PCA

come on fletch dont be so sad just becasue you did not sell the bounce as i stated/warned in my previous post

so did you buy gold, oil, yen and sell the bounce on all bourses (and go short)? if not, you were ridden harder than a bargirl during the high season

regardless the down trend is still in tact......china (shanghai bourse) will experience a nice haircut this year which will acclerate after the olympics are over and the yen carry will continue to unwind

for those of you who do not understand the impact of Jan 30, 2008 to (global) financial markets stick to savings accounts. for those of you who do, get ready

since this is thaivisa, the SET will soon circle the bowl as the economy will continue to skid and the elections are a mess and no resolution is on the immediate horizon

sell bounces and go short

how sure I was that you gonna show up today and indeed you can be so right but so wrong with your prediction. I wont leave a comment about how fundamentals play into the market and which effect they reasonably might have but what you should not do is telling people to short current levels or the next bounce. We are technically in nowhere land until we see the market closing January wherever they will. Maybe when there is another bounce you can call some trades what and how to sell proving that you put your money where your mouth is.

Actually, this guy is pretty good. Averaged almost 40% returns for each of the past 10 years. Still, the fee seems excessive to me.

paying 25% of profits is quite common for managed futures funds. The problem with those kind of funds is that their real performance is not easy retraceable. They work together with brokers and enjoy commission payments on rt fees per trade and cash in regardless if win or loss while charging you the full lot. So what they get is the management fee plus commissions on trades and - the least important thing for them - 25 % of your profits (if any). 99% of them are suckers and the remaining dont trade with peanuts.

If you think the guy is good then ask him for satisfied customers (he should have plenty when claiming 40% performance a year in average) to get in touch with and find out about reality.

Beyond that after reading some of your posts I doubt that you need any of them though your CL trade is not really apropriate for a small account like the OP intends to start with nor do I think he might want to be confronted with a nice margin call to inject some more quid.

attached is a list of the top 100 hedgefunds 2006. Figures for 2007 are not yet relaeased or at least I dont have the file yet. So people who are considering taking some risk but dont know how to act in the markets on their own might have some choice here. What I would do is waiting for the past years results and then compare how their perfomance differed comparing very different market environment in the past 2 years. Those who perfomed steadily good are worth to be looked at/invested in.

Top100_2006.pdf

Just testing the waters a bit to see how the legal market is in Thailand. Anybody have any insights into pay and types of employment for a foreign trained lawyer? As far as my experience I have a JD/MBA from a tier 1 university in the US and two years in the commercial litigation division of a mid-sized US law firm. However, my only in-country experience is an internship at a bank in BKK during a summer abroad program a few years back in undergrad. Any chance I would have some career prospects in Thailand outside of the dodgy visa application/time share shops?

try here:

http://www.legalthai.com/ourfirm_4.html

Matthew McEvily, nice competent guy and the owner.

One of my best friends and myself are going to compete against each other in 2008 to see which of us can make the most profit out of a £10,000 investment. There are no rules other than any investment must be legal and the loser buys dinner in twelve months time but we are both obliged to share thoughts, tactics and progress in a blog and all progress must be verifiable. We're doing this for fun and to see what we can learn both from each other and from the process.

I'm starting to formulate my strategy for this and will happily share progress with the forum but wonder what strategy you would deploy to maximize a one year investment amount of 10k GBP - the fund can be split into as many individual investments as required?

First I would deduct 100 quid for the dinner . Good luck and happy new year.

฿6,000 - 1 Bedroom Condo Rent

฿1,000 - Electricity/Water Bill

฿6,000 - Food

฿500 - Internet

฿1,500 - Health Insurance (Thai coverage)

฿5,000 - Misc Expenses

Total: ฿20,000 Per month

It's tight, but definitely doable. Long term? To each his own I guess

I would cut off half of the food budget and get one or two bottles Mekhong a day as you might want to have some entertainment while sitting in the box all day. A young body can take that for a few years.

Anyway if you have a roundturn ticket go and find out.

Go down the small soi just N of the ha yaek in Chalong that leads to Jimmys lighthouse. About half way to the bay turn left and go about 60 meters til you see a large shop building ply catamarans. Ask for Gunter.

I can confirm that Guenther is a genious in boat building. In case you dont find him PM me and I can forward you his phone number.

Assuming that this is not concerning most of you here I still want to post this warning letter about Forex Brokers and the new regulations enforced for them to stay in business as well as the possible consequences for their clients/customers in case they are not meeting the necessary requirements.

Forex_Warning.doc

FWIW. this past week has seen a repricing of the future value of the GBP:USD March contract. A week ago the March contract had a premium over present value. Today the contract trades at a discount to present vale

thats always before contract rollover, nothing unusual here.

Are you saying you can short out month currency contracts with impumity during triple witching week?

dont understand your question. What are you talking about? The december contract expired and the march contract is spot now. The rollover occurs during the last few days before expiration of the december contract. They are never trading at the same price and you can play calendarspreads with them though its useless with the same currency.

Here's the chart of the spot price:

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$XBP...&a=57556928

I'm not sure how to do a screen caprure, but the BPH8 is trading 55 ticks lower. It had beeen trading well over a point higher a couple of days ago and not at a discount anytime recently. It suggests a possible trend change, though it may be bottoming ST soon.

what you chart here is the Index and not a futures contract. March is the front month now where the volume is and where the music plays. By the way I am short since last tuesday and hope your colourful trendline doesnt stop the market to plunge to my target at 1.90.

Cheers

FWIW. this past week has seen a repricing of the future value of the GBP:USD March contract. A week ago the March contract had a premium over present value. Today the contract trades at a discount to present vale

thats always before contract rollover, nothing unusual here.

Are you saying you can short out month currency contracts with impumity during triple witching week?

dont understand your question. What are you talking about? The december contract expired and the march contract is spot now. The rollover occurs during the last few days before expiration of the december contract. They are never trading at the same price and you can play calendarspreads with them though its useless with the same currency.

FWIW. this past week has seen a repricing of the future value of the GBP:USD March contract. A week ago the March contract had a premium over present value. Today the contract trades at a discount to present vale

thats always before contract rollover, nothing unusual here.

Richard Colburn is holding a 'wealth management seminar for expats" in CM this week and before i waste time [and $'s], I'd like to hear other's experiences on him and his company. He is a regular contributer for BKKPost, business section.

Please share.......

If this guy is so good at what he does ... How come he still needs a day job ?

Naka.

Anyway if its free and you have time why not giving it a try and listen what they have to say. There is no seminar where you cannot learn something. If they try to push you immediately into their products then you know its a scam and they are just after commissions and if not maybe it offers some interesting stimulations.

I have friends who make a lot of money from day trading, and this is possible if you have the knowledge/ support/ data, but is very high risk.

You also need luck to succeed as a day trader over the long haul.

Interestingly, there's a proliferation of day traders when the market's direction is predictable. And day trading is particularly popular when that direction is generally up. But watch what happens when markets become less predictable--relatively few make money under those conditions.

the current market environment is paradise for daytraders as it wasnt that attractive since years.

sonic,

your avtar says it all really.

Yeah, I should have given up several posts back.....

as you said earlier, we are getting into the realms of financial alchemy here.

I might as well post a recipe for turning lead into gold.

yes little Mod, you are the best.

As I have said elsewhere, I don't hide behind my moderator status, unless forum rules have been broken. I am a big boy, and will take the hits. No need to refer to my mod status. I also like intelligent discussion rather than one liners telling me that I am wrong. I am happy to admit I am wrong, all I want is a proper rebuttal based on informed opinion, to which you have not been able to offer.

So again, how is it possible for a bank to:

a) commit fraud and

B ) get around the onshore/offshore market difference to make a profit.

no fraud, all legal for banks. That you dont know how and why is because you have no insight about banking and the way banks book currency deals. As a customer you have the choice where you want to have the dosh exchanged and accordingly you will get the appropriate rate. If the customer is stupid and decides to get the money changed before it gets transferred he will get the bad rate and the bank will book it accordingly transparent for the customer. Next step is that this transaction is marked into a kind of "virtual stock" if you want to call it so and later or anytime of their choice they will make the real deal on their own behalf and cashing in the profit of the difference.

sonic,

your avtar says it all really.

Yeah, I should have given up several posts back.....

as you said earlier, we are getting into the realms of financial alchemy here.

I might as well post a recipe for turning lead into gold.

yes little Mod, you are the best.

It seems there is no point debating this issue.

PCA is convinced it is a scam (because it fits his victimised worldview) and while many members are methodically trying to explain that it is, in fact, something very different, he replies with a huff: "You believe what you want, I can't be bothered to explain it."

So, there we are. Thaivisa debate at its best.

I did explain it but for people who need a bit longer (or who are more entertained in critizising and provoking than discussing) here is a short summary: With this money transfer there would have been a better rate to get exchanging the ammount to thai baht. The OP didnt get the rate he supposed to so he made a loss. His loss is definitely the profit of someone else and you guess who. Or maybe nobody took it? Where is the money?

Whoops. It seems you still don't get it. The "better rate to get " as you put it, is the onshore rate, and that is only available onshore, that is why it is called the onshore rate; but the exchange took place offshore.

There is no corresponding profit. In fact there isn't really even a loss - the customer percieves that there is a loss because had the exchange taken place onshore s/he would have received the onshore rate and consequently a larger amount of baht. The onshore/offshore rates exist because of restrictions imposed by the BOT on domestic (onshore) institutions dealing with foreign (offshore) institutions - and this applies to banks who have branches in thailand and overseas.

Taking today's rates from bloomberg for A$

the offshore rate is 29.25

the onshore rate is 31.26

Sending 10,000 A$ at the onshore rate will produce 312,600 baht, while the offshore rate produces 292,500 - so the person who utilises the offshore rate "loses" 20,100 baht, but no one has profited by 20,100 baht.

But since you have a different opinion, please do enlighten us about where you think the 20,100 baht has gone in this case..... ?

Are you a banker or a tourist? What did you do in international banking, dont know how banks operate with partner banks in other countries?

Lesson finished.

"Lesson finished" ? Wow, you are such a great teacher. I hope that's not your profession, or I would feel very sorry for your students.

I am now a business consultant - I was formerly a banker (first in London and then in Hong Kong). Before that I was an accountant in London and for some of that time I was auditing banks.

By "partner" banks, I assume you mean correspondent banks ? Or perhaps you mean affiliates, subsidiaries, or branches in other countries ? It's really not clear from anything that you say in your last few posts what you actually mean. However in this case it doesn't really matter. What I can tell you, from first hand experience working in a bank, is that banks in different countries are seperate legal entities and are regulated seperately. Thus, for example, Citibank in Hong Kong (who I have an account with) cannot access the onshore thai baht market even through their branch in bangkok (who I also have an account with). So when I want to send money from HK to BKK I could either convert it into baht at the offshore rate and Citi HK would remit those baht to Citi BKK, or I could remit foreign currency from Citi HK to Citi BKK and have the exchange done at the onshore rate. And by the way, Citibank in bangkok cannot remit thai baht to Citibank Hong Kong because they are prohibited in doing so by the BOT. If they could do it the onshore/offshore market would not exist.

If you really want to teach me something or correct my understanding of how these things work please go ahead but you will need to say what you mean with a little more clarity.

no, I dont want to teach you anything because you are so smart already. Go ahead and dream on along with some others here.

I'll be the first to admit that I do not know everything about banking. So please do go ahead and teach me something.....please ?

gonna be expensive for you.

It seems there is no point debating this issue.

PCA is convinced it is a scam (because it fits his victimised worldview) and while many members are methodically trying to explain that it is, in fact, something very different, he replies with a huff: "You believe what you want, I can't be bothered to explain it."

So, there we are. Thaivisa debate at its best.

I did explain it but for people who need a bit longer (or who are more entertained in critizising and provoking than discussing) here is a short summary: With this money transfer there would have been a better rate to get exchanging the ammount to thai baht. The OP didnt get the rate he supposed to so he made a loss. His loss is definitely the profit of someone else and you guess who. Or maybe nobody took it? Where is the money?

Whoops. It seems you still don't get it. The "better rate to get " as you put it, is the onshore rate, and that is only available onshore, that is why it is called the onshore rate; but the exchange took place offshore.

There is no corresponding profit. In fact there isn't really even a loss - the customer percieves that there is a loss because had the exchange taken place onshore s/he would have received the onshore rate and consequently a larger amount of baht. The onshore/offshore rates exist because of restrictions imposed by the BOT on domestic (onshore) institutions dealing with foreign (offshore) institutions - and this applies to banks who have branches in thailand and overseas.

Taking today's rates from bloomberg for A$

the offshore rate is 29.25

the onshore rate is 31.26

Sending 10,000 A$ at the onshore rate will produce 312,600 baht, while the offshore rate produces 292,500 - so the person who utilises the offshore rate "loses" 20,100 baht, but no one has profited by 20,100 baht.

But since you have a different opinion, please do enlighten us about where you think the 20,100 baht has gone in this case..... ?

Are you a banker or a tourist? What did you do in international banking, dont know how banks operate with partner banks in other countries?

Lesson finished.

"Lesson finished" ? Wow, you are such a great teacher. I hope that's not your profession, or I would feel very sorry for your students.

I am now a business consultant - I was formerly a banker (first in London and then in Hong Kong). Before that I was an accountant in London and for some of that time I was auditing banks.

By "partner" banks, I assume you mean correspondent banks ? Or perhaps you mean affiliates, subsidiaries, or branches in other countries ? It's really not clear from anything that you say in your last few posts what you actually mean. However in this case it doesn't really matter. What I can tell you, from first hand experience working in a bank, is that banks in different countries are seperate legal entities and are regulated seperately. Thus, for example, Citibank in Hong Kong (who I have an account with) cannot access the onshore thai baht market even through their branch in bangkok (who I also have an account with). So when I want to send money from HK to BKK I could either convert it into baht at the offshore rate and Citi HK would remit those baht to Citi BKK, or I could remit foreign currency from Citi HK to Citi BKK and have the exchange done at the onshore rate. And by the way, Citibank in bangkok cannot remit thai baht to Citibank Hong Kong because they are prohibited in doing so by the BOT. If they could do it the onshore/offshore market would not exist.

If you really want to teach me something or correct my understanding of how these things work please go ahead but you will need to say what you mean with a little more clarity.

no, I dont want to teach you anything because you are so smart already. Go ahead and dream on along with some others here.

It seems there is no point debating this issue.

PCA is convinced it is a scam (because it fits his victimised worldview) and while many members are methodically trying to explain that it is, in fact, something very different, he replies with a huff: "You believe what you want, I can't be bothered to explain it."

So, there we are. Thaivisa debate at its best.

I did explain it but for people who need a bit longer (or who are more entertained in critizising and provoking than discussing) here is a short summary: With this money transfer there would have been a better rate to get exchanging the ammount to thai baht. The OP didnt get the rate he supposed to so he made a loss. His loss is definitely the profit of someone else and you guess who. Or maybe nobody took it? Where is the money?

Whoops. It seems you still don't get it. The "better rate to get " as you put it, is the onshore rate, and that is only available onshore, that is why it is called the onshore rate; but the exchange took place offshore.

There is no corresponding profit. In fact there isn't really even a loss - the customer percieves that there is a loss because had the exchange taken place onshore s/he would have received the onshore rate and consequently a larger amount of baht. The onshore/offshore rates exist because of restrictions imposed by the BOT on domestic (onshore) institutions dealing with foreign (offshore) institutions - and this applies to banks who have branches in thailand and overseas.

Taking today's rates from bloomberg for A$

the offshore rate is 29.25

the onshore rate is 31.26

Sending 10,000 A$ at the onshore rate will produce 312,600 baht, while the offshore rate produces 292,500 - so the person who utilises the offshore rate "loses" 20,100 baht, but no one has profited by 20,100 baht.

But since you have a different opinion, please do enlighten us about where you think the 20,100 baht has gone in this case..... ?

Are you a banker or a tourist? What did you do in international banking, dont know how banks operate with partner banks in other countries?

Lesson finished.

It seems there is no point debating this issue.

PCA is convinced it is a scam (because it fits his victimised worldview) and while many members are methodically trying to explain that it is, in fact, something very different, he replies with a huff: "You believe what you want, I can't be bothered to explain it."

So, there we are. Thaivisa debate at its best.

I did explain it but for people who need a bit longer (or who are more entertained in critizising and provoking than discussing) here is a short summary: With this money transfer there would have been a better rate to get exchanging the ammount to thai baht. The OP didnt get the rate he supposed to so he made a loss. His loss is definitely the profit of someone else and you guess who. Or maybe nobody took it? Where is the money?

The bank is not "cashing in" in the sense of profiting from the difference in the onshore/offshore rates - as bendix pointed out. However, one of the reasons that they will do this (make the conversion offshore) unless you specify otherwise is partly because they have some vbery cozy relationships with their correspondent banks (who in some cases are their afiliates) where they give each other 2 way business thereby increasing their fees, and also in the exchange rates that they obtain on your behalf. These are very small sums in comparison to the onshore/offshore rates, but when you consider the volume of business that they do overall, it becomes very large.

you are talking about theory. The Australian bank did not even do the transaction yet (changing back). They can do this anytime later. Its just in their books. And they get the profit what the OP is losing the sooner or the later. The full ammount difference is cashed in by those two banks. Shared or only by the Australian bank.

Anyway believe what you want.

It's not a question of what I believe. I worked in international banking for 10 years so I have some experience of the internal operations of banks. The australian bank took australian dollars from the customer and exchanged them for baht with their counterparty at the offshore rate. That baht was then remitted to the receiving bank in thailand. It's as simple as that. There is no "cashing in" between the onshore/offshore rates.

hmm, I have never worked in a bank but for banks eventually and hold accounts in 11 different countries. And its a matter of what you believe seemingly and not what you know or ever have done. If you are still working in a bank or any other financial institute then ask your manager to ask his manager and they will not give you an answer which is the answer I gave to the OP.

I'm not really sure what that is supposed to mean - can you clarify ? Perhaps I am just being obtuse ?

You seem to be implying that somewhere in the process the australian bank has utilised the onshore rate, but only given the customer the offshore rate, and has somehow kept the difference ? If you think about that for more than just a few seconds you should realise that it is not possible - such financial alchemy is beyond the scope of even the most brilliant minds in banking. The other alternative is that they in fact remitted the funds in baht and lied to the customer, getting the onshore rate but only giving the customer the offshore rate, which would be fraud on the part of the bank - a simple inspection of the telex/wire/cable/swift instruction at each side of the transaction (the receiving bank and also the australian bank) would quickly identify that this is not the case.

In fact I would suggest to the customer to get a copy of the outward telex from the australian bank and the inward telex from the thai bank and all should become very clear.

It seems to me that the fault here lies with the customer - although you can easily view this as being taken advantage of by very opaque banking practices. If more countries had an onshore/offshore rate then I'm sure that this would come to the attention of the relevent regulatory body very quickly and something would be done about it. But the fact is that very few countries have this situation and so it is irrelevant in the majority of cross border funds transfers.

If I were the OP I would accept the bank's offer of a partial refund of the loss/ Frankly I'm surprised that they even offered that.

yeah I believe that you are.

The bank is not "cashing in" in the sense of profiting from the difference in the onshore/offshore rates - as bendix pointed out. However, one of the reasons that they will do this (make the conversion offshore) unless you specify otherwise is partly because they have some vbery cozy relationships with their correspondent banks (who in some cases are their afiliates) where they give each other 2 way business thereby increasing their fees, and also in the exchange rates that they obtain on your behalf. These are very small sums in comparison to the onshore/offshore rates, but when you consider the volume of business that they do overall, it becomes very large.

you are talking about theory. The Australian bank did not even do the transaction yet (changing back). They can do this anytime later. Its just in their books. And they get the profit what the OP is losing the sooner or the later. The full ammount difference is cashed in by those two banks. Shared or only by the Australian bank.

Anyway believe what you want.

It's not a question of what I believe. I worked in international banking for 10 years so I have some experience of the internal operations of banks. The australian bank took australian dollars from the customer and exchanged them for baht with their counterparty at the offshore rate. That baht was then remitted to the receiving bank in thailand. It's as simple as that. There is no "cashing in" between the onshore/offshore rates.

hmm, I have never worked in a bank but for banks eventually and hold accounts in 11 different countries. And its a matter of what you believe seemingly and not what you know or ever have done. If you are still working in a bank or any other financial institute then ask your manager to ask his manager and they will not give you an answer which is the answer I gave to the OP.

The bank is not "cashing in" in the sense of profiting from the difference in the onshore/offshore rates - as bendix pointed out. However, one of the reasons that they will do this (make the conversion offshore) unless you specify otherwise is partly because they have some vbery cozy relationships with their correspondent banks (who in some cases are their afiliates) where they give each other 2 way business thereby increasing their fees, and also in the exchange rates that they obtain on your behalf. These are very small sums in comparison to the onshore/offshore rates, but when you consider the volume of business that they do overall, it becomes very large.

you are talking about theory. The Australian bank did not even do the transaction yet (changing back). They can do this anytime later. Its just in their books. And they get the profit what the OP is losing the sooner or the later. The full ammount difference is cashed in by those two banks. Shared or only by the Australian bank.

Anyway believe what you want.

Maybe I'm missing the point here, but how is the bank profiting by sending the money in Baht? All that's happening is that you aren't profiting.

The bank will buy convert your Australian dollars at whatever Baht rate is applicable in Australia at the time - they don't 'pocket' any difference which may or may not result from the temporary dual rate regime.

Sounds to me like your brother screwed up. I'd be angry with him, not the bank.

There is no material advantage to them of converting, say, $20,000 into Baht in Australia, or sending it to Thailand as dollars. Either way, only $20,000 moves from their coffers.

yeah, you are missing the point. The Australian bank is cashing in the difference.

How do you think the Australian bank does that?

The basic issue is there is an offshore and onshore rate. You get more baht if you change your AUD in Thailand. Why does this difference occur? Because there are various capital controls and restrictions that stop people moving large amounts of mony into/out of the country. If the Aus bank sends AUD then it doesn't need to square it's foreign currency position. If it sends THB (using the offshore rate which is worse) in all likelihood it would have to square its THB position, (or put another way replace the THB it sold). To do this the Aus bank in Aus will have to buy back at the offshore rate in THB. Hence the Aus bank doesn't "cash in".

It would only be able to cash in, if it could sell at offshore rates, and buy at onshore rates. It can't buy at onshore rates in Australia, because by definition Australia is offshore for THB. It also can't do this to any significant degree because of capital controls set by Bank of Thailand.

Back to OP. Sounds like your brother f****d up. Your bank is being very generous.

Agree, bank is not cashing in, apart from getting commission on the deal. If you ask to send THB from Australia, then it is the bank who has to enter the offshore market to purchase baht at the going rate.

very wrong, bank is cashing in. Lazy to argue here.

Maybe I'm missing the point here, but how is the bank profiting by sending the money in Baht? All that's happening is that you aren't profiting.

The bank will buy convert your Australian dollars at whatever Baht rate is applicable in Australia at the time - they don't 'pocket' any difference which may or may not result from the temporary dual rate regime.

Sounds to me like your brother screwed up. I'd be angry with him, not the bank.

There is no material advantage to them of converting, say, $20,000 into Baht in Australia, or sending it to Thailand as dollars. Either way, only $20,000 moves from their coffers.

yeah, you are missing the point. The Australian bank is cashing in the difference.

Try sunbeltasia, though they are based in Bangkok, they sold my Patong hotel within a week of listing.

they have also an office in the Royal City hotel in Phuket Town.