The delusion conceptually propounds that traders operate at a spontaneous FOREX market (as stipulated by B. Williams, A. Elder, E. Nayman, etc.). But it is not the case. Traders do their job inside a well-organized and controlled currency exchange market, governed by the Consortium of the world’s largest banks.

Hence, who is pushing the currencies up and down, who defines trends, corrective actions and flats?

And, who, ultimately, places a trend at a point, where the majority of traders are happy to think they have saddled the wave and are about to win an enormous profit! Now! Not to be scared! Not to close the position! Not to be satisfied with a minor profit! Later on we will discuss that sort of stupidity. Thus, one persists to continue long in spite of more and more degrading profit. Shortly, the loss starts growing with light velocity! Are you familiar with the situation?

Well, who has reversed the rate?

And who generally tugs currency rates?

Tugging is surely centralized. Compare on-line quotes of several Dealers or banks to find out that they are per second coincident. Do each bank’s traders act in such synchronism, that even not seeing each other, they place identical orders so that quotation is in 100% agreement? NOTHING IS A MIRACLE HERE!

But prior to further explanation, we will listen to Bill Williams, the FOREX scholar (Trading Chaos, Ch. 6): “…let us trace a trend formation process. Earlier, the market and the market trading venue did constitute a single physical space. Majority of large grain traders were concentrated on the “floor”. Their orders involved amounts, sufficient to move the market; they enjoyed better control over the market than at present. During the latest 20 years markets have grown worldwide. Now, not only “Purina Ralstone”, “Kellog” and other prominent commercial associations seek hedging their cash assets transactions. So do millions of the world’s minor profiteers and farmers, competing with them in anticipation of perspective grain price fluctuations? This fact also implies strong potential for traders with nowadays, trends not being constructed on the floor. The latter mainly ensures the market liquidity by way of tackling “outer orders”.

The fact, that today’s trends are formed rather “outside the floor” than “on the floor”, as before, enables one to trace further market tendencies with trade volume being the key thereto. Our only on-line information is restricted to tick volume, time and price. Tick volume constitutes a number of price changes per a certain time period. It is not at all a number of traded contracts. Multiple researches revealed no significant difference between actual and tick volume. Using a tick volume, we may suppose, that it represents actual volume. It is a real-time volume, thus being our key to what’s going on in “trading pits”.

Two basic elements are organic to FOREX trading: brokers on the floor and remote traders. Local brokers constitute staff, executing orders, thus earning their salaries and/or commissions. They don’t possess money to be at their disposal. They are order executors. Their prospects are not burdened by prices, they getting for the orders management.

Remote traders use their own money. They have to pay the price out of their own pockets, unless they are getting a good one. Traders have to be much superior in skill to brokers since they independently take their own decisions, while the broker’s job is to follow the others’ orders.

Remote traders are supposed to support the market by way of taking its opposite side. As a rule, they are not at all crazy about any long-term transactions. Quite a few remote traders have been participants to our private training programs, and it is to be admitted that a 10-minute long transaction may seem quite a long-term one for some of them.

Think back to the fact that trends are built up of orders, delivered to the floor from outside, but not of long-term positions entered by remote traders. Since the traders’ job is to take the side opposite to the orders arriving from outside, they have no prospects of trading in between themselves. They follow your money. We are emphasizing again, that tick volume is our key to understanding what’s going on in the Forex Market. Remote traders do not contribute any significant volume to trading, which might result from dealing with similar traders on the floor. Trends emerge from incoming orders. That is why we are to be certain about when and in what amount the outer order is supplied to the floor. It is presented via a tick volume change”.

So, we, traders, turn out to be price locomotives, don’t we? And brokers on the floor just allocate and execute order, incoming from us, don’t they? And on April, 1, 2005 they all (meaning: we all) together decided to swivel the trend and to stay short against all the rules, news and common sense… I wonder if the scholar ashamed or not?

As regards the above quotation, I have chanced to hear a single argument in favor of Bill Williams (I guess you understood for what sake I’ve cited it in detail): it all pertains to the futures markets; we neither read nor use the above at Forex. Strange enough, these are the arguments of Williams’s advocates, but not of Williams himself.

This book is actually intended for both: futures markets and Forex Market. That’s why pictures taken from both the markets are so mixed up and the author never differentiates between the Technical Analysis methods thereof. Thus, either the author does not trace any difference between the two markets, or he is not eager to reveal it to the reader.

And neither in the foreword, nor in the remarks did Williams and his publishers refer to the fact that something of “Trading Chaos” is inapplicable to FOREX, and thus should not be made use of by a trader at FOREX.

I have repeatedly come through this peculiarity of Williams (correct specific case method definition being extended to a wider coordinates scale) and it actually induced me to write this book. In all and all, the methods and advice, absolutely true and correct for a PART of Forex Market are claimed by Williams to be universal for the WHOLE of Forex Market without being demonstrated where the above is effective and where it isn’t.

The same is being done by Williams’s opponents and advocates, who visualize the portion of Forex where his methods are operable only. As different from analysts and Williams’s bibliographers, TRADERS require much stronger to realize a demarcation with pro-Williams trading to the one side thereof and with counter-Williams trading to the other one.

Logically there comes a question: what might be added to Williams’s indicators in order to turn them effective at the point where they are presently ineffective (see details in chapter on the Williams Alligator).

And now we are getting back to the issue of who supplies traders with FOREX rates quotation, bearing in mind that it’s us, traders, who exercise rates movement in accordance with Williams’s standpoint. Millions of traders have actually been studying FOREX by virtue of the “Trading House” and it is really worth studying. This is one of the most interesting and instructive editions whose repeated reading each time brings about something new and useful.

However, in some passages it smells being custom tailored. Is Williams ignorant of the fact that there is no single FOREX exchange and there’s no single trading venue or floor? And that Pacific, Asian, European and American session classification is arbitrary?

Did You see currency rates move, while there’s a day off in the USA with the banks closed? So did I. So, who has made up his mind in the USA to trade on the floor on a day off?
Then, who prompts rates, who formulates trends and turns them with no objective reason for the rate to swivel and to rush in a direction, not being requisite at all?

Here is the answer, as provided by No. 11, 2002 “FOREX Profiteer” magazine’s article by Nadezhda Larina “Electronic Broker Systems at FOREX market”, reading: “… an FOREX dealing “Electronic Broking Service (EBS)” enjoys wide popularity with the extra-exchange inter-bank FOREX market. It has been developed by the Consortium of largest FOREX trading participant banks in association with “Quotron” informatics expert company and launched in 1993. Presently EBS incorporates 13 world’s largest market-maker banks, viz,: BN 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 along with Japanese Minex Corp., established by a Consortium of Japanese Banks in a joint manner with KDD Japanese telecommunications company and Dow Jones Telerate.

EBS offers a completely integrated range of dealing services for the professional inter-bank market, being a leading anonymous inter-bank FOREX trading electronic dealer. It is currently used by over 2500 dealers in 850 world banks and yields a trade turnover of about USD80 billion daily.

See there also: “Three greatest FOREX dealers – Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank, together with Reuters Group PLC) have started Atriax system in June, 2001.The latter terminated the operations in spring, 2002 after having failed to stand the competition.

Can you imagine a monster machine, capable of forcing three world’s largest banks – Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank to abandon their business plans! Or capable of reversing the EURUSD from 1.3660 to 1.1865 and thus instantaneously executing orders of all the world’s traders, going and standing short! And thus within, April-June, 2005, buying the EUR from traders at USD1.36, 1.29, 1.20, 1.19, etc.

Do you see the loss? Watching the EUR slip 1700 pts after having bought it at 1.36… But, possibly, there is no loss at all?

All of Larina’s basic provisions have actually found confirmation 2 years later in the UK “Financial Times” article by Jennifer Hughes: “A PC occupying trading floor” (see it on Financial Times 2004).

It underlines that during the precedent 2 years the Consortiums turnover has grown by extra daily USD20 billion thus currently stretching to USD100 billion, whereas the most prominent internet-based trading platforms ensure the average of USD15-20 billion daily turnover.

So, let’s jump to some conclusions:

1. The FOREX market is not the same as it used to be earlier, say 11 years ago.

2. There is in fact “a price fluctuation relative uniformity”, otherwise, practical quotations similarity with all the world’s brokers and traders.

3. The reason for the above uniformity has been honestly disclosed from technological standpoint, being the “flourish of electronic exchange technologies”.

4. There is no mention of other reasons for similar rates at absolutely different FOREX trading platforms the world over what links together the above platform and FOREX rates at them from financial, organizational, contractual viewpoints, etc).

5. The great interest is the remark from “Financial Times” reiterating the changes at FOREX during the latest years as narrated by an anonymous ex-dealer (?) who compares the FOREX market as of those 11 years ago: “It used to be a hell noisy and a hell splendid!”

In his opinion the market has lost a significant portion of its individuality with rise of technology. A very interesting phrase: “It used to be a hell splendid”. I would add:” It used to be a hell volatile”, with reference to the fact that the daily rates travel went as far 400 to 500 pips. And there’s nothing of the kind now.

6. Now, why has “The Financial Times” only interviewed the EBS Consortium official?

J. Jeffrey and the currency transactions department director, Fabian Shey Why wasn’t it desirous to interview the Reuters representatives (UK)? What’s the reason for such kind of disrespect to the compatriots?

Or were they hard to be contacted in London, where The Financial Times and Reuters HQs are located, moreover after maintaining that presently both, EBS Consortium and Reuters are dominant at the inter-bank market? Or The Financial Times possesses enough information on compatriots from Reuters to hold that the EBS Consortium official’s interview is sufficient without any Reuters?

7. Please, pay attention to the following from The Financial Times: “Anyway, other opinions are available. According to Justin Trenner, the current volume of on-line trading is turnover amounts to USD100 billion daily with the steep growth observed”. The Financial Times thus turns out to recognize its complete inability to trace not only FOREX cash flows, but even the trading volumes at those platforms.

The principal difference between stocks and FOREX is, by the way, readily apparent from the above. Those, writing about similar Fundamental and Technical Analysis methods for both the markets, are either ignorant as to fundamental difference of these markets, or they are deliberately swindling millions of traders.

When pointing out, that, besides the above Banks Consortium, there exist other electronic dealing facilities (e.g. Electronic Broker Service, Reuters Dealing 2000-2, etc.), N. Larina has overlooked their interrelations aspect. And there are a lot of questions: how and why there is coincidence of trends, corrections, historical highs and lows in the course of a single day, etc.

And what is the way to reconcile the statement on shunt operation of EBS and Reuters Dealing facilities with the information that Citibank, J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank together with Reuters Group Plc have failed to stand the competition? Is it attributable to the fact that the Consortium has actually acquired Reuters, maintaining its formal sovereignty in order to support traders’ opinion that FOREX market is free and independent? If affirmative, then it’s fairly clear why the Consortium was not scared to buy the EUR on its dip from 1.36 to 1.1860, since there nothing to be afraid of with one’s knowledge of the point, below which one will not drop the rate as well as the point to stage the EUR rally to in several months with no one to interfere with Your so doing.

Hopefully, it’s now understandable who swivels trends at FOREX! The world’s largest banks Consortium does have power to reverse rates, whenever desirous, overthrowing fundamental laws, news releases, trends and common sense, just the way we witnessed on 01.04.2005 charts. But it’s not at all, traders, as claimed by Williams.

That’s why there is obvious ineffectiveness of the Williams’s Market Facilitation Index (MFI) based on fluctuations of traded volumes; to be more precise, sometimes the indicator tells the truth, whereas sometimes it lies in a barefaced manner.

The reasons are stated above: the banks Consortium pushes rates to where it needs, but not to where traders going into deals, thus accumulating the volumes, indicated on the screen. That’s why traders turn losers when making use of the Williams’s MFI indicator.

Full text of this article and pictures of examples Article

If you wish to be trained on Trading System Masterforex-V – one of new and most effective techniques of trade on Forex in the world visit Masterforex-V Academy

Professional Trader from 2000 year.
President of Masterforex-V Trading Academy.

Author of Books:

1. Trade secrets by a professional trader or what B. Williams, A. Elder and J. Schwager not told about Forex to traders.

2. Technical analyses in Trading System MasterForex-V.

3. Entry and Exit Points at Forex Market

Masterforex-V Trading Academy

Author: Vyacheslav Vasilevich
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Low Cost Prototype PCB Assembly

View full post on Business Stories

Dublin, Ireland, United Kingdom (AHN) – Financially challenged Allied Irish Banks is scheduled to give $50 million (EUR 40 million) bonuses to bank officers despite the company being a possible recipient of another bailout from the Irish government.

The bonuses, amounting to $214,328 (EUR 161,000) for each of 2,400 bankers in the Dublin capital markets division, are part of a court award in 2008. The bonuses are scheduled to be given Dec. 17.

Because of the AIB situation, European banking regulators were scheduled to meet in London Thursday to come up with new rules applicable within the regional bloc on payment of bonuses amid financial crises. The rules propose to defer paying the bonuses over three years and forfeiting the payments if the banks suffer more losses.

AIB is 19 percent owned by taxpayers, but the government share is expected to go up to 95 percent after the Irish central bank required AIB to raise another $6.9 billion (EUR 5.2 billion) by the end of February. The amount will likely come not from the private sector, but from the $113 billion (EUR 85 billion) bailout from the International Monetary Fund and the European Union.

AIB investors, including some of the world’s largest fixed-income pension and insurance funds, are scheduled to meet Friday to discuss a possible lawsuit against the Irish government if the bank will be required to reduce again the value of subordinated debts issued by AIB.

Investors who held Tier 1 and Tier 2 bonds in AIB agreed in June 2009 to trade in these bonds for a new issue of lower Tier 2 debt. The move caused investors to lose 33 to 50 percent of their investments’ face value.

The investors warned that if they were forced to another round of swap, many pension funds, insurers and main fixed-income funds would shirk from Irish paper in the future for a long time.

Subordinated debt investors have filed similar legal cases against the Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide, but with little success.

View full post on All Stories

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (AHN) – Economists agree that the Bank of Canada will likely keep interest rates at its present level until July 2011.

They believe that Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney will wait for developments in the U.S. economy and the eurozone.

The Canadian central bank is expected to release its decision on the key lending rate on Tuesday after the monetary board meeting.

The current key lending rate is still a low 1 percent. The governor kept it at that level due to uncertain economic conditions and a lower-than-expected third quarter growth rate due to weak trade and real estate investments.

The fixed-income markets predict 50-50 odds that the Bank of Canada will increase key lending rates in March and 100 percent chance in April.

According to the C.D. Howe Institute, the central bank should keep benchmark interest rates on Tuesday and on Jan. 18. It also forecast that by July next year the key lending rate should not exceed 1.5 percent.

View full post on All Stories

View full post on All Stories

Tip 1: Read and Understand the Forex Robot

A great deal of the time new forex traders will set up their trading robot and expect magic. It is imperative you understand what the robot can do and learn it’s settings inside out. In many cases the default settings will not be optimal for your trading strategy. Click the links below to find out the best robots.

Tip 2: Get a Solid Internet Connection

Should your internet connection cut-off when running automatically any profitable forex system that you have set-up may be at risk. Your open positions could in some occasions experience substantial loses. It’s a must that you get reliable sever hosting. Click the links below to see the best servers.

Tip 3: Keep Searching for a Profitable Forex System that Works for You

Not all robots meet the claims of it’s inventors. Although setting up a profitable forex strategy does require tinkering to get the optimal settings, some robots just will never be profitable no matter what you do. Research and get a better one.

With these 3 tips you should begin to see an increase in the money you make from forex trading. Always make sure you learn as much as you can when it comes to forex trading.

Click Here to Discover the Most Profitable Forex Systems as voted by Automatic Forex Users.

Click Here Now to Learn More Tips to Boost Your Forex Trading Fast!

View full post on All Stories

View full post on All Stories

Dublin, Ireland, United Kingdom (AHN) – Despite the agreed $105 billion (70 billion pounds) bailout for Ireland, trouble continues to hound Dublin as corporate depositors panicked and withdrew their savings.

The Irish Central Bank admitted Tuesday that major international firms had been withdrawing their deposits from Ireland, which worsened the anxious mood of the market.

The chief investment officer of a major bond manager described Irish banks as bleeding deposits, recalling it was the same phenomenon that happened in Argentina and other emerging economies.

With the bailout, Ireland’s banking sector will be recapitalized, which would place the Allied Irish Banks into state control and the government majority stake in Bank of Ireland. The effect of this would be a mandated increase in capital cushions for the Irish banks from 8 to 12 percent. The move is expected to improve confidence in Ireland’s banking sector and stop the financial hemorrhage.

More than half of the bailout would be used to fund Dublin’s deficit spread over three years, while the remaining balance would be used to recapitalize banks and serve as contingency fund.

Markets are also still shaky that borrowing costs for Portugal and Spain jumped to dangerous levels over fears that European Union leaders are losing political control over the Irish crisis.

On Tuesday, yields on 10-year Portuguese bonds went up to 6.9 percent, which repeats the pattern of what happened to Greece and Ireland before these two nations were capitalized by the EU and the International Monetary Fund.

Spreads on 10-year Spanish bonds also grew to a record of 233 basis points over Bunds, which pushed the yield to 4.87 percent. With this development, Spanish Central Bank Governor Miguel Angel Fernandez Ordonez called on Madrid to fast track fiscal reforms to convince the market that Spain could put its house in order.

View full post on All Stories

Ireland is to be offered an €85bn (£72bn) loan from the IMF and the EU to bail out its banks and fund its public finances.

In a deal expected to include a contribution from the UK taxpayer of up to £10bn, the crippled banking sector is to be recapitalised, effectively taking Allied Irish Banks into state control and giving the government a majority stake in Bank of Ireland.

According to Irish broadcaster RTÉ, the banks will be forced to push up their capital cushions from 8% to 12% in a move that should boost confidence in the banking sector that has been suffering big deposit outflows.

RTÉ said €48bn would be used to fund the government deficit over the next three years, with €15bn-20bn to recapitalise the banks, and an extra contingency fund of €20bn.

The potential bailout of the banking system followed comments by the world’s biggest bond investor, virtually inviting depositors to take their money out of Ireland’s stricken banks.

EU authorities will be hoping the speed with which the deal appears to have been agreed will calm the markets, where there have been fears that Portugal could also need a bailout, and even Spain.

Markets were febrile yesterday, with the euro plunging more than two cents against the dollar and share prices falling heavily in Europe and North America.

Tensions between North and South Korea further strained nerves, while Germany admitted that the future of the euro was at stake through the Irish bailout.

Mohamed El-Erian, chief investment officer of the powerful bond manager Pimco, fuelled anxiety about the health of the banks yesterday by describing Ireland’s banks as “bleeding deposits”.

He said: “What you advise your sister in Ireland now is that you’d say take your money out of an Irish bank and put it in another bank headquartered elsewhere.

“That’s what happened in Argentina and in emerging economies. People worry about their savings.”

Ireland’s central bank had immediately denounced Erian’s remarks by saying there was “no basis for concern” and all deposits were guaranteed by the government. But the central bank’s admission that major international firms had been withdrawing their funds from Ireland highlighted the anxious mood of the markets on the eve of the government’s four-year fiscal plan, which is a crucial component on the deal with the IMF and EU.

Erian, who was interviewed by the Bloomberg news agency, said Ireland needed to conclude those negotiations to restore confidence in the banking system.

“It will seriously undermine the prosperity of this country for a generation. The first thing they must do is execute on what they announced this weekend, which is a big external aid package and steps by the Irish government,” he said.

According to RTÉ, Ireland’s banks will be made considerably smaller and the bad loans will be taken out of the troubled UK arm of AIB in an attempt to allow the operation to be sold off.

Irish bank shares had been hit hard before details of the package leaked and central bank boss Patrick Honohan had invited bidders. “They [the banks] are for sale as far as I am concerned. I have been an advocate for a number of years for small countries to have foreign owners for their banks,” he said. US billionaire Wilbur Ross said he was “very far along” in the process of buying a bank.

Ireland’s woes prompted concerns that the authorities had failed to use the Republic as a firebreak for the crisis which now risks enveloping Portugal and even Spain. The cost of borrowing for both countries rose yesterday. Spain did not manage to raise as much money as it had hoped in its regular bond auction and was forced to pay more to raise the funds.

Jim O’Neill, chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, warned that the Irish rescue package did not solve the problems at the heart of the single currency.

Other market experts were also concerned about the eurozone. Graham Turner of GFC Economics said the solution for weak members might be for Germany to walk away from the single currency.

He suggested that Austria, Finland, the Netherlands and Germany could form a new deutschemark bloc which would allow the other 12 members of the eurozone to devalue and reflate their way out of the crisis. “It has to be a better option than the present straitjacket of a single currency,” said Turner.

In Europe, London’s FTSE 100 index closed 95 points (1.8%) lower at 5581.28 while Germany’s DAX tumbled 1.7% and the CAC-40 in France ended 2.5% lower. Spain’s Ibex closed down 2.8% and Portugal’s PSI 2.1%.

The euro fell to its lowest level in two months of 1.3377 against the dollar.

The German parliament was told of the gravity of the situation by finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble. “Our common currency is at risk,” he said, if Germany did not play its part in bailing out Ireland. Without participation, the “economic and social consequences for our country will be incalculable”. Chancellor Angela Merkel echoed his remarks, saying: “We’re in an extraordinarily serious situation.” Ireland bailout European debt crisis Ireland Euro Currencies Banking European banks Euro European Union Economics Banks and building societies Jill Treanor Larry Elliott guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

View full post on All Stories