Is Binary Options Trading Legal And How Is It Regulated ...

No gods, no kings, only NOPE - or divining the future with options flows. [Part 2: A Random Walk and Price Decoherence]

tl;dr -
1) Stock prices move continuously because different market participants end up having different ideas of the future value of a stock.
2) This difference in valuations is part of the reason we have volatility.
3) IV crush happens as a consequence of future possibilities being extinguished at a binary catalyst like earnings very rapidly, as opposed to the normal slow way.
I promise I'm getting to the good parts, but I'm also writing these as a guidebook which I can use later so people never have to talk to me again.
In this part I'm going to start veering a bit into the speculation territory (e.g. ideas I believe or have investigated, but aren't necessary well known) but I'm going to make sure those sections are properly marked as speculative (and you can feel free to ignore/dismiss them). Marked as [Lily's Speculation].
As some commenters have pointed out in prior posts, I do not have formal training in mathematical finance/finance (my background is computer science, discrete math, and biology), so often times I may use terms that I've invented which have analogous/existing terms (e.g. the law of surprise is actually the first law of asset pricing applied to derivatives under risk neutral measure, but I didn't know that until I read the papers later). If I mention something wrong, please do feel free to either PM me (not chat) or post a comment, and we can discuss/I can correct it! As always, buyer beware.
This is the first section also where you do need to be familiar with the topics I've previously discussed, which I'll add links to shortly (my previous posts:
1) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jck2q6/no_gods_no_kings_only_nope_or_divining_the_future/
2) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jbzzq4/why_options_trading_sucks_or_the_law_of_surprise/
---
A Random Walk Down Bankruptcy
A lot of us have probably seen the term random walk, maybe in the context of A Random Walk Down Wall Street, which seems like a great book I'll add to my list of things to read once I figure out how to control my ADD. It seems obvious, then, what a random walk means - when something is moving, it basically means that the next move is random. So if my stock price is $1 and I can move in $0.01 increments, if the stock price is truly randomly walking, there should be roughly a 50% chance it moves up in the next second (to $1.01) or down (to $0.99).
If you've traded for more than a hot minute, this concept should seem obvious, because especially on the intraday, it usually isn't clear why price moves the way it does (despite what chartists want to believe, and I'm sure a ton of people in the comments will tell me why fettucini lines and Batman doji tell them things). For a simple example, we can look at SPY's chart from Friday, Oct 16, 2020:

https://preview.redd.it/jgg3kup9dpt51.png?width=1368&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf8e08402ccef20832c96203126b60c23277ccc2
I'm sure again 7 different people can tell me 7 different things about why the chart shape looks the way it does, or how if I delve deeply enough into it I can find out which man I'm going to marry in 2024, but to a rationalist it isn't exactly apparent at why SPY's price declined from 349 to ~348.5 at around 12:30 PM, or why it picked up until about 3 PM and then went into precipitous decline (although I do have theories why it declined EOD, but that's for another post).
An extremely clever or bored reader from my previous posts could say, "Is this the price formation you mentioned in the law of surprise post?" and the answer is yes. If we relate it back to the individual buyer or seller, we can explain the concept of a stock price's random walk as such:
Most market participants have an idea of an asset's true value (an idealized concept of what an asset is actually worth), which they can derive using models or possibly enough brain damage. However, an asset's value at any given time is not worth one value (usually*), but a spectrum of possible values, usually representing what the asset should be worth in the future. A naive way we can represent this without delving into to much math (because let's face it, most of us fucking hate math) is:
Current value of an asset = sum over all (future possible value multiplied by the likelihood of that value)
In actuality, most models aren't that simple, but it does generalize to a ton of more complicated models which you need more than 7th grade math to understand (Black-Scholes, DCF, blah blah blah).
While in many cases the first term - future possible value - is well defined (Tesla is worth exactly $420.69 billion in 2021, and maybe we all can agree on that by looking at car sales and Musk tweets), where it gets more interesting is the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring. [In actuality, the price of a stock for instance is way more complicated, because a stock can be sold at any point in the future (versus in my example, just the value in 2021), and needs to account for all values of Tesla at any given point in the future.]
How do we estimate the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring? For this class, it actually doesn't matter, because the key concept is this idea: even with all market participants having the same information, we do anticipate that every participant will have a slightly different view of future likelihoods. Why is that? There's many reasons. Some participants may undervalue risk (aka WSB FD/yolos) and therefore weight probabilities of gaining lots of money much more heavily than going bankrupt. Some participants may have alternative data which improves their understanding of what the future values should be, therefore letting them see opportunity. Some participants might overvalue liquidity, and just want to GTFO and thereby accept a haircut on their asset's value to quickly unload it (especially in markets with low liquidity). Some participants may just be yoloing and not even know what Fastly does before putting their account all in weekly puts (god bless you).
In the end, it doesn't matter either the why, but the what: because of these diverging interpretations, over time, we can expect the price of an asset to drift from the current value even with no new information added. In most cases, the calculations that market participants use (which I will, as a Lily-ism, call the future expected payoff function, or FEPF) ends up being quite similar in aggregate, and this is why asset prices likely tend to move slightly up and down for no reason (or rather, this is one interpretation of why).
At this point, I expect the 20% of you who know what I'm talking about or have a finance background to say, "Oh but blah blah efficient market hypothesis contradicts random walk blah blah blah" and you're correct, but it also legitimately doesn't matter here. In the long run, stock prices are clearly not a random walk, because a stock's value is obviously tied to the company's fundamentals (knock on wood I don't regret saying this in the 2020s). However, intraday, in the absence of new, public information, it becomes a close enough approximation.
Also, some of you might wonder what happens when the future expected payoff function (FEPF) I mentioned before ends up wildly diverging for a stock between participants. This could happen because all of us try to short Nikola because it's quite obviously a joke (so our FEPF for Nikola could, let's say, be 0), while the 20 or so remaining bagholders at NikolaCorporation decide that their FEPF of Nikola is $10,000,000 a share). One of the interesting things which intuitively makes sense, is for nearly all stocks, the amount of divergence among market participants in their FEPF increases substantially as you get farther into the future.
This intuitively makes sense, even if you've already quit trying to understand what I'm saying. It's quite easy to say, if at 12:51 PM SPY is worth 350.21 that likely at 12:52 PM SPY will be worth 350.10 or 350.30 in all likelihood. Obviously there are cases this doesn't hold, but more likely than not, prices tend to follow each other, and don't gap up/down hard intraday. However, what if I asked you - given SPY is worth 350.21 at 12:51 PM today, what will it be worth in 2022?
Many people will then try to half ass some DD about interest rates and Trump fleeing to Ecuador to value SPY at 150, while others will assume bull markets will continue indefinitely and SPY will obviously be 7000 by then. The truth is -- no one actually knows, because if you did, you wouldn't be reading a reddit post on this at 2 AM in your jammies.
In fact, if you could somehow figure out the FEPF of all market participants at any given time, assuming no new information occurs, you should be able to roughly predict the true value of an asset infinitely far into the future (hint: this doesn't exactly hold, but again don't @ me).
Now if you do have a finance background, I expect gears will have clicked for some of you, and you may see strong analogies between the FEPF divergence I mentioned, and a concept we're all at least partially familiar with - volatility.
Volatility and Price Decoherence ("IV Crush")
Volatility, just like the Greeks, isn't exactly a real thing. Most of us have some familiarity with implied volatility on options, mostly when we get IV crushed the first time and realize we just lost $3000 on Tesla calls.
If we assume that the current price should represent the weighted likelihoods of all future prices (the random walk), volatility implies the following two things:
  1. Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the current price
  2. Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the future price for every point in the future where the asset has value (up to expiry for options)
[Ignore this section if you aren't pedantic] There's obviously more complex mathematics, because I'm sure some of you will argue in the comments that IV doesn't go up monotonically as option expiry date goes longer and longer into the future, and you're correct (this is because asset pricing reflects drift rate and other factors, as well as certain assets like the VIX end up having cost of carry).
Volatility in options is interesting as well, because in actuality, it isn't something that can be exactly computed -- it arises as a plug between the idealized value of an option (the modeled price) and the real, market value of an option (the spot price). Additionally, because the makeup of market participants in an asset's market changes over time, and new information also comes in (thereby increasing likelihood of some possibilities and reducing it for others), volatility does not remain constant over time, either.
Conceptually, volatility also is pretty easy to understand. But what about our friend, IV crush? I'm sure some of you have bought options to play events, the most common one being earnings reports, which happen quarterly for every company due to regulations. For the more savvy, you might know of expected move, which is a calculation that uses the volatility (and therefore price) increase of at-the-money options about a month out to calculate how much the options market forecasts the underlying stock price to move as a response to ER.
Binary Catalyst Events and Price Decoherence
Remember what I said about price formation being a gradual, continuous process? In the face of special circumstances, in particularly binary catalyst events - events where the outcome is one of two choices, good (1) or bad (0) - the gradual part gets thrown out the window. Earnings in particular is a common and notable case of a binary event, because the price will go down (assuming the company did not meet the market's expectations) or up (assuming the company exceeded the market's expectations) (it will rarely stay flat, so I'm not going to address that case).
Earnings especially is interesting, because unlike other catalytic events, they're pre-scheduled (so the whole market expects them at a certain date/time) and usually have publicly released pre-estimations (guidance, analyst predictions). This separates them from other binary catalysts (e.g. FSLY dipping 30% on guidance update) because the market has ample time to anticipate the event, and participants therefore have time to speculate and hedge on the event.
In most binary catalyst events, we see rapid fluctuations in price, usually called a gap up or gap down, which is caused by participants rapidly intaking new information and changing their FEPF accordingly. This is for the most part an anticipated adjustment to the FEPF based on the expectation that earnings is a Very Big Deal (TM), and is the reason why volatility and therefore option premiums increase so dramatically before earnings.
What makes earnings so interesting in particular is the dramatic effect it can have on all market participants FEPF, as opposed to let's say a Trump tweet, or more people dying of coronavirus. In lots of cases, especially the FEPF of the short term (3-6 months) rapidly changes in response to updated guidance about a company, causing large portions of the future possibility spectrum to rapidly and spectacularly go to zero. In an instant, your Tesla 10/30 800Cs go from "some value" to "not worth the electrons they're printed on".
[Lily's Speculation] This phenomena, I like to call price decoherence, mostly as an analogy to quantum mechanical processes which produce similar results (the collapse of a wavefunction on observation). Price decoherence occurs at a widespread but minor scale continuously, which we normally call price formation (and explains portions of the random walk derivation explained above), but hits a special limit in the face of binary catalyst events, as in an instant rapid portions of the future expected payoff function are extinguished, versus a more gradual process which occurs over time (as an option nears expiration).
Price decoherence, mathematically, ends up being a more generalizable case of the phenomenon we all love to hate - IV crush. Price decoherence during earnings collapses the future expected payoff function of a ticker, leading large portions of the option chain to be effectively worthless (IV crush). It has interesting implications, especially in the case of hedged option sellers, our dear Market Makers. This is because given the expectation that they maintain delta-gamma neutral, and now many of the options they have written are now worthless and have 0 delta, what do they now have to do?
They have to unwind.
[/Lily's Speculation]
- Lily
submitted by the_lilypad to thecorporation [link] [comments]

The speech that would actually redeem Bernie Sanders and start to heal the damage he has done.

Forgiveness should always be offered to someone who demonstrates that they understand how their actions caused harm, that they are sorry for the harm, and that they are committed to repairing the damage they did as well as not do it again. Bernie has not done any of this. This is the speech he would give if he were truly taking the first step on the road to redemption.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looking back at the last 5 years I realize that I have made some big mistakes and caused a lot of harm to a lot of people. I am here today to ask your forgiveness. Since I was a young man I believed in a vision of America that I sincerely believed would be widely adopted if I could only get the word out. I was arrogant. I assumed that the only explanations for not supporting my vision was ignorance or corruption. There was no room in my worldview for good faith disagreement or working with others. It was my way or the highway. Which is not the American way.
The first people I want to apologize to are my donors. I told you that money wins elections and that if you donated to me I would win. I asked many of you to give not simply from your excess but from your need - promising you that pain endured now to support me would pay off later. And you gave me over half a billion dollars across 2 primaries allowing me to outspend everyone except Bloomberg by tens of millions of dollars. Yes, I outspent Hillary. I was the big money candidate in 2016, not her. I spent twice as much as Joe in 2020. And they both won by popular vote landslides. Money doesn't buy elections. It just gets your message out there. If voters don't like your message then money can't help you.
I refused to accept what this meant in 2016 choosing instead to focus on how much better I had done than I ever had before. I saw myself on an upward trajectory and focused on spreading my message instead of on defeating Donald Trump. In fact, I viewed Donald Trump's election as beneficial to my long term goals. If Hillary won and made things better people would cease feeling the urgency I did. But if Trump won things would get worse and I would be in a position to harness that pain in 2020. I had no idea how much worse things would get. But that is no excuse. The very act of supporting harm to others to advance oneself is disqualifying and self destructive. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "You can't fight hate with hate, only love can do that". He was right. I was wrong.
In the beginning of 2020 I had an option to atone and put progress ahead of my own ego but I didn't take it. I could have stayed out of the race and supported Elizabeth Warren. She is a better candidate than me in many ways. She was a struggling single mother where I was a deadbeat dad - it's true I walked out on my son Levi when he was an infant - something you'd all know if the DNC had been rigging things against me. They weren't. There are many more such skeletons in my political closet that not one single Democrat has attacked me with. But you can bet the GOP would not hold back if I'd been the nominee. Warren is a much better face for the movement than I am. She has won significant victories in passing banking regulations and consumer protections - actually doing things I only talked about. I've been in Washington for 30 years while she has only held office for 7 yet her accomplishments dwarf mine. She is a decade younger and in much better health. She has higher approval ratings and support among constituencies I can't get traction in. Where I have slogans she has plans. But I was drunk on adulation and validation. I wanted the roaring crowds chanting my name like I had in 2016. I wanted the money, the interviews, the attention. So I convinced myself that her sex meant she couldn't win and that I had an obligation to run - to do what I deeply wanted to do anyway. This is nonsense. Hillary Clinton proved in 2016 that a woman can win when she got 3 million more votes than Donald Trump. With my help Warren could have won. With my help Clinton could have won. And I will spend the rest of my life trying to atone for undercutting both of them. Especially Warren who was always my friend and ally but I treated her like an enemy and encouraged my fans to attack her horribly when she got in my way. I'm so very sorry Elizabeth.
The 2020 primary was my wake up call. I expected to do better than I did in 2016 - I expected to win. My name was now nationally known, I had spent 4 years in the public eye ensuring that my message understood by all. I had finally achieved my lifelong dream of being heard. It is why I published a newsletter as a young man, why I had my own weekly television show as Burlington's mayor, why I was blogging regularly when most Senators didn't know what the internet was. It was why I was deeply jealous of Clinton for not only getting higher speaking fees than I did but having a much wider audience than me. It is why in 2016 I spent 29 million dollars on social media manipulation. If you add up every House, Senate, and presidential candidate in American history combined it is less than what I spent drowning out any other voice on reddit, twitter, and facebook. But now that I had been heard I was certain there would be a moment of class consciousness that would elect me in a landslide.
But there wasn't.
In fact not only did I lose, I lost even worse than last time. In 2016 Hillary Clinton got 4 million more votes than I did. In 2020 Joe Biden got 9 million more votes than I did. But - most shocking to me - I got 4 million fewer votes than I did last time. People who supported me in 2016 left me in 2020. How could they have seen the light and then walked away from it? I really struggled with this and understanding it was not easy. Some people noticed that I stopped showing up for work in the Senate for several months while I came to grips with losing a race I had assumed was in the bag. Important votes happened and I wasn't there. My absence made the difference in some of them. Warren, Klobuchar, Harris - they didn't let having their dreams be crushed stop them from doing their job. I did. Yet another way in which I failed to be the person I thought I was. The person I told you I was. They were fighters, showing up every day for you. I wasn't.
Most of the reason my vote total shrank was that in 2016 over a fifth of my voters listed Biden as their first choice. He wasn't running in 2016. He was running in 2020. I was so caught up in my own righteousness that I assumed every vote cast for me was truly for me. They weren't. As soon as a candidate more to their liking showed up they left. Another reason my vote shrank was due to my own behavior. I hired to run my campaign people who saw the world as I did. A simple binary choice between good and evil where I was good and everyone else was evil. Where the world was broken and only I could fix it. Nobody else was good enough. Everyone else was corrupt. They worshipped me and I reveled in it. I treated every other successful candidate as enemies to be destroyed and my staff imitated me creating a uniquely toxic campaign culture that repelled voters. My zero tolerance policy for questioning or criticism blinded us all to impending defeat. Anyone who disagreed, after all, was "low information" or "corrupt" and didn't need to be listened to. But we were the real low information people.
In examining my failures and coming to accept my faults I now understand and accept why so many voters rejected me. I failed the Commander and Chief test not once but many times in these last 5 years. I am never running for President again and wouldn't accept the nomination if it was somehow offered to me. So please, stop wishing for something bad to happen to Biden on my behalf. He is a good man and a great leader who will be a fine president. He may not be going to my destination but he is going in a good direction that will heal this country. Vote for him. And vote in every election, not just Presidential years.
- Imaginary Bernie Sanders
submitted by Mrs_Frisby to Enough_Sanders_Spam [link] [comments]

Petition to abolish the German transgender law and call for reforms that affect people with transgender and intersex backgrounds.

I decided to hand in a petition to the responsible committee of the German Parliament. Please share and support us. Every single signature helps. The main goal is to hit 50K for entering the quorum.
What's it about?
Petition to abolish the German transgender law and call for reforms that affect people with transgender and intersex backgrounds.
Main demands:
1) Self-determination of gender
2) Self-determination of name
3) Nationwide consistent regulations for subsequent changes of certificates (education, training, work, official) - free of charge for people with low income
4) Easier access to hormone replacement therapy and other medical treatment
The transgender law is outdated and the procedure is discriminating, humiliating, lengthy, expensive and dehumanising.
Only the individual can say which gender (male, female, non-binary) they relate to.
It's also necessary to recognise a new first name at the same time.
There's no consistent procedure for subsequent changes of certificates nationwide or even within federal states. This applies to schools, apprenticeship institutions and former employers. This leads to situations where one school can charge over €100 for changes while another school does it for free - within the same federal state. Changes of certificates have to be free of charge for people with low income.
Demanding therapy and assessments previous to medical treatment can cause negative results and damage to the people affected. A one-time assessment to eliminate other underlying conditions that might show similar symptoms can be an alternative to that. Additionally this lowers the very high risk of suicide during the time between coming out and the start of hormone replacement therapy.
How to sign the petition (unfortunately German language only):
-Click on the link
-A pop-up appears with two options on the top. Click on 'Ich bin neu hier' (I'm new here)
-Enter your email
-choose and confirm password (at least 8 characters, 1 capital letter, 1 lowercase letter, 1 symbol or 1 number)
-Check tick boxes 2 & 3 (data protection & terms of use; first one is optional for using a pseudonym in the forum)
-fill in your personal data (mandatory only, marked with *)
-Vorname (first name), Nachname (surname), Straße, Hausnr. (street and number), PLZ (postal code, just use 00000 if not residing in Germany and yours doesn't work), Ort (city), Land (country)
-Click on the button 'Jetzt registrieren'
-You'll receive and email with an activation link. Activate your account by clicking it and log in.
-You might have to use the initial link to the petition again. Once you're logged in and in the overview of the petition, click on the button 'Petition mitzeichnen' (sign petition)
https://epetitionen.bundestag.de/content/petitionen/_2020/_09/_22/Petition_116285.html
Thank you for helping out the entire LGBTI community of Germany!
Feel free to share this post and petition online (other subreddits, Discord, email, etc.)
-MJ
submitted by mj_ireland to lgbt [link] [comments]

HPA FDL-3 "WTFDL-3" | Select Fire | Variable FPS, DPS, pressure

HPA FDL-3
I had a Super Core lying about collecting dust, but I really felt in the mood to build myself a new FDL-3... The problem is that FDL's are flywheelers, and to be honest, I already have 4 of them.. And so what would any self respecting Nerfer do in my position? Mod. And mod I did...

Virtually every part of the FDL has been modified to make this work. Some parts are obvious and quite extensive - such as installing a Super Core and air system where you had a pusher and electronics, and the creation of a matching bottle stock.. But other parts were less so.. Such as changing the position of the magazine within the magwell, adjusting the mag release components to suit, realignment of screw holes and wiring runs.. That sort of thing.. Plus with the massive cantilevered barrel and air bottle, a lot of design has gone into ensuring that the blaster can support it while surviving the crucible of war. Maybe 4 or 5 minor pieces are untouched.

But it's not enough to just chuck in some HPA components - in the spirit of the FDL, it has to be teched out, fully configurable, and per my more recent builds, closed loop. This brings us to the crux of the matter, it has the following features:
  • Narfduino with OLED console
  • Software controlled air pressure (i.e. turn the dial for more or less power)
  • Variable FPS configured separately for Auto and Burst
  • Select fire - Semi-auto, burst, full auto, binary trigger, and ramped (you map the modes you want to the buttons in the config screen) and a range of configuration options for each
  • Dual profile settings
  • Ammo counter with reset on mag change
  • Tournament lock to cap the maximum air pressure
  • Auto jam detection / air out, and battery protection
  • Open-bolt configuration
  • Spectre composite barrel and acetal scar

The closed loop control system allows for the variable air pressure, plus it also monitors the internal pressure to detect the optimum time to fire and vent the core. The regulator is set to about 110 - 120 psi and you get increadibly quick charge times. This helps the system run faster than the magazine follower and you can effectively run whatever DPS you want - with the blaster turning it down as the bottle starts getting close to empty.

So far the maximum I have gotten out of this setup was a shade over 420fps, and the minimum was just under 50fps. It's very stable and reliable in the 200 - 300 range.

Demo video: https://youtu.be/CM311Xk63Wc

Pics:

The blaster
Compared to one of my other FDL-3's
FDL-3 with an air tank
Family photo
Family photo
Family photo
Turned up to '11'
Turned down to 'Jolt'
Pics for mobile: https://imgur.com/a/V4Xp4oH
submitted by airzonesama to Nerf [link] [comments]

ASIC Regulation Thread - Regarding the proposed changes ( Australians effected the most )

I'm hopeless at formatting text, so if you think you can structure this post better take everything i write and put it into an easy to digest way. I'm just going to type out everything i know in text as fast as possible. I'm not a legal expert, I'm not somehow who understands every bit of information in the PDF's below, but i know I'm a retail trader that uses leverage to make profit which is why I'm posting this, in the hope that someone who can run a charge better than me, will.
Some of you are already aware of what might be happening, this is just a post to educate retail traders on changes that might be coming to certain brokers. This effects Australian Customers the most, but also effects those living in other countries that use Australian brokers, such as Pepperstone and others.
Last year in August 2019, ASIC ( Australian Securities and Investments Commission ) was concerned about retail traders going into Forex and Binary options without understanding these instruments properly and started sticking their noses in for tough regulation.
ASIC asked brokers and anyone with interest in the industry to write to them and explain what should and should not change from the changes they proposed, some of the proposed changes are very misguided and come from a lack of understanding exactly how OTC derivatives actually work.
I will provide the link to the paper further down so you can read it yourself and i will provide a link to all the submission made by all parties that sent submissions to ASIC, however the 2 main points of debate are:
1, To reduce the overall leverage available to retail traders to either 20:1 or 30:1. This means people who currently use leverage such as 100:1 to 500:1 and everything in between will be effected the most, even more so are those traders with relatively small accounts, meaning in order to get your foot in the door to trading you will need more capital for it to be viable.
^^ This point above is very important.
2, The removing of Binary options trading, which basically includes products like "Bet if gold will rise to this price in the next 30 seconds" This sort of stuff. So far from all the submissions from brokers and individuals nobody really cares if this changes as far as i know, though if you have concerns about this i would start voicing your disapproval. Though i would not waste your time here, all is pointing to this being eradicated completely with brokers also supporting the changes, I've never used such a product and know very little about them.
^^ This point above isn't very important and will probably be enforced in the future.
Still to this day i see retail traders not understanding leverage, they think of it as "dangerous and scary", it's not, position size is the real danger, not leverage. So ASIC is aiming to limit retail traders access to high leverage, they are claiming it is a way to protect traders who don't really understand what they are getting into by attacking leverage and not the real problem which is position size relative to your capital.
If it was truly about protecting retail traders from blowing up their accounts, they would look for ways to educate traders on "understanding position sizes and why it's important" rather than attacking leverage, but their goal is misguided or has an ulterior motive . I will give you a small example below.
EXAMPLE - We will use 2 demo accounts for demonstration purposes. If you don't understand my example, i suggest you try it for yourself. - Skip if not interested in examples.
Lets say we open 2 demo accounts with $1000 in both, one with 20:1 leverage and one with 500:1 leverage and we open an identical position on both accounts ( say a micro lot '0.01' on EURUSD ). You are safer on the 500:1 account as you don't need to put up as much margin as collateral as you would on the 20:1. If the trade we just opened goes against us and continues against us, the account with 20:1 leverage will run out of free margin a lot faster than the 500:1 account. In this simple example is shows you that leverage is not dangerous but safer and gives you a lot more breathing room. This trade was a small micro lot, so it would take hundreds of pips movements to get margin called and blow up that $1000 on each account. Lets now use a different position size to truly understand why retail traders blow up accounts and is the reason why trading can be dangerous.
This time instead of opening a micro lot of '0.01' on our $1000 dollar demo accounts, lets open a position size much larger, 5 lots. Remember we only have $1000 and we are about to open a position much larger relative to our capital ( which we should never do because we can't afford to do that ) the 20:1 probably wont even let you place that trade if you don't have enough margin as collateral or if you could open the position you would have a very tiny amount of free margin left over, meaning a small pip movement against you will instantly blow up your $1000 account. On the 500:1 account you wouldn't need to put up as much margin as collateral with more free margin if the trade goes bad, but again a small movement could blow up your account. In this example, both accounts were dangerous because the lack of understanding position sizes, opening a position you can't afford to open. This is what the true danger is, not the leverage.
Even in the second example, the higher leverage would "margin call" you out later. So i would go as far to say that lower leverage is more dangerous for you because it margin calls you out faster and just by having a lower leverage doesn't stop you from opening big positions that can blow you up in a 5 pip movement anymore, any leverage size is dangerous if you're opening positions you can't afford to open. This is also taking into consideration that no risk management is being used, with risk management higher leverage is even more powerful.
ASIC believes lowering leverage will stop people opening positions that they can't afford. When the reality is no matter how much capital you have $500, $1000, $5000, $50,000, $500,000, $5,000,000. You don't open position sizes that will blow that capital up completely with small movements. The same thing can happen on a 20:1 or 500:1 account.
Leverage is a tool, use it, if your on a lower leverage already such as 20:1, 30:1 it means your country has been regulated and you already have harder trading conditions. Just remember higher leverage allows you to open larger position sizes in total for the amount of money you own, but the issue is NOT that your using the higher leverage but because you are opening positions you can't afford, for what ever reason that is, the only fix for this is education and will not be fixed by simply lowing leverage, since you can just as easy blow up your account on low leverage just as fast or if not faster.
So what is going on?
There might ( get your tinfoil hats on ) be more that is involved here, deeper than you think, other agendas to try and stop small time retail traders from making money via OTC products, theories such as governments not wanting their citizens to be traders, rather would prefer you to get out there and work a 9 to 5 instead. Effective ways to do this would be making conditions harder with a much larger barrier of entry and the best way to increase the barrier of entry for retail traders is to limit leverage, lower leverage means you need to put up more money, less breathing room for trades, lower potential. They are limiting your upside potential and the downside stays the same, a blown account is a blow account.
Think of leverage as a weapon, a person wielding a butchers knife can probably destroy a person wielding a steak knife, but both knifes can prove fatal. They want to make sure your holding the butter knife then tell you to butcher a cow with it. 30:1 leverage is still workable and can still be profitable, but not as profitable as 500:1 accounts. This is why they are allowing professionals to use high leverage, this gives them another edge over successful retail traders who will still be trying to butcher a cow with a butter knife, while they are slaying limbs off the cow with machetes.
It's a way to hamstring you and keep you away rather than trying to "protect" you. The real danger is not leverage, they are barking up the wrong tree, how convenient to be barking up the very tree most retail traders don't fully understand ( leverage) , pass legislation to make trading conditions harder and at the same time push the narrative that trading is dangerous by making it even harder. A full circle strategy to make your trading conditions worse, so you don't succeed.
Listen carefully especially if you trade with any of the brokers that have provided their submissions to ASIC. Brokers want to seem like they are on your side and so far some of the submissions ( i haven't read them all ) have brokers willing to drop their leverage down to 30:1 because they know by dropping the leverage down it will start margin calling out their clients at a much faster rate, causing more blown up accounts / abandoned accounts with residual margin called funds, but they also know that if they make trading environments too hard less people will trade or even worse move their funds elsewhere offshore to unregulated brokers that offer higher leverage.
Right now it's all just a proposal, but as governments expand and continue to gain more control over it's citizens, it's just a matter of time till it's law, it's up to you to be vocal about it, let your broker know that if they drop their leverage, you're out, force them to fight for you.
If you have any more information related to this, or have anything to add, post below. I'm not an expert at this technical law talk, i know that i do well with 500:1 leverage and turn profits with it, it would be harder for me to do on a lower leverage, this is the reason for my post.
All related documents HERE
CP-322 ( Consultation paper 322 ) & Submissions from brokers and others.
https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-322-product-intervention-otc-binary-options-and-cfds/
submitted by southpaw_destroyer to Forex [link] [comments]

[OWL WATCH] AMA's SUMMARY

Disclaimer: This is my arbitrary summary for myself, so there could be some misunderstandings.
If you want the full picture, I recommend reading the full thread.
But, for a guy who just settles with 'less than perfect' summary, why not sharing my own?


Billy-IF
All the key research questions in coordicide have been answered. The challenges lying are implementing and testing our solution. We are implementing our solution into the Pollen Testnet and typing it up into our research specifications**(the specifications, while not complete, will hopefully be made publicly available soon).**
**After these tasks are done, our solution will go through a rigorous testing phase.**During this time, we will collect performance data, look for attack vectors, and tune the parameters.

domsch
the only way for IOTA and crypto-currencies in general to be adopted is via clear and strong regulatory guidelines and frameworks.
We often have the situation where a company reaches out to us and wants to use the IOTA token, but they are simply not able to due to uncertainties in regards to taxes, accounting, legal and regulatory questions.
The EU is taking a great stance with their new proposal (called MICA) to provide exactly this type of regulatory clarity and guidance we need. So we are very happy about that and see this as a great development for the adoption of IOTA.
We are very active in INATBA (in fact Julie is still on the board), are in the Executive Committee of the Digital Chamber of Commerce (https://digitalchamber.org) and are actively working with other regulatory bodies around the world. I think that especially in 2021, we will be much more pro-active with our outreach and efforts to push for more regulatory guidance (for the IOTA Token, for Tokenization, Smart Contracts, etc.). We are already talking with companies to start case studies around what it means to use the IOTA token - so that will be exciting.

domsch
actual product development, will really help us to convince regulators and lawmakers of what IOTA is intended for and where its potential lies.

DavidSonstebo
We are actively participating in regulatory matters via entities such as INATBA, as well as with local regulators in individual countries to help shape regulations to favor the adoption of crypto.
once the use cases can display real-world value, then deployments will happen regardless.

serguei_popov
"The multiverse" is quite an ingenious and promising idea that has many components. Actually, quite some of those are being incorporated to the Coordicide already now. The most "controversial" part, though, is the pure on-Tangle voting -- Hans thinks it should work fine while I think that it can be attacked

Billy-IF
Several of our modules have been devloped jointly with researchers in academia. For example, our rate control module is being developed jointly with professor Robert Shorten **and his team at Imperial College. Moreover,**our team has published several papers in peer reviewed journals and conference proceedings,
We are also making sure the entire protocol is audited. First, we have a grant given to Professor Mauro Conti specifcally to vet our solution.
you may hear an announcement regarding a similar grant to a second university.Second, eventually will offer bug bounties on our testnet. Lastly, we will hire some firm to audit our software and our protocol.

domsch
I would say that the entire enterprise and also the broader crypto-community is certainly actively following our developments around Coordicide**.**
Once that is removed, and with the introduction of Tokenization and Smart Contracts as Layer 2 solutions, there is no reason not to switch to IOTA.
there are probably even more who will reach out once we've achieved our objective of being production ready.

serguei_popov
Our objective is to have Honey ready within the first half of 2021.
we are very confident that Coordicide will happen in time.

Billy-IF
For Chrysalis, we will implement a deposit system. In order for an address to receive dust (which will be explicitly defined as any output with value less than a certain threshold), that address must already have a minimum balance (either 1 MIota or 1 KIota). The total ordering in conflict white flag makes this solution incredibly easy to implement.
this solution in the Coordicide needs alterations, because of the lack of total ordering.

HusQy_IOTA
Sharding is part of IOTA 3.0 and currently still in research.
there are of course some hard questions that need to be answered but we are pretty confident that these questions can and will be answered.

Billy-IF
**Having these layers helps keep the protocol modular and organized.****Indeed,****it is important to be able to track dependencies between the modules, particularly for standardization purposes.As your question suggests, a key component of standardization is the ability to update the standard(no living protocol is completely static).**Standardization will be accompanied by a versioning system, which tracks backwards compatibility.

Billy-IF
Well, let me try to clear these things up.
-The congestion control mechanisms are indifferent to the types of messages in the tangle. Thus non-value transactions (data messages) will be processed in the same way as value transactions (value messages). Thus, in times of congestion, a node will require mana in order to issue either of them.
-You will not need mana to simply “set up a node” and monitor the tangle.
However, in order to send transactions (or issue any messages) you will need mana in times of congestion.

IF_Dave
**The next big one is next month:**Odyssey Momentum; This is a huge multi-day DLT focussed hackathon with a lot of teams and big companies/governments involved working on solutions for the future. The IOTA Foundation is a Ecosystem member of Odyssey and we will be virtually present during the hackathon to help and guide teams working with IOTA.

Billy-IF
Coordicide will not fail. We are working very carefully to make sure that coordicide is a success, and we will not launch Iota 2.0 until it has gone through the proper testing.

domsch
Everyone internally and also our partners are very confident in the path that we've defined. Failure is not an option for us :)

HusQy_IOTA
We will most probably see a slight delay and see Nectar early 2021 instead.

DavidSonstebo
No, IF is not running out of money, this narrative has been repeated for 3 years now, yet we're still operating. Of course, bear markets impact our theoretical runway, but The IOTA Foundation is hard at work at diversifying revenue streams so that we become less and less dependent on the token holdings.

IF_Dave
We are constantly working on getting more exchanges to list IOTA, we however do not pay for listings
Some exchanges require a standard signature scheme
with the introduction of ed25519 in Chrysalis phase 2 that will be introduced and no longer be a restriction.

HusQy_IOTA
Being feeless is one of the most important aspects here since a new technology usually only gets adopted if it is either better or easier to use than existing solutions.
if it enables new use cases that would be completely impossible with the existing infrastructure. That is the single biggest reason why I think that IOTA will prevail.
An example for such a "new" use case is the Kupcrush use case presented by Terry

domsch
there are so many amazing use cases enabled with IOTA
I would say that****the most specific use cases which gets me really excited is conditional access control based on IOTA payments - in particular for the sharing economy.
IOTA Access + IOTA tokens really enable so many exciting new possibilities.

Billy-IF
In fact, with coordicide research coming to an end, we have already started to look into sharding**.**Indeed, sharding will provide the scalability needed to handle the demands of an IoT enabled world.

Billy-IF
We have designed Iota 2.0 to not have large concentrations of power. Unlike PoS systems, Iota will not be a block chain and thus will not be limited by a leader election process.
in a DAG, people can information in parallel, and so nodes with small amounts of mana can create messages at the same time with large mana holders.

Billy-IF
**In any DLT, "voting" needs a sybil protection system, and thus "voting power" is linked to some scarce resource.****Typically the allocation of any resource follows some sort of Zipf distribution, meaning that some people will have a lot, and others not.**The best we can do is to make sure that the little guys get their fair share of voting power.

HusQy_IOTA
With Chrysalis and coordicide we are finally moving to being production ready which will most probably also lead to a bigger market share as partners will start to use the technology which will increase the demand for tokens.

HusQy_IOTA
Privacy features are currently not being researched and it might be hard to support that on layer1 but privacy features could definitely be implemented as a 2nd layer solution

domsch
We focus on making the base layer of IOTA (namely transactional settlement) as secure and fast as possible. Many of the greater extensions to this core functionality are built on layer 2 (we already have Streams, Access, Identity and now also Smart Contracts)

HusQy_IOTA
There are discussions about increasing the supply to be able to still have micro transactions if the token would i.e. cost a few hundred dollars per MIOTA but we have not made a final decision, yet.

IF_Dave
We think we have a edge over other technology especially when it comes to fee-less transactions allowing a lot of use-cases that would otherwise be impractical or impossible.Adoption is not a given but a useful technology will be utilized with the right functionality,

DavidSonstebo
**why we have such a widespread strategy of driving IOTA, not only its development but in industry, academia, regulatory circles, raising awareness, funding ecosystem efforts etc.**I am confident in the position we are in right now.
There is a clear demand for financial disruption, data security, and automation.
someone has to assemble a killer application that meets the demand; IF is pushing for this with partners

Billy-IF
Our goal is to have at least 1000 TPS.

Billy-IF
Personally, I think our congestion control algorithm is our greatest innovation.
our algorithm can be used in any adversarial setting requiring fairness and consistency. Keep an eye out for a blog post that I am writing about it.

HusQy_IOTA
about proof of inclusion?
I have started implementing a proof of concept locally and the required data structures and payload types are already done but we won't be able to integrate this into goshimmer until we are done with the current refactoring of the code.

Jakub_Cech
**Many of the changes that are part of the Chrysalis would have made it and will make it into Coordicide.**Like the atomic transactions with binary layout. The approach we took was actually opposite - as in, what are the improvements we can already make in the current network without having to wait for Coordicide, and at the same time without disrupting or delaying Coordicide?

Billy-IF
All the key research questions in coordicide have been answered.
in reality, the biggest research challenges are behind us.

Jakub_Cech
When Chrysalis part 2 will be live?
We are still aiming for 2020****as still reflected at roadmap.iota.org. **We want to have a testnet where everyone can test things like the new APIs on, and some initial implementations of specific client libraries****to work with.**This will also allow us to test the node (both Hornet and Bee) implementations more in the wild.
The new wallet will also be tested on that testnet.
The whole testing phase will be a big endeavor, and, at the same time, we will also start auditing many of the implementations,

Billy-IF
We are in contact currently with OMG, and they are advising us on how to draft our specifications in order to ease the standardization process. Coordicide, or Iota 2.0, actually provides us a chance to start off with a clean state, since we are building it from the ground up with standardization in mind.

IF_Dave
The focus at this point is delivering Chrysalis and Coordicide. DeFi could possibly be done with Smart contracts at a given moment but it's not a focus point at this stage.

domsch
about price?
We are quite frankly not worried about that. Knowing everything that we have in the pipeline, our ecosystem and how everything around IOTA will mature over the next few months, I am sure that the entire crypto ecosystem will wake up to IOTA and its potential. **Many participants in the market still have outdated information from 2017 about us, so there is certainly some education to do.**But with Chrysalis and the Coordicide progress, all of that will change.

domsch
At the core of it, the IOTA Foundation is a leader in trust protocols and digital infrastructure.We will always remain a R&D organization at our core, as there is a lot more development we can lead when it comes to make our society and economy more fair, trustless and autonomous.
I certainly see us evolving into a broader think-tank and expert group to advise governments and large corporations on their strategies - in particular around data, identity and IoT.

HusQy_IOTA
barely any cryptocurrency gets used in the real world.
IOTA will soon start to actually be used in real world products and it is likely that this will also have an impact on the price (but I can't really give any details just yet).

domsch
ISCP (IOTA Smart Contract Protocol) is based on cryptographic consensus via BLS threshold signatures. That means a certain pre-defined amount of key holders have to come together to alter the state of the contract****or to send funds around. **If majority of the nodes are offline, the threshold will not be reached and the contract cannot be executed anymore.**There are various ways in how we are looking at this right now on how to make SC recovery and easy transitions possible.
**The beauty of ISCP is that we have a validator set which you can define (can be 3 or it can be 100+), and via an open selection process we can really ensure that the network will be fully decentralized and permissionless.Every smart contract committee (which will be its own network of course) is leveraging the IOTA ledger for security and to make it fully auditable and tamper-proof.**Which means that if a committee acts wrong, we have cryptographic proof of it and can take certain actions.
This makes our approach to smart contracts very elegant, secure and scalable.

Billy-IF
No, we will not standardize Iota 1.5. Yes, we do hope that standardization will help adoption by making it easier for corporates to learn our tech.

serguei_popov
In general, I also have to add that I'm really impressed by the force of our research department, and I think we have the necessary abilities to handle all future challenges that we might be facing.

Billy-IF
In coordicide, i.e. Iota 2.0, yes all nodes have to process all transactions and must receive all data. Our next major project is sharding, i.e. Iota 3.0 which will remove this requirement, and increase scalability.
FPC begins to be vulnerable to attack if the attacker has 30%-40% of the active consensus mana.

HusQy_IOTA
There is no doubt about coordicide working as envisioned.

HusQy_IOTA
When will companies fully implement iota tech?
Soon(TM) :P

Billy-IF
Well first, we are going to make sure that we dont need a plan B :) Second, our plans for the actual deployment are still under discussion. Lastly, we will make sure there is some sort of fail safe, e.g. turning the coordinator back on, or something like that.

Billy-IF
All the key research questions in coordicide have been answered, and each module is designed.

Billy-IF
What will be standardized is the behavior of the modules, particularly their interactions with other nodes and wallets. Implementation details will not be standardized. The standardization will allow anyone to build a node that can run on the IOTA 2.0 network.

DavidSonstebo
Tangle EE has its own Slack (private) and calls, so the lack of activity can probably be explained in that fashion. Coordicide will have an impact on all of IOTA :) There's certainly a lot of entities awaiting it, but most will start building already with Chrysalis v2, since it solves most pain points.

Billy-IF
If there are no conflicts, a message will be confirmed if it receives some approvals. We estimate that this should happen within 10-20 seconds.
To resolve a conflict, FPC will typically take another 4 minutes, according to our simulator. Since conflicts will not affect honest users, most transactions will have very short confirmation times.

Billy-IF
a colored coin supply cannot exceed that of all Iota. You could effectively mint a colored coin supply using a smart contract, although there would be performance downsides. There are no plans to increase the supply. The convergence to binary will not affect the supply nor anyone's balances.

HusQy_IOTA
Both, Radix and Avalanche have some similarities to IOTA:
- Avalanche has a similar voting scheme and also uses a DAG
- Radix uses a sharding approach that is similar to IOTAs "fluid sharding"
I don't really consider them to compete with our vision since both projects still rely on fees to make the network work.
Centralized solution can however never be feeless and being feeless is not just a "nice feature" but absolutely crucial for DLT to succeed in the real world.
Having fees makes things a lot easier and Coordicide would already be "done" if we could just use fees but I really believe that it is worth "going the extra mile" and build a system that is able to be better than existing tech.
submitted by btlkhs to Iota [link] [comments]

Google Play to Ban Binary Options

Google Play set to ban binary options

Google Play recently came out with new updates and policies for April 2018 spanning over a number of topics including hate speech, child endangerment, user produced content, fantasy sports apps, and app metadata. Additionally, included in the April memo was a short note concerning “a new policy on Binary Options”, in which Google play states the following:
“We do not allow apps that provide users with the ability to trade binary options.”
Last summer, after coming under intensive scrutiny from financial ombudsman across the globe, including ASIC of Australia and Canada’s several regional regulators, Google acted against a number of financial-related apps providing either unlicensed services, or apps that were known to promote dishonest behavior. Most of that “action” included removing numerous Binary Options trading apps linked to unlicensed and unregulated “offshore” firms. However, there was never a blanket ban against those types of apps. Regulated brokers providing Binary Options trading could remain on Google Play until now.
Apple, however, passed a complete ban on Binary Options apps at around the same time in its App Store. Last month, after increased pressure from various regulators Google AdWords issued a ban on all Binary Options associated ads, as part of a new controlled financial products procedure. Additionally, Google banned all crypto and ICO ads, and in June 2018 it will demand prior advertiser certification for running ads pertaining to other types of financial trading products including Contracts for Difference (CFDs) and spot forex. It comes as no surprise that Google Play is now taking similar action by instituting a blanket ban on Binary apps.

Is the end of binary options?

It’s becoming increasingly apparent that Binary Options trading – even when regulated – will not be able to make a comeback. Leading European regulator ESMA is additionally preparing a Binary Options ban. This comes as it is in the midst of enacting new laws governing leveraged and online trading. The new regulations are scheduled to come into effect across the EU later this year.
The new Google Play binary options policy for April 2018 can be seen here.

Contact us today

If you have fallen victim to a cryptocurrency scam, send a complaint to at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.
submitted by asaston to u/asaston [link] [comments]

FCA Updates Forex Broker Scam List

FCA Targets More Forex & Binary Brokers

The FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) finally got around to updating its list of unregulated online trading brokers. This list includes both forex and binary options unregulated brokers. Despite the fact, these brokers supposedly offer numerous services they are located in financial havens such as Seychelles, the Marshall Islands or Vanuatu and provide little to no information as to who they really are, and which parent company operates them. So, without further ado let’s introduce these fraudulent companies

SolidCFD

Owned by LOK Marketing Ltd, this forex broker is supposedly located in Vanuatu, a tax haven for any illicit business. Apparently, SolidCFD appears to be forging a path for current forex brokers and others that would like to set up shop in the country, whose major exports are frozen fish and distinct floating edifices. However, upon further inspection, the SolidCFD has two other offices registered on their website.
The first is under the name MGNC Marketing Ltd. and it is located in Cyprus. A quick google search tells us all that we need to know. MGNC Marketing LTD (Solid CFD) cold-calls potential investors and offers them unauthorized or prohibited financial services. An additional address is attributed to an area in West London. However, upon further review, there is no real company located there. Unsurprisingly no company is registered in the UK under SolidCFD, LOK marketing or MGNC Marketing, which implies that the broker has no physical presence in the United Kingdom.
Furthermore, there is a whole list of negative reviews pertaining to SolidCFD. This includes clients being unable to withdraw their funds, aggressive salesmen and not being able to log back into an account once a withdrawal request is made.

StratX Markets

Registered in the Marshal Islands, the company supposedly has an office in North London. However, the address that is provided is used by a company that enables other companies to register their business under their address. This obviously implies that StratX has no workers at its given address.
Just by merely glancing at a few of the reviews tells you that StratX Markets is operated by a bunch of con-artists. In fact what is more alarming, a number of former clients are claiming that StratX personnel are operating a fraudulent fund recovery company called Linrow Clarion Solvency that claims they can recover money that was lost to illegitimate brokers like Stratx Markets.

Options Stars Global

Last but not least this “broker” is registered in Samoa, but apparently has some sort of a branch in Cyprus that is regulated by CySEC. That is patently false.
Additionally, although the website has a U.K. phone number none of their of operations occur in the country. Not only Are there plenty of negative reviews about them, there is a dedicated Facebook page against them
Users of the website report an inability to withdraw funds, threatening salesmen, and pushy brokers who tempt traders into depositing more cash into their accounts. The company has done so badly they even have a Facebook page against them.

Take Action

If you have fallen victim to a cryptocurrency scam, send a complaint to at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.

submitted by asaston to u/asaston [link] [comments]

Wall Street Week Ahead for the trading week beginning June 29th, 2020

Good Saturday afternoon to all of you here on StockMarket. I hope everyone on this sub made out pretty nicely in the market this past week, and is ready for the new trading week ahead.
Here is everything you need to know to get you ready for the trading week beginning June 29th, 2020.

Fragile economic recovery faces first big test with June jobs report in the week ahead - (Source)

The second half of 2020 is nearly here, and now it’s up to the economy to prove that the stock market was right about a sharp comeback in growth.
The first big test will be the June jobs report, out on Thursday instead of its usual Friday release due to the July 4 holiday. According to Refinitiv, economists expect 3 million jobs were created, after May’s surprise gain of 2.5 million payrolls beat forecasts by a whopping 10 million jobs.
“If it’s stronger, it will suggest that the improvement is quicker, and that’s kind of what we saw in May with better retail sales, confidence was coming back a little and auto sales were better,” said Kevin Cummins, chief U.S. economist at NatWest Markets.
The second quarter winds down in the week ahead as investors are hopeful about the recovery but warily eyeing rising cases of Covid-19 in a number of states.
Stocks were lower for the week, as markets reacted to rising cases in Texas, Florida and other states. Investors worry about the threat to the economic rebound as those states move to curb some activities. The S&P 500 is up more than 16% so far for the second quarter, and it is down nearly 7% for the year. Friday’s losses wiped out the last of the index’s June gains.
“I think the stock market is looking beyond the valley. It is expecting a V-shaped economic recovery and a solid 2021 earnings picture,” said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA. He expects large-cap company earnings to be up 30% next year, and small-cap profits to bounce back by 140%.
“I think the second half needs to be a ‘show me’ period, proving that our optimism was justified, and we’ll need to see continued improvement in the economic data, and I think we need to see upward revisions to earnings estimates,” Stovall said.
Liz Ann Sonders, chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab, said she expects the recovery will not be as smooth as some expect, particularly considering the resurgence of virus outbreaks in sunbelt states and California.
“Now as I watch what’s happening I think it’s more likely to be rolling Ws,” rather than a V, she said. “It’s not just predicated on a second wave. I’m not sure we ever exited the first wave.”
Even without actual state shutdowns, the virus could slow economic activity. “That doesn’t mean businesses won’t shut themselves down, or consumers won’t back down more,” she said.

Election ahead

In the second half of the year, the market should turn its attention to the election, but Sonders does not expect much reaction to it until after Labor Day. RealClearPolitics average of polls shows Democrat Joe Biden leading President Donald Trump by 10 percentage points, and the odds of a Democratic sweep have been rising.
Biden has said he would raise corporate taxes, and some strategists say a sweep would be bad for business, due to increased regulation and higher taxes. Trump is expected to continue using tariffs, which unsettles the market, though both candidates are expected to take a tough stance on China.
“If it looks like the Senate stays Republican than there’s less to worry about in terms of policy changes,” Sonders said. “I don’t think it’s ever as binary as some people think.”
Stovall said a quick study shows that in the four presidential election years back to 1960, where the first quarter was negative, and the second quarter positive, stocks made gains in the second half.
Those were 1960 when John Kennedy took office, 1968, when Richard Nixon won; 1980 when Ronald Reagan’s was elected to his first term; and 1992, the first win by Bill Clinton. Coincidentally, in all of those years, the opposing party gained control of the White House.

Stimulus

The stocks market’s strong second-quarter showing came after the Fed and Congress moved quickly to inject the economy with trillions in stimulus. That unlocked credit markets and triggered a stampede by companies to restructure or issue debt. About $2 trillion in fiscal spending was aimed at consumers and businesses, who were in sudden need of cash after the abrupt shutdown of the economy.
Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin both testify before the House Financial Services Committee Tuesday on the response to the virus. That will be important as markets look ahead to another fiscal package from Congress this summer, which is expected to provide aid to states and local governments; extend some enhanced benefits for unemployment, and provide more support for businesses.
“So much of it is still so fluid. There are a bunch of fiscal items that are rolling off. There’s talk about another fiscal stimulus payment like they did last time with a $1,200 check,” said Cummins.
Strategists expect Congress to bicker about the size and content of the stimulus package but ultimately come to an agreement before enhanced unemployment benefits run out at the end of July. Cummins said state budgets begin a new year July 1, and states with a critical need for funds may have to start letting workers go, as they cut expenses.
The Trump administration has indicated the jobs report Thursday could help shape the fiscal package, depending on what it shows. The federal supplement to state unemployment benefits has been $600 a week, but there is opposition to extending that, and strategists expect it to be at least cut in half.
The unemployment rate is expected to fall to 12.2% from 13.3% in May. Cummins said he had expected 7.2 million jobs, well above the consensus, and an unemployment rate of 11.8%.
As of last week, nearly 20 million people were collecting state unemployment benefits, and millions more were collecting under a federal pandemic aid program.
“The magnitude here and whether it’s 3 million or 7 million is kind of hard to handicap to begin with,” Cummins said. Economists have preferred to look at unemployment claims as a better real time read of employment, but they now say those numbers could be impacted by slow reporting or double filing.
“There’s no clarity on how you define the unemployed in the Covid 19 environment,” said Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank. “If there’s 30 million people receiving insurance, unemployment should be above 20%.

This past week saw the following moves in the S&P:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL S&P TREE MAP FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Indices for this past week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR INDICES FOR THE PAST WEEK!)

Major Futures Markets as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE MAJOR FUTURES INDICES AS OF FRIDAY!)

Economic Calendar for the Week Ahead:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ECONOMIC CALENDAR FOR THE WEEK AHEAD!)

Percentage Changes for the Major Indices, WTD, MTD, QTD, YTD as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

S&P Sectors for the Past Week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Major Indices Pullback/Correction Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!

Major Indices Rally Levels as of Friday's close:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Most Anticipated Earnings Releases for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Here are the upcoming IPO's for this week:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Friday's Stock Analyst Upgrades & Downgrades:

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #1!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART LINK #2!)

When Will The Economy Recover?

The economy is moving in the right direction, as many economic data points are coming in substantially better than what the economists expected. From May job gains coming in more than 10 million higher than expected and retail sales soaring a record 18%, how quickly the economy is bouncing back has surprised nearly everyone.
“As good as the recent economic data has been, we want to make it clear, it could still take years for the economy to fully come back,” explained LPL Financial Senior Market Strategist Ryan Detrick. “Think of it like building a house. You get all the big stuff done early, then some of the small things take so much longer to finish; I’m looking at you crown molding.”
Here’s the hard truth; it might take years for all of the jobs that were lost to fully recover. In fact, during the 10 recessions since 1950, it took an average of 30 months for lost jobs to finally come back. As the LPL Chart of the Day shows, recoveries have taken much longer lately. In fact, it took four years for the jobs lost during the tech bubble recession of the early 2000s to come back and more than six years for all the jobs lost to come back after the Great Recession. Given many more jobs were lost during this recession, it could takes many years before all of them indeed come back.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
The economy is going the right direction, and if there is no major second wave outbreak it could surprise to the upside. Importantly, this economic recovery will still be a long and bumpy road.

Nasdaq - Russell Spread Pulling the Rubber Band Tight

The Nasdaq has been outperforming every other US-based equity index over the last year, and nowhere has the disparity been wider than with small caps. The chart below compares the performance of the Nasdaq and Russell 2000 over the last 12 months. While the performance disparity is wide now, through last summer, the two indices were tracking each other nearly step for step. Then last fall, the Nasdaq started to steadily pull ahead before really separating itself in the bounce off the March lows. Just to illustrate how wide the gap between the two indices has become, over the last six months, the Nasdaq is up 11.9% compared to a decline of 15.8% for the Russell 2000. That's wide!
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
In order to put the recent performance disparity between the two indices into perspective, the chart below shows the rolling six-month performance spread between the two indices going back to 1980. With a current spread of 27.7 percentage points, the gap between the two indices hasn't been this wide since the days of the dot-com boom. Back in February 2000, the spread between the two indices widened out to more than 50 percentage points. Not only was that period extreme, but ten months before that extreme reading, the spread also widened out to more than 51 percentage points. The current spread is wide, but with two separate periods in 1999 and 2000 where the performance gap between the two indices was nearly double the current level, that was a period where the Nasdaq REALLY outperformed small caps.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
To illustrate the magnitude of the Nasdaq's outperformance over the Russell 2000 from late 1998 through early 2000, the chart below shows the performance of the two indices beginning in October 1998. From that point right on through March of 2000 when the Nasdaq peaked, the Nasdaq rallied more than 200% compared to the Russell 2000 which was up a relatively meager 64%. In any other environment, a 64% gain in less than a year and a half would be excellent, but when it was under the shadow of the surging Nasdaq, it seemed like a pittance.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Share Price Performance

The US equity market made its most recent peak on June 8th. From the March 23rd low through June 8th, the average stock in the large-cap Russell 1,000 was up more than 65%! Since June 8th, the average stock in the index is down more than 11%. Below we have broken the index into deciles (10 groups of 100 stocks each) based on simple share price as of June 8th. Decile 1 (marked "Highest" in the chart) contains the 10% of stocks with the highest share prices. Decile 10 (marked "Lowest" in the chart) contains the 10% of stocks with the lowest share prices. As shown, the highest priced decile of stocks are down an average of just 4.8% since June 8th, while the lowest priced decile of stocks are down an average of 21.5%. It's pretty remarkable how performance gets weaker and weaker the lower the share price gets.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Nasdaq 2% Pullbacks From Record Highs

It's hard to believe that sentiment can change so fast in the market that one day investors and traders are bidding up stocks to record highs, but then the next day sell them so much that it takes the market down over 2%. That's exactly what happened not only in the last two days but also two weeks ago. While the 5% pullback from a record high back on June 10th took the Nasdaq back below its February high, this time around, the Nasdaq has been able to hold above those February highs.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
In the entire history of the Nasdaq, there have only been 12 periods prior to this week where the Nasdaq closed at an all-time high on one day but dropped more than 2% the next day. Those occurrences are highlighted in the table below along with the index's performance over the following week, month, three months, six months, and one year. We have also highlighted each occurrence that followed a prior one by less than three months in gray. What immediately stands out in the table is how much gray shading there is. In other words, these types of events tend to happen in bunches, and if you count the original occurrence in each of the bunches, the only two occurrences that didn't come within three months of another occurrence (either before or after) were July 1986 and May 2017.
In terms of market performance following prior occurrences, the Nasdaq's average and median returns were generally below average, but there is a pretty big caveat. While the average one-year performance was a gain of 1.0% and a decline of 23.6% on a median basis, the six occurrences that came between December 1999 and March 2000 all essentially cover the same period (which was very bad) and skew the results. Likewise, the three occurrences in the two-month stretch from late November 1998 through January 1999 where the Nasdaq saw strong gains also involves a degree of double-counting. As a result of these performances at either end of the extreme, it's hard to draw any trends from the prior occurrences except to say that they are typically followed by big moves in either direction. The only time the Nasdaq wasn't either 20% higher or lower one year later was in 1986.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Christmas in July: NASDAQ’s Mid-Year Rally

In the mid-1980s the market began to evolve into a tech-driven market and the market’s focus in early summer shifted to the outlook for second quarter earnings of technology companies. Over the last three trading days of June and the first nine trading days in July, NASDAQ typically enjoys a rally. This 12-day run has been up 27 of the past 35 years with an average historical gain of 2.5%. This year the rally may have begun a day early, today and could last until on or around July 14.
After the bursting of the tech bubble in 2000, NASDAQ’s mid-year rally had a spotty track record from 2002 until 2009 with three appearances and five no-shows in those years. However, it has been quite solid over the last ten years, up nine times with a single mild 0.1% loss in 2015. Last year, NASDAQ advanced a solid 4.6% during the 12-day span.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Tech Historically Leads Market Higher Until Q3 of Election Years

As of yesterday’s close DJIA was down 8.8% year-to-date. S&P 500 was down 3.5% and NASDAQ was up 12.1%. Compared to the typical election year, DJIA and S&P 500 are below historical average performance while NASDAQ is above average. However this year has not been a typical election year. Due to the covid-19, the market suffered the damage of the shortest bear market on record and a new bull market all before the first half of the year has come to an end.
In the surrounding Seasonal Patten Charts of DJIA, S&P 500 and NASDAQ, we compare 2020 (as of yesterday’s close) to All Years and Election Years. This year’s performance has been plotted on the right vertical axis in each chart. This year certainly has been unlike any other however some notable observations can be made. For DJIA and S&P 500, January, February and approximately half of March have historically been weak, on average, in election years. This year the bear market ended on March 23. Following those past weak starts, DJIA and S&P 500 historically enjoyed strength lasting into September before experiencing any significant pullback followed by a nice yearend rally. NASDAQ’s election year pattern differs somewhat with six fewer years of data, but it does hint to a possible late Q3 peak.
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)
(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: Stock Market Analysis Video for Week Ending June 26th, 2020

(CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!

STOCK MARKET VIDEO: ShadowTrader Video Weekly 6.28.20

(CLICK HERE FOR THE YOUTUBE VIDEO!)
Here are the most notable companies (tickers) reporting earnings in this upcoming trading week ahead-
  • $MU
  • $GIS
  • $FDX
  • $CAG
  • $STZ
  • $CPRI
  • $XYF
  • $AYI
  • $MEI
  • $UNF
  • $CDMO
  • $SCHN
  • $LNN
  • $CULP
  • $XELA
  • $KFY
  • $RTIX
  • $JRSH
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S MOST NOTABLE EARNINGS RELEASES!)
(CLICK HERE FOR NEXT WEEK'S HIGHEST VOLATILITY EARNINGS RELEASES!)
(CLICK HERE FOR MOST NOTABLE EARNINGS RELEASES FOR THE NEXT 4 WEEKS!)
Below are some of the notable companies coming out with earnings releases this upcoming trading week ahead which includes the date/time of release & consensus estimates courtesy of Earnings Whispers:

Monday 6.29.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NONE.

Monday 6.29.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR MONDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Tuesday 6.30.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Tuesday 6.30.20 After Market Close:

(CLICK HERE FOR TUESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 7.1.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Wednesday 7.1.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR WEDNESDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NONE.

Thursday 7.2.20 Before Market Open:

(CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!)

Thursday 7.2.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR THURSDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NONE.

Friday 7.3.20 Before Market Open:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S PRE-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NONE.

Friday 7.3.20 After Market Close:

([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NONE.

Micron Technology, Inc. $48.49

Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Monday, June 29, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.71 per share on revenue of $5.27 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.70 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 71% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for earnings of $0.40 to $0.70 per share. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 29.00% with revenue increasing by 10.07%. Short interest has increased by 7.6% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 8.0% from its open following the earnings release to be 0.9% below its 200 day moving average of $48.94. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, June 11, 2020 there was some notable buying of 46,037 contracts of the $60.00 call expiring on Friday, July 17, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 4.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.4% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

General Mills, Inc. $59.21

General Mills, Inc. (GIS) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:00 AM ET on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.04 per share on revenue of $4.89 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.10 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 69% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 25.30% with revenue increasing by 17.50%. Short interest has decreased by 9.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.7% from its open following the earnings release to be 7.8% above its 200 day moving average of $54.91. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 there was some notable buying of 8,573 contracts of the $60.00 call expiring on Friday, July 17, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 6.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 3.0% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

FedEx Corp. $130.08

FedEx Corp. (FDX) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Tuesday, June 30, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.42 per share on revenue of $16.31 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.65 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 61% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 71.66% with revenue decreasing by 8.41%. Short interest has increased by 10.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 43.9% from its open following the earnings release to be 7.6% below its 200 day moving average of $140.75. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, June 25, 2020 there was some notable buying of 1,768 contracts of the $145.00 call expiring on Thursday, July 2, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 4.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 7.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Conagra Brands, Inc. $32.64

Conagra Brands, Inc. (CAG) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:30 AM ET on Tuesday, June 30, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.66 per share on revenue of $3.24 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.69 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 66% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 83.33% with revenue increasing by 23.99%. Short interest has decreased by 38.3% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 6.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 6.4% above its 200 day moving average of $30.68. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, June 11, 2020 there was some notable buying of 3,239 contracts of the $29.00 put expiring on Thursday, July 2, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 4.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 10.8% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Constellation Brands, Inc. $168.99

Constellation Brands, Inc. (STZ) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:30 AM ET on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.91 per share on revenue of $1.97 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $2.12 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 53% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 13.57% with revenue decreasing by 13.69%. Short interest has increased by 20.8% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 25.2% from its open following the earnings release to be 5.2% below its 200 day moving average of $178.34. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 there was some notable buying of 888 contracts of the $195.00 call expiring on Friday, October 16, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 3.1% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 5.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Capri Holdings Limited $14.37

Capri Holdings Limited (CPRI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:30 AM ET on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.32 per share on revenue of $1.18 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.34 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 39% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for earnings of $0.68 to $0.73 per share. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 49.21% with revenue decreasing by 12.20%. Short interest has increased by 35.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 56.7% from its open following the earnings release to be 44.0% below its 200 day moving average of $25.67. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, June 4, 2020 there was some notable buying of 11,042 contracts of the $17.50 put expiring on Friday, August 21, 2020. Option traders are pricing in a 10.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.7% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

X Financial $0.92

X Financial (XYF) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 5:00 PM ET on Tuesday, June 30, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.09 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 25% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 55.00% with revenue increasing by 763.52%. Short interest has increased by 1.0% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 1.2% from its open following the earnings release to be 37.7% below its 200 day moving average of $1.47. Overall earnings estimates have been unchanged since the company's last earnings release. The stock has averaged a 4.9% move on earnings in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Acuity Brands, Inc. $84.45

Acuity Brands, Inc. (AYI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:40 AM ET on Tuesday, June 30, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.14 per share on revenue of $809.25 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.09 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 42% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 51.90% with revenue decreasing by 14.60%. Short interest has increased by 48.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 23.4% below its 200 day moving average of $110.25. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 9.2% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.2% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

Methode Electronics, Inc. $30.02

Methode Electronics, Inc. (MEI) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 7:00 AM ET on Tuesday, June 30, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.77 per share on revenue of $211.39 million. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 45% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 24.19% with revenue decreasing by 20.53%. Short interest has increased by 6.2% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 1.7% from its open following the earnings release to be 9.0% below its 200 day moving average of $32.97. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 18.4% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.1% move in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

UniFirst Corporation $170.54

UniFirst Corporation (UNF) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 8:00 AM ET on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.17 per share on revenue of $378.28 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.25 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 44% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 52.44% with revenue decreasing by 16.63%. Short interest has decreased by 2.7% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 14.1% from its open following the earnings release to be 8.4% below its 200 day moving average of $186.14. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. The stock has averaged a 7.0% move on earnings in recent quarters.

(CLICK HERE FOR THE CHART!)

DISCUSS!

What are you all watching for in this upcoming trading week?
I hope you all have a wonderful weekend and a great trading week ahead StockMarket.
submitted by bigbear0083 to StockMarket [link] [comments]

Google Play to Ban Binary Options

Google Play set to ban binary options

Google Play recently came out with new updates and policies for April 2018 spanning over a number of topics including hate speech, child endangerment, user produced content, fantasy sports apps, and app metadata. Additionally, included in the April memo was a short note concerning “a new policy on Binary Options”, in which Google play states the following:
“We do not allow apps that provide users with the ability to trade binary options.”
Last summer, after coming under intensive scrutiny from financial ombudsman across the globe, including ASIC of Australia and Canada’s several regional regulators, Google acted against a number of financial-related apps providing either unlicensed services, or apps that were known to promote dishonest behavior. Most of that “action” included removing numerous Binary Options trading apps linked to unlicensed and unregulated “offshore” firms. However, there was never a blanket ban against those types of apps. Regulated brokers providing Binary Options trading could remain on Google Play until now.
Apple, however, passed a complete ban on Binary Options apps at around the same time in its App Store. Last month, after increased pressure from various regulators Google AdWords issued a ban on all Binary Options associated ads, as part of a new controlled financial products procedure. Additionally, Google banned all crypto and ICO ads, and in June 2018 it will demand prior advertiser certification for running ads pertaining to other types of financial trading products including Contracts for Difference (CFDs) and spot forex. It comes as no surprise that Google Play is now taking similar action by instituting a blanket ban on Binary apps.

Is the end of binary options?

It’s becoming increasingly apparent that Binary Options trading – even when regulated – will not be able to make a comeback. Leading European regulator ESMA is additionally preparing a Binary Options ban. This comes as it is in the midst of enacting new laws governing leveraged and online trading. The new regulations are scheduled to come into effect across the EU later this year.
The new Google Play binary options policy for April 2018 can be seen here.

Contact us today

If you are the victim of an HBC Broker scam be sure to send your complaint to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.
submitted by taifkhan420 to u/taifkhan420 [link] [comments]

Google to Ban Binary Options Ads

Google is ready to ban binary option and cryptocurrency ads

Well, it’s about time, Google is next in line to pose a stiff challenge to the largely fraudulent online trading industry. The world’s largest search engine has just announced that it plans to ban all cryptocurrencies and binary options advertisements, and it is cracking down on ads for various other speculative financial products.

Say goodbye to binary options & cryptocurrency ads

The new rules, which are scheduled to take effect in June, will flat out ban adverts for binary options, cryptocurrencies and all related content (including initial coin offerings, cryptocurrency exchanges, cryptocurrency wallets, and cryptocurrency trading advice. Cryptocurrencies have surged in popularity over the last year thanks to a boom in the price of bitcoin towards the end of fiscal 2017. This coincided with a surge in initial coin offerings (ICOs), where numerous startups have issued their own cryptocurrency in exchange for money to construct their businesses.

Taking Facebook’s lead

Google’s hard-line approach follows a similar ban that Facebook enacted earlier in the year in banning cryptocurrency related advertising on its platform. Scott Spencer, Google’s Director of Sustainable Ads said in a recent blog post that the clampdown is part of Google’s efforts to shield consumers from online trading scams.
However, much of the online trading world is unregulated, which in turn has attracted scammers looking to make quick money. Last year myriads of “pump and dump” filled the market, while this year bogus ICO projects have become routine.

Forex & CFD Crackdown

Google is additionally coming down on ads for contracts for difference (CFD), spread betting, and foreign exchange (forex) instruments on its platform.
These products carry a high level of risk and the entire industry is under increasing regulatory scrutiny across Europe over the past year thanks to severe investment fraud sweeping through the continent. The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued a warning in November that cryptocurrency CFDs are incredibly high-risk, speculative products that risk the investor suffering significant losses. Research conducted by the FCA showed 82% of people who use the products lose money, implying CFDs are more similar to gambling than investing.

Affiliate marketing for online trading takes a hit

Google additionally announced it is banning ads from affiliates and aggregators who traffic leads to online trading brokers. These websites earn a commission for referring new clients to these products that are lightly regulated.
The search giant will require CFD, spread bet, and forex websites to register with it if they want to advertise on its platform and all brokers must be licensed in the country they are looking to advertise in.

Pressure getting to Google

Google’s financial marketing crackdown arises among continued pressure on the search giant, which additionally owns YouTube, regarding the way it runs its advertising procedure. Google has been heavily criticized by the media and politicians for permitting everything from radicalization to binary options trading on its advertising platform due to careless controlling of content and advertising.
Spencer did state in his blog post that Google removed 3.2 billion “bad” ads last year and announced, “Improving the ads experience across the web, whether that’s removing harmful ads or intrusive ads, will continue to be a top priority for us.” We shall see. However, there is a pretty good chance that these fraudulent brokers will just simply change the name of their product in order to get around Google’s ban and deceive an unsuspecting user.

What you can do

If you are the victim of an HBC Broker scam be sure to send your complaint to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]y247.com), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.

submitted by taifkhan420 to u/taifkhan420 [link] [comments]

Survey Results Are In!

Hello comrades! Thanks to everyone who filled out the survey.
I'll break down the survey below for those who want a transcription of it or for those who want a more organized presentation instead of the raw data. Here is a link to the survey results. For comparison, here is the previous survey. Please discuss your thoughts on the survey in the comments, and also continue the conversation started in the old thread about what you want to see for the sub’s future
We had 600 responses to the survey, which given the size of the subscriber base is a statistically significant amount that we can confidently extrapolate from.
Question 1: Age demographics
We are trending younger than the previous survey, with zoomers making a major jump in demographics at the expense of 26-30 and 31-40 year olds. The early 20s seemed to hold relatively consistent. I am unsure if this means the old people are leaving or if more young people are joining. 25% of us are under 17, 29% are 18-21, 21% are 21-25, 14% are 26-30, and the rest are older.
Question 2: Gender Identity
Overall, we are very much dominated by men at 79.5% of the sub. There has been a slight decrease in male identification in favour of women and non-binary. But this is definitely a weakness of the sub. We need to work on ways to be more inclusive of non cis-male voices.
Question 3: How non-white are we
The answer is very mayonnaise at 76% non-PoC. We had an almost 5% drop from a year ago which is great but I think we can do much better.
Question 4: LGBTQ+
This one is much better. We seem to have a strong representation from LGBTQ+ folks which is consistent from last year, and it is good to see the number be pushed up by around 4 points from 32% to 36%.
Question 5: How non-cis are we
Considering around 3% of the population is trans according to GLAAD, we seem to have decent representation on the subreddit at 7.7%.
Question 6: Where do we live
This question is worth looking at on the google form. They all are, but this one particularly so what with all the different possible answers. Suffice it to say, we are very much situated in the imperial core. This is somewhat problematic but to be expected given the overall reddit userbase. This is something that we should definitely try to combat. Since last year it seems the US portion has decreased by around 5 points to favor eastern europe, canada, and some growth outside the imperial core.
Top five regions:
  1. US (52%)
  2. Western Europe and British Isles (tie at 9.8%)
  3. Canada (5.2%)
  4. Northern Europe (3.2%)
Question 7: Living environment
Largely unchanged from last year, socialism is split roughly evenly between city living and suburbia, with a small but important section living in a rural area.
Question 8: English
75% of the sub considers English to be their primary language, which is a slight drop from last year.
The top non-english primary languages are as follows in descending order:
  1. German
  2. Spanish
  3. Swedish
  4. Dutch
  5. Portuguese
  6. Italian
  7. Polish
  8. Romanian
  9. Turkish
  10. Hindi
Question 9: Religion.
We are largely not a religious sub, and the demographics here have largely not changed in the last year.
Top religious beliefs (above 1%) are:
  1. Atheist/non-religious-72%
  2. Spiritual but not religious- 11%
  3. Roman Catholic- 4%
  4. Protestant- 4.2%
  5. Buddhist- 1.8%
  6. Sunni Muslim- 1.7%
  7. Folk/Pagan- 1.5%
  8. Jewish- 1.3%
Honorable mention to the 5 people who wrote in "Materialist" lol, I like you.
Question 10: How long have you been a socialist
We've shifted down to subscribers having less overall experience with socialism, losing from all categories above 3 years and gaining on all the lower choices. This could be from an influx of new people from the election, and hopefully it does not mean we are losing more experienced folks in large numbers. Half of the sub has been a socialist for either a year or 3-5 years, with relatively even responses for the options on either end of the spectrum
Question 11: Education
We seem to be an educated group. Almost 50% of the sub either has a college degree or is actively pursuing one, with 12% of us having gone to college without achieving a degree. 20% are currently in secondary education. 7% have or are chasing a graduate degree, and 6% had their education stop at secondary level.
Question 12: Employment
37% of us are students who are not employed, and 18% of us are students with a job. 25% of us have a full time job, while 7% have a part time job and 7% are unemployed. Smaller amounts are either self-employed or of a non-working population.
Question 13: Relationship to production
Thankfully, 85% of us are either working class or dependents of working class folks. 5% are petite-bourgiosie small business owners or self employed. 3% of us are (hopefully class betraying) capitalists.
Question 14: Living situation
Pretty even split between renting our living situation and living rent free with family/friends. Of the rest, 13% of us have alternate living arrangements such as home ownership or mortgages.
15 and 16: Living conditions
The majority of us are at comfortable or adequate arrangements (around 80%), pointing again to reddit's overall demographic. 20% of us would describe their situation as poor. 41% of us did not have difficulty in in our budgets.
Top things socialism had difficulty affording over the last few months in descending order:
  1. Medical bills
  2. Necessary repairs such as home and auto
  3. Rent/mortgage
  4. Student loans
  5. Transportation
  6. Tendency
Time for the fun stuff. Top labels people use to describe their politics (over 5%) of socialism are in descending order:
  1. Socialist
  2. Marxist
  3. Communist
  4. Democratic Socialist
  5. Libertarian Socialist
  6. Marxist Leninist
  7. Anarchist and/or Anarcho-Communist
  8. Anarcho-Syndicalist
  9. Unsure
  10. Marxist Feminist
  11. Social Democrat
  12. Trotskyist
  13. Market Socialism/Titoist
  14. Leftcom
  15. Marxism-Leninism-Maoist and Communalist (tied)
More people are identifying as a tendency from the last survey, which means more people are reading
Questoin 18: Who are we reading
There were a lot of answers to this one, so I will just list our top ten most widely read or read about comrades
  1. Karl Marx (duh)
  2. Lenin
  3. Freidrich Engels
  4. Malcolm X
  5. Che
  6. Rosa Luxemburg
  7. Fidel Castro
  8. Angela Davis
  9. Leon Trotsky
  10. Pyotr Kropotkin
Overall as a sub I think we definitely need to read more. Its great that we can recognize the big names on that top ten list, but the real proof of how widely read our sub base is is in the smaller names. There are a lot of people on there I hope to see increase next time!
Honorable mentions from the write in list that got more than 2-3 submissions include Richard Wolff, Victor Serge, Daniel DeLeon, Stirner, and Assata Shakur
19: Working with liberals
This question not worded very well or needs to be broken up into a few different questions, as working with liberals can take many forms and is something the next survey will take into consideration. Showing up to a protest organized by a liberal NGO is very different than actively campaigning for a Democrat or other capitalist party. This is a question that will definitely change next time.
Anyhow, a majority of the sub supports working with liberal capitalist organizations; 40% in a limited capacity and 18% are fully on board for it. A strong majority opposes this kind of involvement, 21% saying they are generally opposed to the idea and 14% taking a principled stance against such tactics.
20: Organization
28% of us are actively organized in some way, which is great! But those are rookie numbers, we gotta pump those up. 29% of us are searching for an org in some way, and 28% are not actively looking but plan on doing so sometime in the future. 12% of us have no intentions of organizing.
21: Unions
A disappointingly large 76% of the sub have never been unionized. Given that a quarter of the sub is under 17, that's partially excusable but the rest of us need to get on it!
13% of the sub actively belongs in a union, and 5% have been in one in the past. 8 of us are actively organizing one, good on you!
21: Types of organization
For those that are organized, the most popular methods of organizing on socialism appears to be:
  1. Mainstream labor union (45%)
  2. Big tent parties such as DSA (35%)
  3. Non-party organization (20%)
  4. Explicitly radical labor unions (15%)
  5. Tendency specific revolutionary party (14%)
  6. Internationally affiliated party (10%)
  7. Tenants union (4%)
  8. Problems organizing
By far the largest stumbling block appears to be lack of options in a given geographic area. There's only one way to fix that however, these things don't just spring up out of the ground fully formed!
After that follows more access to information, more free time, too many shitty socialists, too much time spent working, more money, organizations not open enough, and transportation difficulties
  1. Organizational satisfaction:
Overall people seem to run the full spectrum of satisfaction with their organizations. 45% of those organized are happy with what they got, and 55 either see much room for improvement or are not happy with the organizations.
  1. How should socialism be achieved:
Overall we tend to be more revolutionary. Only a quarter of the sub takes a reformist stance which is good. Almost half the sub is open to seizing power through elections if it is possible, same with those who think we should explicitly have a revolution. Doing so using general strikes seems to win support from everyone. Overall, this is an important question that the sub does seem a bit split on.
  1. The struggles of oppressed groups:
This one had great responses. An overwhelming majority (87%) chose the correct response that socialism must fight form all struggles. There were a few different takes on the **wrong** answers, 7% think these struggles should be ignored until after the revolution and 2% actively call these issues divisive. I will politely yet firmly ask both of the latter to leave, or even better get educated.
  1. Free speech:
I seriously need to consider editing or removing this question because I am not sure what it really achieves.
41% of the sub rejects the existence of bourgeois rights in the first place. 43% acknowledge that free speech is a right but does not trust a capitalist state to honestly enforce it. 18% take an absolutist stance on it, and 22% are happy with how speech is currently treated under capitalism.
  1. Immigration:
There is roughly 2/3 split on this, the majority calling for open borders and the minority calling for some sort of loose restrictions but still maintaining freedom of movement.
  1. Planned economies:
Overall, the sub is in favor of planned economies, and are split over the question of more decentralized production for luxury goods or local community needs. Only 8% of the sub is totally against planning. This is a moderate change from the last survey where just over half the sub was for total planning.
  1. The future:
Just under half (48%) of the sub is unsure if they will live to see socialism, and 36% of the sub think they will. This is almost exactly the same as last time.
  1. State of the subreddit:
Most users have a positive time here, with 43% giving us a 4/5. This has also not changed much since the last survey. Hooray!
  1. How often do you use the sub:
We see a full spectrum of use. Fairly evenly split between a once or twice a month, a few times a week, and almost every day.
  1. Sub activity
Only 7% of the sub posts, and 31% comments. Not much to say here other than much more people are commenting now than they were a year ago, which is good for how we are able to engage folks!
  1. No Mods No Masters
I have to say I am seriously dissapointed with the subreddit here. Us mods are more or less unelected self appointed regulators, and 2/3 of the subs of a *socialist* subreddit passed on the opportunity to tell us to take our authority and jump in a lake. For shame smh.
  1. Mod Approval:
There seems to be an overall mandate from the users that we are doing a good job at keeping this a healthy place for socialists to interact with each other. Under 5% think we are doing a poor job.
  1. Modding Liberals:
Largely the same story here, though there is a bit of a jump in dissaproval. Overall the majority of the sub is happy with our stance on liberal politics, and 10% think we are not modding liberals correctly.
  1. US Election and the subreddit:
Sub seems a bit split on this, but overall the mandate appears to be to remove liberal content, emphasize organizing over voting, while not being super aggressive with banning politically center folks. Just over a third (37%) think socdem content should not be removed, but frankly I do not see our policy on supporting capitalist party content changing anytime soon
  1. Reading group:
58% of the sub would be interesting in some form of organized reading circles. Look out for this in the future, we are unsure how this will manifest but something will be decided on. We will probably have a separate thread for organizing this in the future to choose what pieces we should do, but feel free to spitball in the comments for the *form* you would like to see this take.
Cheers,
Mods Team
submitted by comradeMaturin to socialism [link] [comments]

The Sun Rises as Usual: My thoughts on the enactment of the national security law in Hong Kong (Author: Simon Shen 沈旭暉)

The below essay by Simon Shen (沈旭暉), a Hong Kong-based political scientist and columnist.
Link to original essay: Facebook
YouTube channel (Cantonese)
His videos and articles has been on this sub a few times (See https://redd.it/hmttfa https://redd.it/gn5j83), so I thought this one is also worth a read and discuss, whether we agree or not.

The Sun Rises as Usual: My thoughts on the enactment of the national security law in Hong Kong

July 1st, 2020 shall be remembered as the day Hong Kong completed its second Handover to China. A strong sense of despair clouds over the city as Beijing nuked us with the National Security Law (NSL). The thought of losing the authenticity of Hong Kong forever is ingrained in many of us.
The same day, the sun rises in the east as usual.The rule of thumb to survive this era of turmoil is to maintain control of your mental state. Remain unflappable by the ongoing absurdity. You live your life at your own pace with no restrictions. And that is how you win in society, at the workplace, on campus, and in marriage.
As to how we could achieve that, I hope my two-cents would give you some ideas.
The officials expected us to be overwhelmed, terrified, and occupied by NSL. Nevertheless, the clauses of the law have never been the main course of this extravagant meal. What truly awaits for us is the complete makeover of the Hong Kong ruling. Abolishing the standard procedure inherited from British Hong Kong, rationality and logical decision-making are soon replaced by the ambiguity of the authoritarian “rule of law” of China. Hong Kong has lost its place in the globe at the mercy of NSL; that is, to show a lucid message: Beijing could withdraw the “One Country, Two Systems” principle however it sees fit. Moreover, it is the re-education training CCP set up for Hongkongers to make them know their place and accept the “Mainland ideology,” which includes tolerating laws and regulations that are more “lenient” to serve the Chinese political agenda. Placing the national interests in heart, it is farewell to “Rule of Law,” and the common understanding of right and wrong and dos and don’ts.
This is the textbook example of authoritarian ruling. Perhaps people would be seeing some form of democracy and freedom; however, those were merely decoys in which the supreme power vested afar.
23 years after the Handover, pro-Beijing population remains small by default. The young generation rebukes Chinese identity even more than before. The enactment of NSL indicates the failure of CCP’s strategic approaches to entice Hongkongers. If the regular and United Front approaches failed through, they might as well execute eradication instead. It may appear as China is calling for enticement, but the underlying measures/gimmicks are showing something else. The grand Unity of Mainland and Hong Kong is nothing more than a hoax.
In this new Hong Kong, measurements taken to appease public backlash or allow people to express their frustration toward politicians or policies are stored in the past. Furthermore, the Hong Kong government has adopted more extreme approaches—severing Hong Kong into the pro-democracy camp and the pro-Beijing camp; bringing back Cultural Revolution tactics to effectively counteract dissentance; and activating 24/7 monitorization of the population. The propaganda of the CCP regime is to increasingly disintegrate the mutual trust between people by ratting and spying. Building the new norm where the civil society crumbles and espionage is normalized. People with malicious intent may find this new world rather exciting. Without the checks and balances or supervision in the system, the escalating waves of purging the “impure” in the next 2 years are anticipated.
The hostile public opinion of Hong Kong toward Beijing’s decisions have always been a throne in the flesh for the ruling party which led to it prioritizing the disunification of the Hong Kong civil society in the following 2 years—gathering the elites from all professions, alternating the policies of media regulations, reforming education to be more CCP-interests-oriented, and emphasizing the governmental compliance of all departments for effective executions of the new laws. The small population that is most affected by NSL would be those who are in the “Four Black Categories,” including the influencers and KOLs. The two major key points for Hong Kong government’s guidelines are “rule by law” and “always have the national interests at heart.” Regardless of NSL, Public Order Ordinance(POO) per se or any other laws could be used to incriminate the dissidents. Even a world-renowned Chinese artist such as Ai Weiwei was accused of Tax Evasion. Apolitical celebrities with millions of fans and could also be targeted; e.g. Fan Bingbing. Over time, people would adapt to self-censorship. As their minds slowly die of a thousand cuts to circumvent trespassing the political “bottom-line”, it includes avoiding dissenting the propaganda and minimizing exposure that may attract unwanted attention.
Oddly enough, if you were to be a tourist, you probably would not be able to capture the post-NSL nuances of this hollow Hong Kong. You would see all business continue, stock market arises, and the real estate market thrives as usual. It is as if the script written for the second Handover would play out successfully, as long as the basic needs of Hongkongers are satisfied.
Amidst of this turmoil, Hongkongers wouldn’t need me to elaborate more; however, we should ask ourselves if there is something else that we could do. Do you still remember how we were like before all of these occur? What are the options we have aside from obeying to the laws, immigrating out of our homeland, or starting riots? How should we live in the middle of this mess?
From the anti-extradition law protest to the ongoing movement we have today—disregarding the variations in the slogans—we are a part of the global transformation which is beyond politics and may very well be a segment of the fourth industrial revolution. Moving forward from now, with AI replacing brain-power taxing positions, it would be unlikely for anyone to have a stable job and their retirement secured. With that being said, we are facing a tomorrow where people could no longer rely on a singular path for career planning. The younglings are determined and flexible about making chances. They are independent individuals who seek for autonomy in life without relying on governmental entities, pro-establishment units, and consortiums, for their survival which tie into a global trend. The “ultrastable system” of the good old times Hong Kong is in the past. The young generation is calling for “Laam Chau.” (self-destruction to counterbalance Hong Kong government) Acknowledging the fact that enduring injustice would not secure any job positions, the young generation tends to take on entrepreneurship and minimizing their political dependency.
Many friends started talking about immigration. A decade ago, the media were hyping the topic regarding whether or not I would be immigrating to Singapore. I have been repeating myself—the concept of immigration is obsolete. Over the past year, would you say that the overseas Hongkongers contributed more to the movement or the apolitical Hongkongers? Even if we hold multiple citizenships, travel around the world, send our children to study abroad, or hold investments in another country, what would it matter? Any of those would not affect our Hongkonger identity. When online classes are given remotely on Zoom, would it matter if you are in Hong Kong or in Congo? The physical location of Hong Kong shouldn’t tie us down. We should sever ourselves from the idea of leaving or staying and make the world our home. By stitching the virtual world to the real world, we are undefeated by constant change. To me, that is what Hong Kong really is.
All censorship from the authoritarian regime have one in common; that is, the oppressions could never be reasoned with the Common Law. If the pro-democracy anthem, “Glory to Hong Kong,” is prohibited to be sung on campuses, what about the 80’s Cantopop hit, “Boundless Oceans, Vast Skies” or “Blowing in the Wind” which both hint liberation in the lyrics? As the movement slogan, “Five Demands, Not One Less,” was banned, could the protesters express their dissent by raising their hands to point out 5 and 1 or having the number 5 and 1 written over their tops? Does everything related to the number 5 and 1 need to be a politically sensitive topic? Could we still talk about the Labor Day that falls on May 1st? The rebellious ideology is embedded in the mind of Hong Kong protesters, as people have witnessed the incompetence of our government on a daily basis. This movement has been embodying innovation in various ways. No extra commentaries are needed. This is the true essence of “be water.”
Similarly, Poland and the Czech Republic in the 60s were under greater oppression than what we have been seeing in recent Hong Kong; however, “life always finds a way.” We now live in a globalized world where “colluding foreign forces” is unnecessary, with the help of our overseas brothers and sisters to amplify the pro-democracy messages to the international community. We shall acknowledge the fact that dwelling on the past does no one any good for sustaining this movement.
You could be someone who lacks the courage to venture out of the comfort zone, refuses to adapt to having multiple careers, resists leaving the physical location of Hong Kong, fears to put on a yellow helmet (a pro-democracy symbol), and chooses to be enslaved by the ruling party. Even if you are a Blue Ribbon ( pro-established or pro-Beijing person), as long as you are not a part of the most extreme 20% of the deep Blue Ribbon community, I say you are still a very valuable asset to Hong Kong. In this NSL-enacted Hong Kong, you should give it some thoughts about what advantages you hold that the “new Hongkongers” cannot offer. If you cannot answer this question, then no matter how patriotic you are, you will be eliminated in the next wave of selection. “Survival the fittest.” Even in Chinese companies, they still need Hongkongers to do the due diligence for them. In bureaucratic institutions, the Chinese would still need someone with a creative spirit and an international perspective while putting on a nationalist front.
Many have expressed their concerns toward the implementation of “Indoctrination” in Hong Kong, including some of the pro-Beijing parents. By sending their children to non-state-owned schools, their actions speak louder than their words. The new trend of education has confirmed that the traditional classroom model inherited from the 19th century Prussian teaching is outdated. Through big data, the teaching materials are personalized for individuals; moreover, students may build up their unique libraries of knowledge via their personal experience and curiosity. Regretfully, the new Hong Kong under authoritarian ruling embraces a rigid education system where syllabi and marking scheme is key to grooming the next generation of nationalists. The instructors would be under surveillance, school principals would bend to state-interests policies, and households would monitor each other for anti-government speeches or actions. Apparently, CCP would not succeed in brainwashing anyone with these educational reformations. Perhaps, Tik Tok may be more effective. Personalized education is an irreversible global trend. The authoritarian Hong Kong could butcher education but it could not prevent people from adapting to other alternatives. I would like to believe that the younger generations would harness the power of the internet and seize the opportunities given by an international community that has become more amiable to Hong Kong.
NSL’s main target is those who are “in collusion with foreign forces. How ironic is it to see how the strong connections between Hong Kong and the global community came back to bite per se? I recall reading from a research report, stating that on average every 1 out of 3 to 4 Hongkongers have connections overseas—overseas relatives, holding foreign qualifications or degrees, overseas working experience, having international investments, or having work contacts with foreign employees. Hongkongers have been colluding with the foreign forces before NSL made it a crime. The 2020 Hong Kong is suffering from cultural discontinuity created by the conflicts between the Chinese authoritarian system and the Western democracy system. Soon enough, “mass surveillance enabled by Big Data” vs. “A.I. regulated by privacy concerns” could be a multiple choice question for all Hongkongers. As long as Hongkongers are connected to the global network, we shall not lose our resilience against oppression.
To sum it up, Hongkongers have incorporated the world into “the revolution of our time.” March on and be water. The world we are facing is no longer black and white or binary of any sort. We may not reap what we sow. This is a long-term fight that requires us to be resourceful, as well as being mentally and physically prepared.
You may ask if I have ever wanted to leave Hong Kong. Ironically, since my 18th birthday, I have never stayed in Hong Kong for so long. The past 6 months, aside from pandemic, I have been sentimental toward this land. My profession and residences require me to travel a lot of places. I hardly stayed in Hong Kong for long as I made that decision deliberately 10 years ago. Now you may understand where I am coming from. Thus, I would not change for this NSL-enacted Hong Kong. I would not stay to make a statement, nor would I leave this land to make a stance. To my dear friends out there, my piece of advice has been the same—live like a digital nomad and have your footstep stamped locally and globally. No need to start from scratch. You may join a community that is well-established.
Should I self-censor for my safety? I’ve never been an editorial writer. My rationally words and videos are merely personal expressions of a Hongkonger. I honestly can’t get any more cautious. I am the same Simon Shen, now and always. We should not take any form of harassment or attacks personally.
Before the extradition law and the NSL, CCP had been effectively silencing dissents by sending them on one-way trips to Mainland China (i.e. Causeway Bay Books disappearances). The regime needed no bills to aid its attempt of kidnapping those who dare to voice up. Hong Kong has fallen too fast that no one bothers to attack or criticize the kidnaps. There is no such thing as making something less absurd by talking about it more. The systematic oppression of Hong Kong’s civil freedom does not only come from the without but also the within; especially when nowadays all we could talk about is “safety” and “survival.” It is exactly what CCP wanted for us to believe—we are trapped and our lives depends on our compliance. Hongkongers are being tested for our resilience. If we couldn’t pass this challenge together, how could we stand up tall as proud Hongkongers?
As to making ends meet, I’ve always believed that the global Hongkonger network is a large enough of encomany to support, expand, and give back to Hong Kong. We are all at its mercy, including me becoming a KOL. Within the Hongkonger community, I wish to be more practical and strategic; especially, in terms of elevating our quality of living. CCP is extremely calculative and different from us. It is my deepest belief that when the world sees how irreplaceable Hongkongers are that is the day when we can anticipate change. Before then, we will keep a low profile and prepare for this long battle.
Do expect the next two years to be a long rollercoaster ride with plenty of ups and downs. Hongkongers will only thrive through the hardships. Buckle up, winter is coming.
submitted by baylearn to HongKong [link] [comments]

Binary Options Review; Best Binary Options Brokers

Binary Options Review; Best Binary Options Brokers

Binary Options Review; Best Binary Options Brokers
We have compared the best regulated binary options brokers and platforms in May 2020 and created this top list. Every binary options company here has been personally reviewed by us to help you find the best binary options platform for both beginners and experts. The broker comparison list below shows which binary trading sites came out on top based on different criteria.
You can put different trading signals into consideration such as using payout (maximum returns), minimum deposit, bonus offers, or if the operator is regulated or not. You can also read full reviews of each broker, helping you make the best choice. This review is to ensure traders don't lose money in their trading account.
How to Compare Brokers and Platforms
In order to trade binary options, you need to engage the services of a binary options broker that accepts clients from your country e.g. check US trade requirements if you are in the United States. Here at bitcoinbinaryoptionsreview.com, we have provided all the best comparison factors that will help you select which trading broker to open an account with. We have also looked at our most popular or frequently asked questions, and have noted that these are important factors when traders are comparing different brokers:
  1. What is the Minimum Deposit? (These range from $5 or $10 up to $250)
  2. Are they regulated or licensed, and with which regulator?
  3. Can I open a Demo Account?
  4. Is there a signals service, and is it free?
  5. Can I trade on my mobile phone and is there a mobile app?
  6. Is there a Bonus available for new trader accounts? What are the Terms and
  7. conditions?
  8. Who has the best binary trading platform? Do you need high detail charts with technical analysis indicators?
  9. Which broker has the best asset lists? Do they offer forex, cryptocurrency, commodities, indices, and stocks – and how many of each?
  10. Which broker has the largest range of expiry times (30 seconds, 60 seconds, end of the day, long term, etc?)
  11. How much is the minimum trade size or amount?
  12. What types of options are available? (Touch, Ladder, Boundary, Pairs, etc)
  13. Additional Tools – Like Early closure or Metatrader 4 (Mt4) plugin or integration
  14. Do they operate a Robot or offer automated trading software?
  15. What is Customer Service like? Do they offer telephone, email and live chat customer support – and in which countries? Do they list direct contact details?
  16. Who has the best payouts or maximum returns? Check the markets you will trade.
The Regulated Binary Brokers
Regulation and licensing is a key factor when judging the best broker. Unregulated brokers are not always scams, or untrustworthy, but it does mean a trader must do more ‘due diligence’ before trading with them. A regulated broker is the safest option.
Regulators - Leading regulatory bodies include:
  • CySec – The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (Cyprus and the EU)
  • FCA – Financial Conduct Authority (UK)
  • CFTC – Commodity Futures Trading Commission (US)
  • FSB – Financial Services Board (South Africa)
  • ASIC – Australia Securities and Investment Commission
There are other regulators in addition to the above, and in some cases, brokers will be regulated by more than one organization. This is becoming more common in Europe where binary options are coming under increased scrutiny. Reputable, premier brands will have regulation of some sort.
Regulation is there to protect traders, to ensure their money is correctly held and to give them a path to take in the event of a dispute. It should therefore be an important consideration when choosing a trading partner.
Bonuses - Both sign up bonuses and demo accounts are used to attract new clients. Bonuses are often a deposit match, a one-off payment, or risk-free trade. Whatever the form of a bonus, there are terms and conditions that need to be read.
It is worth taking the time to understand those terms before signing up or clicking accept on a bonus offer. If the terms are not to your liking then the bonus loses any attraction and that broker may not be the best choice. Some bonus terms tie in your initial deposit too. It is worth reading T&Cs before agreeing to any bonus, and worth noting that many brokers will give you the option to ‘opt-out’ of taking a bonus.
Using a bonus effectively is harder than it sounds. If considering taking up one of these offers, think about whether, and how, it might affect your trading. One common issue is that turnover requirements within the terms, often cause traders to ‘over-trade’. If the bonus does not suit you, turn it down.
How to Find the Right Broker
But how do you find a good broker? Well, that’s where BitcoinBinaryOptionsReview.com comes in. We assess and evaluate binary options brokers so that traders know exactly what to expect when signing up with them. Our financial experts have more than 20 years of experience in the financial business and have reviewed dozens of brokers.
Being former traders ourselves, we know precisely what you need. That’s why we’ll do our best to provide our readers with the most accurate information. We are one of the leading websites in this area of expertise, with very detailed and thorough analyses of every broker we encounter. You will notice that each aspect of any broker’s offer has a separate article about it, which just goes to show you how seriously we approach each company. This website is your best source of information about binary options brokers and one of your best tools in determining which one of them you want as your link to the binary options market.
Why Use a Binary Options Trading Review?
So, why is all this relevant? As you may already know, it is difficult to fully control things that take place online. There are people who only pose as binary options brokers in order to scam you and disappear with your money. True, most of the brokers we encounter turn out to be legit, but why take unnecessary risks?
Just let us do our job and then check out the results before making any major decisions. All our investigations regarding brokers’ reliability can be seen if you click on our Scam Tab, so give it a go and see how we operate. More detailed scam reports than these are simply impossible to find. However, the most important part of this website can be found if you go to our Brokers Tab.
There you can find extensive analyses of numerous binary options brokers irrespective of your trading strategy. Each company is represented with an all-encompassing review and several other articles dealing with various aspects of their offer. A list containing the very best choices will appear on your screen as you enter our website whose intuitive design will allow you to access all the most important information in real-time.
We will explain minimum deposits, money withdrawals, bonuses, trading platforms, and many more topics down to the smallest detail. Rest assured, this amount of high-quality content dedicated exclusively to trading cannot be found anywhere else. Therefore, visiting us before making any important decisions regarding this type of trading is the best thing to do.
CONCLUSION: Stay ahead of the market, and recover from all kinds of binary options trading loss, including market losses in bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and forex markets too. Send your request via email to - [email protected]
submitted by Babyelijah to u/Babyelijah [link] [comments]

Guide ║ us regulated binary options - YouTube How To Check If Binary Options Company Is Regulated Trend Trading with Regulated 24 Options - Make Money ... Binary Options Brokers Top 5 Regulated with CySec License ... Binary Options in the U.S in 2020! - YouTube Binary Options Brokers Comparison #Us Top Us Regulated ...

That said binary options trading is not as regulated as compared to Forex or other trading types so the restrictions are not as tight as they could be. It is essential though to make sure you trade with a reputable, regulated broker whether USA based or as long as they legally accept US traders. Compare Top Rated Sites. With the recent spotlight on online trading, many US traders now find ... Binary.com is a licensed and regulated trading platform that serves over 1,000,000 customers globally. We hold multiple licenses to comply with regulations around the world. Since 1999, we've served our clients with a constant and unwavering commitment to integrity and reliability. We always hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards, in addition to our regulatory requirements. Deriv ... Here are the regulated binary options brokers that we recommend: 24option: USA traders are not accepted. Licensed and regulated by CySEC, license #207/13. This was one of the first binary options brokers we ever recommended. Trade High/Low, One Touch, Boundary, and Short Term options, and take advantage of a lot of great training resources and ... The US has, if not the most, strict regulations when it comes to binary options which make it quite complex for both traders and brokers. Its financial trading market is regulated by the U.S. CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) and the U.S. SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission). The former is a regulatory body that’s responsible for overseeing financial securities and exchanges of ... US Binary Options Regulation & Licensing – Safety Of Funds. The US is known to have several regulatory agencies and independent authorities for promoting a safe and secure financial market. Companies that deal in high-risk instruments such as Forex, CFD, and binary options trading must be regulated by the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the National Futures Association ... As of date, the US residents face the maximum trouble in finding a binary broker accepting the US clients. The main reason for that is the US law that demands registration of a Forex or binary broker with the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) or the CFTC (Commodities Futures and Trading Commission), as deemed necessary, before accepting the US clients. Well US binary options brokers are regulated and over the years binary regulations are becoming more and more stringent. It is the OCC that has made a point of making these regulations harder and also making sure that binary option sold by brokers have the right securities. Rules regarding trading have now been put in place and traders and brokers are expected to abide by them, if they don’t ... Nadex is the only regulated (CFTC regulated) binary options broker that accepts traders from the US. CFTC stands for Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The broker offers charting and technical analyisis tools, as well as, advanced order types. The minimum deposit is only $250 to open a real money trading account. You have a good variety of banking options. Sign of for a demo account and ... We have compared the best regulated binary options brokers and platforms in November 2020 and created this top list. Every broker and platform has been personally reviewed by us to help you find the best binary options platform for both beginners and experts. The sortable broker comparison list below shows which binary trading sites came out on top based on different criteria. You can sort the ... It is also one of the best us regulated binary options brokers. Raceoption offers up to 90% profit on the stake in payoffs. 3. Binarymate. Binarymate is yet another reputable UK-based binary options trader. It is also under the regulation of the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority). It is also regulated and licensed by CySec. Binarymate is another one of the few binary options brokers that admit ...

[index] [15321] [12903] [16352] [26043] [15723] [25173] [22357] [27511] [10118] [20348]

Guide ║ us regulated binary options - YouTube

Quick, Easy and Profitable Trading? YES! TOP SECRET Formula! Click Here Now! http://tiny.cc/Profit-Autopilot Unique Scalping Technology that WINS! 170+ Pips ... Binary Options Brokers Top 5 Regulated with CySec License Check this amazing opportunity - http://copypasteacademy.com/opportunity Here are the 5 Binary Opti... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue 💰💲FULL BEGINNER? Join My PERSONAL TRAINING!💴💵 BLW Trading Academy: http://www.blwtradingacademy.com/ Live Trading Signals HERE!🔙💲💹Join My ... Best Binary Options Brokers http://2by.us/best 90% Winning System http://buffettbots.com/ Trend Trading with Regulated 24 Options! - Solid Profit! Tre... Hello everyone!:) My name is Anastasia, but it's too hard to pronounce, that's why you may call me just ANA. I'm a pro trader for more than 2 years already a...

http://arab-binary-option.pipenormindperly.cf