they didn't get on the black list of Masterforex-V Academy
But you will never succeed in gaining profit with both kinds of broking service companies unless you learn to understand each movement generated by the software that control Forex.
Masterforex-V's theory about the controlled Forex market was given for a completely different reason (aim):
· Any trading system applied/applicable to Forex can be created and checked basing on the mentioned theory
· Check the above-mentioned example about Bill Williams' TS, which I gave in 2004.
· In 2007 Bill Williams himself proved the fact and admitted that his TS isn't suitable for profitable trading at Forex.
· Another opinion of a MF-V Academy student that was concluded from the fact that Forex is controlled.
The quote (Sergo11 @ 10.1.2009, 15:22)
I have calculated and drew on the H4 chart the structure of the correctional wave…and I was shocked - no excess movement, each wave and sub-wave and mini-flat at Forex has its own specific functions: (end of quote)
I want to remind you that none of the technical and wave analysis Classics (Prechter, Fisher, Balan, Williams, Vozny etc.) managed to discover the algorithm of online detecting a correctional wave. They admitted that the model of such a wave can be defined only post factum.
What exact advantages can MF-V's theory of the controlled Forex give traders to profit at Forex?
· The logic of searching for trading advantages at a controlled/independent type of Forex is completely different.
· What exact advantages in trading does a trader have if his trading system is based on the theory of the controlled Forex market?
· How does the theory of the controlled FX market give you the way to the stable gaining of profit through understanding each movement of the computer software that controls Forex.
The chapter can be discussed at the Academy forum
Introduction to the 2nd edition of Masterforex-V's Book I. >>>
Read more
Part II - Masterforex-V's Trading System and new technical analysis. >>>
Book 2. Technical analysis in the Masterforex-V Trading System >>>
REPORT ERROR
