Jun 17 2018 at 14:21
We at FXBook and on other forums can take action and make our feelings known by contacting ESMA. So please if you disagree with the introduction of these new leverage restrictions please contact them.
Jun 17 2018 at 14:21
Info ESMA <Info.ESMA@esma.europa.eu>
Sat 16/06/2018, 09:06
You;
Dear sir or Madam,
Thank you for your message.
We value your input and question raised on this issue. As with all relevant questions that are submitted to us by external sources, we have taken note of the points raised and are consulting internally as well as with the relevant ESMA committees to assess whether further public guidance is needed. Please refer to https://www.esma.europa.eu/questions-and-answers
Questions and Answers - ESMA
This page contains an overview of all Q&As developed by ESMA per legislative act and instructions on submitting new questions to ESMA.
www.esma.europa.eu
for information on criteria followed by ESMA to accept and prioritise questions.
Please note that ESMA endeavours to reply within two months to factual questions received and within four to six months to policy questions that raise new points of interpretation.
Please also note that a question is much more useful when submitted together with a proposed answer. We would therefore be grateful if you could suggest possible answers should you need guidance on other issues in the future.
Finally, please note that this inbox only handles general enquiries. If you are contacting us to make a complaint, you should first refer to the complaints section of the ESMA website. There you will find information on how ESMA can help and who you should contact to make your complaint.
Regards,
Sat 16/06/2018, 09:06
You;
Dear sir or Madam,
Thank you for your message.
We value your input and question raised on this issue. As with all relevant questions that are submitted to us by external sources, we have taken note of the points raised and are consulting internally as well as with the relevant ESMA committees to assess whether further public guidance is needed. Please refer to https://www.esma.europa.eu/questions-and-answers
Questions and Answers - ESMA
This page contains an overview of all Q&As developed by ESMA per legislative act and instructions on submitting new questions to ESMA.
www.esma.europa.eu
for information on criteria followed by ESMA to accept and prioritise questions.
Please note that ESMA endeavours to reply within two months to factual questions received and within four to six months to policy questions that raise new points of interpretation.
Please also note that a question is much more useful when submitted together with a proposed answer. We would therefore be grateful if you could suggest possible answers should you need guidance on other issues in the future.
Finally, please note that this inbox only handles general enquiries. If you are contacting us to make a complaint, you should first refer to the complaints section of the ESMA website. There you will find information on how ESMA can help and who you should contact to make your complaint.
Regards,
500k wow that is a huge account. I can't believe it is so much for a pro account. I thought it would be more like 20k. It must be so difficult to make the move from amateur to pro
Not at all.
We have the General Data Protection Directive in place, and even before, no employer is allowed to tell somebody about his employes.
Not to mention bank secret.
We have the General Data Protection Directive in place, and even before, no employer is allowed to tell somebody about his employes.
Not to mention bank secret.
Jun 18 2018 at 06:05
Just realised a lot of brokers have already got Negative Balance Protection so why the restrictions on Leverage? My opinion is because the few, the rich and the privileged eg: banks, brokers etc are starting to realise that small traders are starting to wise up and learning stuff that they themselves don't teach or don't know about. Furthermore, only an idiot would trade their life saving or their house!!! I wouldn't trade with more than I can afford to lose, I certainly wouldn't risk everything. That's why for several years I've been learning to trade with an opening balance of £100 and achieve consistency in my trading.
They are simply fixing something that ain't broken.
Jun 18 2018 at 09:46
It is pretty obvious that IT IS NOT about protecting retail traders' (from themselves), because with the same logic the EU should ban ALL online and brick-and-mortar casinos, horse race betting and even lottery.
Since retail traders - as a group - lose more than earn from trading (incl. spreads and commissions), there will be a huge income loss for brokers and tax loss for the EU, while traders will find a way to continue trading with high leverage outside the EU. So the logic - the hidden motive - is still unclear.
Since retail traders - as a group - lose more than earn from trading (incl. spreads and commissions), there will be a huge income loss for brokers and tax loss for the EU, while traders will find a way to continue trading with high leverage outside the EU. So the logic - the hidden motive - is still unclear.
Please click "Vouch" if you liked my post. If not, just put me on your Blocked list. :o)
Unfortunately many people trade with much more than they can afford to lose, they think that with Forex they can become rich , they mortgage their houses, estates and etc... this is illness. .. I personally know such people.... So I think the end purpose of ESMAs restrictions may come to defend the small players
NottsBlade posted:
Just realised a lot of brokers have already got Negative Balance Protection so why the restrictions on Leverage? My opinion is because the few, the rich and the privileged eg: banks, brokers etc are starting to realise that small traders are starting to wise up and learning stuff that they themselves don't teach or don't know about. Furthermore, only an idiot would trade their life saving or their house!!! I wouldn't trade with more than I can afford to lose, I certainly wouldn't risk everything. That's why for several years I've been learning to trade with an opening balance of £100 and achieve consistency in my trading.
Accept the loss as experience
TiffanyK posted:
Unfortunately many people trade with much more than they can afford to lose, they think that with Forex they can become rich , they mortgage their houses, estates and etc... this is illness. .. I personally know such people.... So I think the end purpose of ESMAs restrictions may come to defend the small playersNottsBlade posted:
Just realised a lot of brokers have already got Negative Balance Protection so why the restrictions on Leverage? My opinion is because the few, the rich and the privileged eg: banks, brokers etc are starting to realise that small traders are starting to wise up and learning stuff that they themselves don't teach or don't know about. Furthermore, only an idiot would trade their life saving or their house!!! I wouldn't trade with more than I can afford to lose, I certainly wouldn't risk everything. That's why for several years I've been learning to trade with an opening balance of £100 and achieve consistency in my trading.
Well to be able to trade they will need to deposit much more now compared to high leverage.
Even to trade 1 lot EURUSD you will need 100,000 EUR /30 = 3,333 EUR. Just to cover margin...
And potentially loose it as well
So at the end they will loose more
That is the danger of low leverage.
Jun 20 2018 at 10:19
@TiffanyK
You are right, trading can be a socially more acceptable disguised gambling addiction. A friend of mine has committed suicide due to trading related losses and threats from loan sharks. It was pretty sad. Nevertheless, ESMA regulations will be easily bypassed by traders with addiction problems, i.e. by those who feel the irresistible urge to trade/gamble with funds they cannot afford to lose simply by moving their accounts to ASIC regulated or off-shore brokers. It is simple as that.
So what will the ESMA regulations achieve finally in this regard...? Seriously... My guess is that it is just a symbolic act, so they can ''wash their hands'' as Pontius Pilate did according to the Bible...
You are right, trading can be a socially more acceptable disguised gambling addiction. A friend of mine has committed suicide due to trading related losses and threats from loan sharks. It was pretty sad. Nevertheless, ESMA regulations will be easily bypassed by traders with addiction problems, i.e. by those who feel the irresistible urge to trade/gamble with funds they cannot afford to lose simply by moving their accounts to ASIC regulated or off-shore brokers. It is simple as that.
So what will the ESMA regulations achieve finally in this regard...? Seriously... My guess is that it is just a symbolic act, so they can ''wash their hands'' as Pontius Pilate did according to the Bible...
Please click "Vouch" if you liked my post. If not, just put me on your Blocked list. :o)
