Jump to content
  • 0

Position closed by IG


Getrich

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 1
1 hour ago, ColinJ said:

'already demonstrated that you’ll be giving it all back and more' - I'll take that compliment; if I can afford that kind of cost that makes me a millionaire,

'why don’t you buy the underlying shares and stop paying money to borrow off your broker.' - its a very simple concept, listen carefully!  its called Maths; I can buy ~5 times more of a single stock and more variety of stocks, thereby spreading my RISK - let's call that management shall we,

overnight funding £costs c.0.0065% / day - not much price %age gain needed to cover that, but it is also monitored daily following on from the initial analysis of the Company fundamentals that made the stock a RISK BASED pick and HOLD, and others a day trade - ooh! let's call that management shall we!

'couldn’t care less how much you’ve made' - WRONG AGAIN, you have already stated many times that we don't know what we are doing, ours is not a winning strategy - if your measuring of success in trading is not financial gain what is? 

You simply make arbitrary statements with no ability to provide substantive detail or qualify, its becoming clearer with each post that you are simply a Troll

🤦🏼‍♂️
 

This is what I mean. It’s not spreading your risk at all, you clearly don’t understand. You have 5 times as much risk as you would have with an unleveraged portfolio. The volatility on that is going to be very high, plus you’re holding overnight and exposed to gaps and abrupt moves on earnings and other newsflow. 
 

Using the word ‘fundamentals’ to describe your risk management strategy is another red flag tbh. That’s not a sell rule to protect capital. It’s basically you saying ‘right I’ve done my analysis and the share is worth X, but the market says it’s worth Y. The market is clearly wrong so I’ll just hold forever until the market prices it where I think it should be.’ It’s amateurish and there’s no plan if things don’t progress as you think they should.

A big reason you’re so p*ssed is because you’re being forced to close trades at a loss. If you had a proper risk budget and a plan you would have just closed out the positions and looked for the next trade, would be no big deal. But you’re fuming and want to blame somebody because you allowed trades to run against you and now have to crystallise a loss that you wanted to avoid. 

Link to post
  • 0
50 minutes ago, Getrich said:

This morning just before 8 my BYD position was closed by IG.  I had plenty of money in my account.  Why did this happen and where can I complain.  

Hey @Getrich

If you had sufficient funds on your account we wouldn't have closed it due to a margin call. I would advise reaching out to us so we can look into the position and let you know why it was closed. 

All the best 

Link to post
  • 0

I had sufficient funds but IG decided that their customers are not allowed to trade BYD any longer so everyone who had shares in BYD was forced to either close their positions.  If they did not, like in my case, it was just closed by IG.  This means that IG could just at any time decide to not offer a share on their platform via spread betting and even if you bought shares in the company you just get forced to close your position.

Link to post
  • 0
58 minutes ago, StormChaser said:

This would be like Paddy Power taking a football bet and closing you out at half time because you are one-nil down.

But they told you they were going to do it weeks ago so gave you plenty of time to make alternative arrangements. I don’t know any profitable traders who hold on to spreadbets for months, it’s such a bad idea and is one of the reasons why over 75% are losing money hand over fist

  • Like 1
Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, Mcg said:

But they told you they were going to do it weeks ago so gave you plenty of time to make alternative arrangements. I don’t know any profitable traders who hold on to spreadbets for months, it’s such a bad idea and is one of the reasons why over 75% are losing money hand over fist

They can set their timelines (after they totally f--k over their clients).  They cannot alter the timelines for newsflow on which we based on trades.  You don't know profitable traders who hold on to spread bets for months?   Do you know profitable traders, in the bagger category?   If you limit your risk to 1-2% you probably limit your upside to 1-2%.  At what frequency?  Nothing more than threading water.  Tell me how YOU make money, rather than telling me what my issues are?

Link to post
  • 0
34 minutes ago, StormChaser said:

They can set their timelines (after they totally f--k over their clients).  They cannot alter the timelines for newsflow on which we based on trades.  You don't know profitable traders who hold on to spread bets for months?   Do you know profitable traders, in the bagger category?   If you limit your risk to 1-2% you probably limit your upside to 1-2%.  At what frequency?  Nothing more than threading water.  Tell me how YOU make money, rather than telling me what my issues are?

They aren’t screwing their clients though because it’s transparent and they don’t have to make a market for you on things where there’s little liquidity. It’s not like they’ve randomly closed you out, you were warned it was coming ages ago. You guys are just salty because you’ve allowed trades to move significantly against you because your risk management is off and now you don’t want to exit the trades and take the loss. Most good traders have no difficulty flattening their book and going again as from time to time things like this can happen, but there’s a lack of adaptability here.

And no because as a product it’s just not set up for holding for months, particularly on volatile shares. You have to pay financing charges and the leverage is totally unsuitable for overnight holding of highly volatile stocks when a relatively small move would take you out when you’re leveraged 5:1. Spread betting is just that.. betting. Have fun with it and take advantage of the leverage intra day. Long term holds are better done by holding the underlying.. no leverage to worry about, no margin calls, no brokers changing rules.

Personally I spread bet daily, but I don’t allow positions to move against me too far from my entry price, and just look for somewhere between 1:1 and 4:1 risk reward. Would have no issue with exiting any trade i take as I’m not over leveraged. If I like a stock I buy the physical shares because that’s the most appropriate way of gaining exposure and means I can chill and not have to get stressed out about stuff I can’t control all the time.

Link to post
  • 0
9 minutes ago, StormChaser said:

FFS, are they paying you?  You sound like an IG lapdog.

Nope.. I just understand how it works and what the risks are. Most of the people on here complaining have massive holes in their trading strategies and just want to blame the broker rather than fixing their problems. It’s sad but most won’t make money until they change their approach.. there are people on here complaining about fraud, writing to the police/treasury/prime minister/tooth fairy lol.

If they spent half as much time on managing downside risk or at least learning about it as they do moaning and blaming other people for their losses then they might actually make some money and keep hold of most of it when something unexpected happens.

Link to post
  • 0

I do not loose money, I trade sensible.  But if you buy something from a shop, they agree to sell it to you and then they come and knock on your door and force you to sell it even if it is not a good time to sell,  If you do not sell the product you bought from them then they just take the product that you bought from them away.  How is this right in any capitalist society.  Maybe it would be allowed in a socialist society where people do not have any rights.  But customers should not accept this behaviour in a free and fair society.  Forcing people to sell something that you willingly sold is not acceptable and should not be tolerated.  Why did people get money back from PPI claims? Because big institutions unfairly tried to make money out of their customers.  This is not about my trading and if I win or loose money.  This is about fairness and treating your customers with the respect they deserve.  If we just accept big institutions like IG not treating us fairly once, it will happen again and again and one day it will affect each one of us.  Keep complaining about this on social media, Ombudsman etc.  If enough people complain through all these methods something will get done and it will protect all of us in the future.  Do not accept being stepped on, stand up and fight for your rights. I do not believe that the person posting against me is a customer as they would understand what this is all about.  Not about losing money but about right and wrong.

Link to post
  • 0
1 hour ago, Getrich said:

I do not loose money, I trade sensible.  But if you buy something from a shop, they agree to sell it to you and then they come and knock on your door and force you to sell it even if it is not a good time to sell,  If you do not sell the product you bought from them then they just take the product that you bought from them away.  How is this right in any capitalist society.  Maybe it would be allowed in a socialist society where people do not have any rights.  But customers should not accept this behaviour in a free and fair society.  Forcing people to sell something that you willingly sold is not acceptable and should not be tolerated.  Why did people get money back from PPI claims? Because big institutions unfairly tried to make money out of their customers.  This is not about my trading and if I win or loose money.  This is about fairness and treating your customers with the respect they deserve.  If we just accept big institutions like IG not treating us fairly once, it will happen again and again and one day it will affect each one of us.  Keep complaining about this on social media, Ombudsman etc.  If enough people complain through all these methods something will get done and it will protect all of us in the future.  Do not accept being stepped on, stand up and fight for your rights. I do not believe that the person posting against me is a customer as they would understand what this is all about.  Not about losing money but about right and wrong.

All of these posts just show that there are people who have got involved with trading who just don’t understand the financial system or how spread betting actually works. All the complaints to the FCA will do is increase the likelihood that leveraged trading gets banned for retail traders because they will conclude that too many retail traders don’t understand the risks they’re taking. Which would be a shame for the rest of us

When you place a spread bet with IG or any other broker you’re using leverage and they extend you margin. On the indices it’s 20:1 and on individual stocks it’s 5:1 for retail traders. The basis of your point is that you expect a broker to extend you margin in perpetuity, whenever you want it. Even if market conditions have changed or their business model is changing.

Given the retail trading boom driven by Fed easy money pumping the markets, there are loads of small cap stocks going haywire and the volatility is through the roof. Market conditions are dictating that for some of these stocks, there’s not much liquidity and brokers are having difficulty in laying off the other side of the bet on exchanges. IG can’t take the other side of your trades because that would be a conflict of interest, so if they’re unable to lay the bets off then the only other option is to not allow clients to buy.

This is what obviously happened with the likes of Gamestop or AMC, and on the back of that IG have decided they don’t want the hassle of people betting on illiquid stuff when the underlying market isn’t always there for them to lay off.

Its a good move. Most of IG’s revenues come from long term clients placing sizeable and regular trades as they make their money on the spreads. There’s very little money made on small time retail clients making small bets and blowing accounts left right and centre. Particularly when you factor in how much employee time they have to divert towards answering daft questions from these people.

Now of course the markets should be open to anyone.. accessibility is important. All of those big IG clients were newbies or small traders once... and of all of the newbie retail clients some of them will be big clients in 10 or 20 years time. But unfortunately 90% of them will never make it and will drop out.

So in summary IG should offer trading to all, that makes sense in terms of their business model. But they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to. This is just a risk you take as a trader borrowing money off your broker to trade. Either don’t use leverage and buy the underlying in which case you aren’t answerable to your broker... or trade something like the indices where ample liquidity makes a decision like this unlikely.

Either way, it’s something you need to factor in and adapt to if you want to be successful at this.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
  • 0
9 hours ago, Mcg said:

All of these posts just show that there are people who have got involved with trading who just don’t understand the financial system or how spread betting actually works. All the complaints to the FCA will do is increase the likelihood that leveraged trading gets banned for retail traders because they will conclude that too many retail traders don’t understand the risks they’re taking. Which would be a shame for the rest of us

When you place a spread bet with IG or any other broker you’re using leverage and they extend you margin. On the indices it’s 20:1 and on individual stocks it’s 5:1 for retail traders. The basis of your point is that you expect a broker to extend you margin in perpetuity, whenever you want it. Even if market conditions have changed or their business model is changing.

Given the retail trading boom driven by Fed easy money pumping the markets, there are loads of small cap stocks going haywire and the volatility is through the roof. Market conditions are dictating that for some of these stocks, there’s not much liquidity and brokers are having difficulty in laying off the other side of the bet on exchanges. IG can’t take the other side of your trades because that would be a conflict of interest, so if they’re unable to lay the bets off then the only other option is to not allow clients to buy.

This is what obviously happened with the likes of Gamestop or AMC, and on the back of that IG have decided they don’t want the hassle of people betting on illiquid stuff when the underlying market isn’t always there for them to lay off.

Its a good move. Most of IG’s revenues come from long term clients placing sizeable and regular trades as they make their money on the spreads. There’s very little money made on small time retail clients making small bets and blowing accounts left right and centre. Particularly when you factor in how much employee time they have to divert towards answering daft questions from these people.

Now of course the markets should be open to anyone.. accessibility is important. All of those big IG clients were newbies or small traders once... and of all of the newbie retail clients some of them will be big clients in 10 or 20 years time. But unfortunately 90% of them will never make it and will drop out.

So in summary IG should offer trading to all, that makes sense in terms of their business model. But they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to. This is just a risk you take as a trader borrowing money off your broker to trade. Either don’t use leverage and buy the underlying in which case you aren’t answerable to your broker... or trade something like the indices where ample liquidity makes a decision like this unlikely.

Either way, it’s something you need to factor in and adapt to if you want to be successful at this.  

 

9 hours ago, Mcg said:

All of these posts just show that there are people who have got involved with trading who just don’t understand the financial system or how spread betting actually works. All the complaints to the FCA will do is increase the likelihood that leveraged trading gets banned for retail traders because they will conclude that too many retail traders don’t understand the risks they’re taking. Which would be a shame for the rest of us

When you place a spread bet with IG or any other broker you’re using leverage and they extend you margin. On the indices it’s 20:1 and on individual stocks it’s 5:1 for retail traders. The basis of your point is that you expect a broker to extend you margin in perpetuity, whenever you want it. Even if market conditions have changed or their business model is changing.

Given the retail trading boom driven by Fed easy money pumping the markets, there are loads of small cap stocks going haywire and the volatility is through the roof. Market conditions are dictating that for some of these stocks, there’s not much liquidity and brokers are having difficulty in laying off the other side of the bet on exchanges. IG can’t take the other side of your trades because that would be a conflict of interest, so if they’re unable to lay the bets off then the only other option is to not allow clients to buy.

This is what obviously happened with the likes of Gamestop or AMC, and on the back of that IG have decided they don’t want the hassle of people betting on illiquid stuff when the underlying market isn’t always there for them to lay off.

Its a good move. Most of IG’s revenues come from long term clients placing sizeable and regular trades as they make their money on the spreads. There’s very little money made on small time retail clients making small bets and blowing accounts left right and centre. Particularly when you factor in how much employee time they have to divert towards answering daft questions from these people.

Now of course the markets should be open to anyone.. accessibility is important. All of those big IG clients were newbies or small traders once... and of all of the newbie retail clients some of them will be big clients in 10 or 20 years time. But unfortunately 90% of them will never make it and will drop out.

So in summary IG should offer trading to all, that makes sense in terms of their business model. But they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to. This is just a risk you take as a trader borrowing money off your broker to trade. Either don’t use leverage and buy the underlying in which case you aren’t answerable to your broker... or trade something like the indices where ample liquidity makes a decision like this unlikely.

Either way, it’s something you need to factor in and adapt to if you want to be successful at this.  

Do you work for IG? Must be if you promote this kind of treatment of customer. BYD is not Gamestop.  I can understand if this is decided for risky stocks that trade over the moon, but it makes no sense to have the same principles apply to a $67B market cap company.  Even Warren Buffet owns a part of BYD.  Why is it not good enough for IG?  What is the rational like a share like BYD that is not a small cap stock?  Pretty low if you ask me. Why should the small retail investor place any trades with IG if they can and will withdraw at any point without justification. Would be much better to go to another provider.  They can just cut your throat for no good reason at all.  Like buying a cat from someone, then they give you warning and say if you do not kill the cat in two months we will have to come and kill it.  Obviously you are not going to kill the cat.  Does it make it right if they then come and kill it just because they gave you notice and because they feel they can.  Does that make it morally right to treat their clients like this?  If we make money they make money. For example the more money we make, the more we can buy and sell and the more money they can make.  If they want to cut their risk they can increase their margins or make the spreads bigger.  There are ways.  If you are forced to pay 100 percent margin on BYD how much risk is left for them.  Why do they choose to force people to sell sensible good shares, they must gain from doing this or why else would they.  If people complain on social media and to the FCA it is a good thing as risk will be less for us and they will force companies to treat their customers with the respect they deserve.  If we do not complain some customers will lose everything.  One day the tide (IG) can turn against you and IG can decide to give you notice on everything you bought. People will loose a lot of money and some already did.  This is not fair practice. Do not believe the lie that this was about risky shares like Gamestop! Repay the money you took or this might end like the PPI scandal for you.

Link to post
  • 0
On 30/03/2021 at 23:40, Mcg said:

Nope.. I just understand how it works and what the risks are. Most of the people on here complaining have massive holes in their trading strategies and just want to blame the broker rather than fixing their problems. It’s sad but most won’t make money until they change their approach.. there are people on here complaining about fraud, writing to the police/treasury/prime minister/tooth fairy lol.

If they spent half as much time on managing downside risk or at least learning about it as they do moaning and blaming other people for their losses then they might actually make some money and keep hold of most of it when something unexpected happens.

Who are you to question my trading strategy? You know nothing about it (unless you work for IG). My trading strategy has been profitable for some considerable time. This is about outrageous behaviour by IG. It has nothing to do with the client's risk management strategy. 

Link to post
  • 0
4 minutes ago, Getrich said:

 

Do you work for IG? Must be if you promote this kind of treatment of customer. BYD is not Gamestop.  I can understand if this is decided for risky stocks that trade over the moon, but it makes no sense to have the same principles apply to a $67B market cap company.  Even Warren Buffet owns a part of BYD.  Why is it not good enough for IG?  What is the rational like a share like BYD that is not a small cap stock?  Pretty low if you ask me. Why should the small retail investor place any trades with IG if they can and will withdraw at any point without justification. Would be much better to go to another provider.  They can just cut your throat for no good reason at all.  Like buying a cat from someone, then they give you warning and say if you do not kill the cat in two months we will have to come and kill it.  Obviously you are not going to kill the cat.  Does it make it right if they then come and kill it just because they gave you notice and because they feel they can.  Does that make it morally right to treat their clients like this?  If we make money they make money. For example the more money we make, the more we can buy and sell and the more money they can make.  If they want to cut their risk they can increase their margins or make the spreads bigger.  There are ways.  If you are forced to pay 100 percent margin on BYD how much risk is left for them.  Why do they choose to force people to sell sensible good shares, they must gain from doing this or why else would they.  If people complain on social media and to the FCA it is a good thing as risk will be less for us and they will force companies to treat their customers with the respect they deserve.  If we do not complain some customers will lose everything.  One day the tide (IG) can turn against you and IG can decide to give you notice on everything you bought. People will loose a lot of money and some already did.  This is not fair practice. Do not believe the lie that this was about risky shares like Gamestop! Repay the money you took or this might end like the PPI scandal for you.

What are you bumbling on about? This has nothing to do with killing cats or whatever 😂. I explained pretty clearly why a broker might choose to do what they’ve done. At the end of the day if you trade on margin then it’s up to the broker to decide which shares to offer. It’s just part of the game. It’s not like they chop and change which shares they offer on spreadbetting, it’s a conscious business decision to withdraw from certain markets. Just either trade something less risky or buy stocks without relying on broker margin.

IG are the largest spread betting provider in the UK so if they do something it’s quite likely the others will follow, or most of them probably never offered leveraged exposure to such shares to start with.

Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, Getrich said:

Who are you to question my trading strategy? You know nothing about it (unless you work for IG). My trading strategy has been profitable for some considerable time. This is about outrageous behaviour by IG. It has nothing to do with the client's risk management strategy. 

Couldn’t care less about your trading strategy and no I don’t work for IG. Just been pointing out the nonsense that some people post on here.. because you just want to blame a broker rather than take responsibility for your own junk trades 

Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, Mcg said:

Couldn’t care less about your trading strategy and no I don’t work for IG. Just been pointing out the nonsense that some people post on here.. because you just want to blame a broker rather than take responsibility for your own junk trades 

Keep going mate. Everyone who is a legitimate client of IG can see through you. If you don't care about my trading strategy, then do not criticise it. This is about how IG treats it clients. NOTHING to do with the client's, trading strategy. 

Link to post
  • 0
15 minutes ago, Mcg said:

What are you bumbling on about? This has nothing to do with killing cats or whatever 😂. I explained pretty clearly why a broker might choose to do what they’ve done. At the end of the day if you trade on margin then it’s up to the broker to decide which shares to offer. It’s just part of the game. It’s not like they chop and change which shares they offer on spreadbetting, it’s a conscious business decision to withdraw from certain markets. Just either trade something less risky or buy stocks without relying on broker margin.

IG are the largest spread betting provider in the UK so if they do something it’s quite likely the others will follow, or most of them probably never offered leveraged exposure to such shares to start with.

Because you can screw your customers in the name of a "conscious business decision", does not mean you should screw them or that you can keep screwing them without consequences. And since you do work for IG, can you please inform this forum how many hundreds of thousands or pounds were lost by customers in the name of a "conscious business decision" by IG?

 

Link to post
  • 0
3 minutes ago, Getrich said:

Because you can screw your customers in the name of a "conscious business decision", does not mean you should screw them or that you can keep screwing them without consequences. And since you do work for IG, can you please inform this forum how many hundreds of thousands or pounds were lost by customers in the name of a "conscious business decision" by IG?

 

I’ve no idea lol but I can see from this forum why there are 75% of clients losing money.. I’ve already explained to you why they haven’t screwed you but the mechanics of financial markets seems to be over your head. I wouldn’t give up the day job that funds your gambling habit if I was you lol

Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Mcg said:

I’ve no idea lol but I can see from this forum why there are 75% of clients losing money.. I’ve already explained to you why they haven’t screwed you but the mechanics of financial markets seems to be over your head. I wouldn’t give up the day job that funds your gambling habit if I was you lol

Please do no insult me. This is about how IG treats it's clients. That fact that you keep criticising the victims of this behaviour is instructive. Like is said. You know nothing about my trading strategy, my risk management strategy or my profitability. These things are all irrelevant. IG screwed a lot of traders, some of the profitable, some not. The point is how IG behaves. Stop deflecting attention from IG's outrageous behaviour by criticising the victims.

Edited by Getrich
Link to post
  • 0
On 30/03/2021 at 23:40, Mcg said:

Nope.. I just understand how it works and what the risks are. Most of the people on here complaining have massive holes in their trading strategies and just want to blame the broker rather than fixing their problems. It’s sad but most won’t make money until they change their approach.. there are people on here complaining about fraud, writing to the police/treasury/prime minister/tooth fairy lol.

If they spent half as much time on managing downside risk or at least learning about it as they do moaning and blaming other people for their losses then they might actually make some money and keep hold of most of it when something unexpected happens.

Indeed. It's quite sad how individuals are blaming the system and making non comparable comparisons. They see the glowing upside and flock in like moths to the flames. On getting burned they cry foul and being gamed by the system. Greed compounded by lack of education. No wonder these platforms regularly point out 75% retail investors lose. 

Link to post
  • 0
On 02/04/2021 at 23:51, Getrich said:

Please do no insult me. This is about how IG treats it's clients. That fact that you keep criticising the victims of this behaviour is instructive. Like is said. You know nothing about my trading strategy, my risk management strategy or my profitability. These things are all irrelevant. IG screwed a lot of traders, some of the profitable, some not. The point is how IG behaves. Stop deflecting attention from IG's outrageous behaviour by criticising the victims.

No one needs to know your strategy or profitability. We don't really care. All we need to make judgement are the surround comments you've been making and deflecting blame from yourself. I don't understand why you're throwing the toys out of the pram. A victim you certainly are but of your own decisions and lack of education on how the system works.

Link to post
  • 0
On 30/03/2021 at 23:26, StormChaser said:

FFS, are they paying you?  You sound like an IG lapdog.

Typical reaction from the woke club and cancel culture. Don't like something and start making random accusations. Someone tries to civilly educate you and that's the best response you have. Your comparison to Paddy power was **** awful and someone was kind enough to educate you. Show some gratitude.  

Link to post
  • 0
On 02/04/2021 at 23:51, Getrich said:

Please do no insult me. This is about how IG treats it's clients. That fact that you keep criticising the victims of this behaviour is instructive. Like is said. You know nothing about my trading strategy, my risk management strategy or my profitability. These things are all irrelevant. IG screwed a lot of traders, some of the profitable, some not. The point is how IG behaves. Stop deflecting attention from IG's outrageous behaviour by criticising the victims.

I know you aren’t profitable just from the information you’ve posted on here, it’s obvious. Victims?! No successful trader ever had a victim mentality. They react to changing markets and conditions, something which you’re unable to do because you’ve overleveraged on illiquid crappy small caps and now your broker is pulling the plug on them. You should just cash out and take the money out before you lose anymore as you won’t make money with your attitude 

Link to post
  • 0
On 06/04/2021 at 10:40, Mcg said:

I know you aren’t profitable just from the information you’ve posted on here, it’s obvious. Victims?! No successful trader ever had a victim mentality. They react to changing markets and conditions, something which you’re unable to do because you’ve overleveraged on illiquid crappy small caps and now your broker is pulling the plug on them. You should just cash out and take the money out before you lose anymore as you won’t make money with your attitude 

'No successful trader ever had a victim mentality' - WRONG - being successful and being a victim (in this case of disgraceful business behaviour of forced open position  closure by IG) are not mutually exclusive; 'something which you’re unable to do because you’ve overleveraged on illiquid crappy small caps' - WRONG - my small cap margin is <2% of equity; 'you won’t make money with your attitude' - WRONG - >£100k trading profit this financial year: the fact that IG gave notice they they were screwing over some of their customers doesn't make it any less of a screw over; yes IG can decide what markets they wish to trade in, but what they should not do is touch open positions taken out in good business faith; we fully understand the way leverage works, so if IG don't want the risk that situations will move against them dont offer the contract in the first place; I don't recall IG ever asking me if I would like to close my CFD position because it had been open too long in their opinion - happy to take the overnight fees!

Link to post
  • 0
On 30/03/2021 at 22:29, Mcg said:

But they told you they were going to do it weeks ago so gave you plenty of time to make alternative arrangements. I don’t know any profitable traders who hold on to spreadbets for months, it’s such a bad idea and is one of the reasons why over 75% are losing money hand over fist

'don’t know any profitable traders who hold on to spreadbets for months, it’s such a bad idea' - not necessarily - its simple Maths; my £75,000 Saga CFD position overnight cost over 3 months is a great deal for a £15,000 profit, even if it took 6 months

Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, ColinJ said:

'don’t know any profitable traders who hold on to spreadbets for months, it’s such a bad idea' - not necessarily - its simple Maths; my £75,000 Saga CFD position overnight cost over 3 months is a great deal for a £15,000 profit, even if it took 6 months

You’re just HODLing and hoping for the best though.. it’s not a winning strategy because you have no risk management or exit plan for your trades. 

Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, ColinJ said:

'No successful trader ever had a victim mentality' - WRONG - being successful and being a victim (in this case of disgraceful business behaviour of forced open position  closure by IG) are not mutually exclusive; 'something which you’re unable to do because you’ve overleveraged on illiquid crappy small caps' - WRONG - my small cap margin is <2% of equity; 'you won’t make money with your attitude' - WRONG - >£100k trading profit this financial year: the fact that IG gave notice they they were screwing over some of their customers doesn't make it any less of a screw over; yes IG can decide what markets they wish to trade in, but what they should not do is touch open positions taken out in good business faith; we fully understand the way leverage works, so if IG don't want the risk that situations will move against them dont offer the contract in the first place; I don't recall IG ever asking me if I would like to close my CFD position because it had been open too long in their opinion - happy to take the overnight fees!

Tbh my view on it is that people like you need to do some sort of financial awareness course before opening an account because you don’t understand the system.

I couldn’t care less how much you’ve made because you’ve already demonstrated that you’ll be giving it all back and more, so it’s kind of irrelevant. It’s not exactly been difficult over the last year to HODL and make money.. US markets up 80%, a record year on year return. There are a lot of clowns who have made money and now they think they’re the next Warren Buffet.

I’ve explained in detail already how leveraged trading works in this thread but you choose not to listen. If your position is less than 2% of equity, why don’t you buy the underlying shares and stop paying money to borrow off your broker. It would save you complaining when your broker decides they don’t want to offer margin against your shares anymore which for some reason you think they should be obliged to do in perpetuity.

Its pretty clear to me that this Colin J, Stormchaser and Getpoor all have no clue what they’re doing.

Link to post
  • 0
20 hours ago, Mcg said:

Tbh my view on it is that people like you need to do some sort of financial awareness course before opening an account because you don’t understand the system.

I couldn’t care less how much you’ve made because you’ve already demonstrated that you’ll be giving it all back and more, so it’s kind of irrelevant. It’s not exactly been difficult over the last year to HODL and make money.. US markets up 80%, a record year on year return. There are a lot of clowns who have made money and now they think they’re the next Warren Buffet.

I’ve explained in detail already how leveraged trading works in this thread but you choose not to listen. If your position is less than 2% of equity, why don’t you buy the underlying shares and stop paying money to borrow off your broker. It would save you complaining when your broker decides they don’t want to offer margin against your shares anymore which for some reason you think they should be obliged to do in perpetuity.

Its pretty clear to me that this Colin J, Stormchaser and Getpoor all have no clue what they’re doing.

'already demonstrated that you’ll be giving it all back and more' - I'll take that compliment; if I can afford that kind of cost that makes me a millionaire,

'why don’t you buy the underlying shares and stop paying money to borrow off your broker.' - its a very simple concept, listen carefully!  its called Maths; I can buy ~5 times more of a single stock and more variety of stocks, thereby spreading my RISK - let's call that management shall we,

overnight funding £costs c.0.0065% / day - not much price %age gain needed to cover that, but it is also monitored daily following on from the initial analysis of the Company fundamentals that made the stock a RISK BASED pick and HOLD, and others a day trade - ooh! let's call that management shall we!

'couldn’t care less how much you’ve made' - WRONG AGAIN, you have already stated many times that we don't know what we are doing, ours is not a winning strategy - if your measuring of success in trading is not financial gain what is? 

You simply make arbitrary statements with no ability to provide substantive detail or qualify, its becoming clearer with each post that you are simply a Troll

Link to post
  • 0

'some reason you think they should be obliged to do in perpetuity.' correct, once a position is open they ARE obliged - its called a deal/contract; there is no time limit set on a CFD trade and nothing in IG T&C that allows them to close an open position that is not margin call based

Link to post
  • 0
On 02/04/2021 at 13:40, Mcg said:

All of these posts just show that there are people who have got involved with trading who just don’t understand the financial system or how spread betting actually works. All the complaints to the FCA will do is increase the likelihood that leveraged trading gets banned for retail traders because they will conclude that too many retail traders don’t understand the risks they’re taking. Which would be a shame for the rest of us

When you place a spread bet with IG or any other broker you’re using leverage and they extend you margin. On the indices it’s 20:1 and on individual stocks it’s 5:1 for retail traders. The basis of your point is that you expect a broker to extend you margin in perpetuity, whenever you want it. Even if market conditions have changed or their business model is changing.

Given the retail trading boom driven by Fed easy money pumping the markets, there are loads of small cap stocks going haywire and the volatility is through the roof. Market conditions are dictating that for some of these stocks, there’s not much liquidity and brokers are having difficulty in laying off the other side of the bet on exchanges. IG can’t take the other side of your trades because that would be a conflict of interest, so if they’re unable to lay the bets off then the only other option is to not allow clients to buy.

This is what obviously happened with the likes of Gamestop or AMC, and on the back of that IG have decided they don’t want the hassle of people betting on illiquid stuff when the underlying market isn’t always there for them to lay off.

Its a good move. Most of IG’s revenues come from long term clients placing sizeable and regular trades as they make their money on the spreads. There’s very little money made on small time retail clients making small bets and blowing accounts left right and centre. Particularly when you factor in how much employee time they have to divert towards answering daft questions from these people.

Now of course the markets should be open to anyone.. accessibility is important. All of those big IG clients were newbies or small traders once... and of all of the newbie retail clients some of them will be big clients in 10 or 20 years time. But unfortunately 90% of them will never make it and will drop out.

So in summary IG should offer trading to all, that makes sense in terms of their business model. But they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to. This is just a risk you take as a trader borrowing money off your broker to trade. Either don’t use leverage and buy the underlying in which case you aren’t answerable to your broker... or trade something like the indices where ample liquidity makes a decision like this unlikely.

Either way, it’s something you need to factor in and adapt to if you want to be successful at this.  

'they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to.' - correct, for anyone who wishes to open a new position from a given point, but they ARE OBLIGED to honour existing open positions: If market conditions change against IG existing business model then they change for future trades, not historical ones - that's the deal, we don't have to just accept it as a risk because it is not STATED as a risk by IG

Link to post
  • 0
34 minutes ago, ColinJ said:

'they’re under no obligation to extend leverage on stocks they don’t want to.' - correct, for anyone who wishes to open a new position from a given point, but they ARE OBLIGED to honour existing open positions: If market conditions change against IG existing business model then they change for future trades, not historical ones - that's the deal, we don't have to just accept it as a risk because it is not STATED as a risk by IG

No they aren’t obliged.. they just have to give you notice of their intentions which they did. You should get a lawyer to go over the small print with you. If anything what IG are guilty of is not doing their due diligence on potential clients because they seem to have a lot of clients who think in this way. As I said, there should be some sort of training course covering all of these things off before people are allowed to open an account.

Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • General Statistics

    • Total Topics
      14,955
    • Total Posts
      72,663
    • Total Members
      60,976
    • Most Online
      5,137
      14/01/21 09:51

    Newest Member
    Deller78
    Joined 18/04/21 12:49
  • Posts

    • So, the vaccines are not actually vaccines because the don't protect you from getting covid but might just reduce the symptoms somewhat, for a disease were 99.9% experience only mild symptoms anyway. With the animal studies of previous types of mRNA medications the real test was 6 - 12 months after injection when the autoimmune system malfunctions started to show, should be interesting as no one knows what's going to happen next because these vaccines were allowed to skip the animal testing phase.   Now that the plan has been shown to work are you ready for the gear change from covid lockdowns to climate change lockdowns yet? The WHO starts flashing hints. WHO warns a coronavirus vaccine alone will not end pandemic (cnbc.com)   And if the covid models were a deliberate fear mongering total exaggeration take a look at the climate change ones.     Meanwhile Fauci over steps the line and gets a well deserved ear full.    
    • 50K might be a too conservative target...  any thoughts?  43?  25...?
×
×
  • Create New...