Hi.

I assume many people is happy with FXDD and seems to be an average broker.

However, I´m not the kind of gouy trusting in what somebody is telling him. In want to know facts and proofs.

I have some some points to think next.

First: TRADITION SECURITIES AND FUTURES INC is in row 154 of last CFTC report (0704) with adjusted net capital of 781.869 and minimum requirements of 500.000. Not big money huh? far away from 5 millions.

Second: How to proving the relation between FXDD and the aforementioned company? HOW? There is some link with documents?

The form to open an account does not mention any TRADITION SECURITIES AND FUTURES, only FXDIRECTDEALER, LLC.

If we suppose that for some magic we can find some relation between both. Why FXDIRECTDEALER, LLC. would be under NFA regulation?.

Example:
It´s different when FOREX.com claims to be "a division of GAIN Capital Group, the trusted counterparty to professional traders and fund managers worldwide. " because by reading the agreement in the open accout form you could find: "your Account at Forex.com (“Forex.com”), a division of GAIN Capital Group, LLC".

So, meanwhile forex.com is under NFA regulation is you can as you can read below, the same is not applied to FXDD

Third: Some time ago FXDD claimed to be part of some Compagnie Financiere Tradition but I can´t find any reference in the website. Why?

This NFA new was not widely know but is enough to proof the relation between Gain and forex.com. Release day is MAy 17/2007:

Attached is the NFA decision if somebody does not trust on me.


One good point:s TRADITION SECURITIES AND FUTURES INC is registered from 1996 which is good. More than 11 years in business tell you a lot about company.


TO forexsavior: Could you explain how concentration charger needs to be calculated, please. And adding two more things

1-a little more maths to your posts
2-a link to the new proposal

How you could be sure none of the firms could survive. Let´s take CMC as example. They´re London based, just need to request 20 millions to the mother company and ready.

TO goldensight: glad to read your posts.
And I want to add one more thing. Also, there is a completely misconception about how global companies works. Global assets are important.
Because in my country Citibank or HSBC have less capital than some local bank means they´re smallest?

Attached Files

Decision_GainCapitalGroupLLC20070517.pdf (101.2 KB, 27 views)

__________________

No, FXDD is not regulated by any regulator bodies, neither NFA nor CFTC. You could call them directly and ask about it. On December 2006, Tradition Group already sold 80% of its holding on FXDD. You can read this report on Tradition 2006 Annual Report http://www.traditiongroup.com/Admin/...T06_UK_WEB.pdf page 20.

The sad SAD part about all of that is, FXCM the biggest scammer in the FX industry known to date, have the most capital 56 mill.
That is capital they have taken/stolen from there customers by directly trading against them or even using there capital to trade themselves and just fixing the results of customer trades.
FXCM been fined many times by NFA have they ever even paid it?
Then you have IBFX which has only 7 million yet they are for the traders making money from the spread and not trading against them, I know alot of people whinge about the spreads at times, even if you look at an ecn the spreads arent much better even worse.I cant see how IBFX could make only there revenue from pip spread though, imagine if they had mostly carry trade customer who have positions open for months then they only get pip spread once, they would make nothing.All scammers in my opinion all of them.

__________________
No

I think the bottom line is that you're on your own in judging a broker. If you feel safe with a company that has a lot of capital, go with FXCM. They have nothing to offer me, but that's a personal choice.

The only meaningful change the NFA (or whoever) could impose would be if the accounts of forex traders would not count as assets in case of bankruptcy. We all remember Refco: the futures traders were fine, the forex traders were screwed.

I also feel that rules and regulations have to be meaningful and I have my doubts about the NFA in that regard. Wait until they feel they need to have a say about anything and anyone concerning forex; soon you will not be able to post a chart without a disclaimer.

FXCM dont work man they are a scam insider info etc etc ETC for years, saying how your positions aren't even traded its all a setup.
4 years ago I used them for about 3 months and lost about 90% due to odd things happening.Friends who had years in the biz told me to report them and I did and I never got a reply.
A guy just reported and filed a claim with the NFA against Farr Financial INC an ecn in California registered commodoties broker, and he received his payout.
WHy?Because they are a registered commodoties broker NOT just an FCM.
So if you trade the currency futures, at minimum margins etc, then you are protected, if you trade OTC you ain't got jack shit no matter who its through.

__________________
No

Seems simple to me. If you are trading with a broker who is, well, pretty much broke, then watch your wallet. Why people send their hard earned money to these tiny little outfits I'll never understand.

If they are not broke, you still have to watch your wallet. See FXCM...

Well, it looks like the forex dead pool is about to claim its first two victims. Read it and weep.

The NFA has issued serious complaints against two small, undercapitalized firms.

The first is Advanced Markets (Amifx). The NFA says in its complaint, “On June 28, 2007, NFA issued a Complaint charging AMI with cheating, defrauding or deceiving another person or attempting to do so and failure to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. The Complaint also charged AMI with failure to maintain required adjusted net capital; failure to take required charges; failure to collect and maintain required security deposits; failure to file accurate weekly reports; and failure to maintain accurate records.”

http://www.nfa.futures.org/basicnet/...px?seqnum=1251

What is even more frightening is that Amifx has only $1,020,000 in capital. Could this be ANOTHER UGMFX?

The second is against Bacera Corporation (whoever they are?) But just like UGMFX Bacera looks like they got no money left. On June 28, 2007, NFA issued a Complaint charging Bacera with failure to give required notice; failure to maintain required adjusted net capital; failure to take required charges; and failure to maintain accurate records. The Complaint also charged Bacera with cheating, defrauding or deceiving another person or attempting to do so and failure to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. Finally, the Complaint charged Bacera, Wong, Hsu and Valdivia with failure to supervise.

It seems like these smaller firms are going under on a weekly basis. I'll keep everyone posted as the dead forex firms walking continue to die off...

The link is dead too...

they're dropping like flies...