I don’t think they ever had it.
Oh wow all going off here
David please… these stocks were added back in November and none of them had the stamp on otcmarkets, yet you guys added them. After that big amount of time you decided to suspend them? Gosh… how?
Sorry please don’t shout at @David it was him specifically that made the decision.
He/T212 needs time to look into what happen and to come back with evidence first. We want to see that they were PSE and no-longer PSE.
I could be completely wrong, or the otcmarkets website could have mistakenly not added the PSE badge when they were PSE.
It’s my fault for writing it as fact, rather than my understanding. They need a chance to prove either way.
When was it removed?
I want to make a few things clear:
Regarding $GAXY, we haven’t questioned the company’s OTC/OTCQB compliance or regulatory status. We referred to its “penny stock exempt” status.
Also, because of the stocks’ popularity, the high number of small orders we send to the markets are seen as a highly unusual activity. This triggers regulatory concerns with liquidity providers and market makers. On some occasions, they automatically stop our trading in the relevant OTC stock, as a precautionary measure. Subsequently it makes impossible for us to execute your orders.
Why were the clients not informed?
Exchanges & market makers rarely provide market participants with prior notices. They must comply with stringent rules without delay. That is why we are unable to provide you with a notice in advance as well. We’re doing our best to find a middle ground in order to secure some trading activity, but please keep in mind that U.S. regulations bind our execution intermediary’s market makers and liquidity providers. They cannot facilitate any type of activity as much as they’d like.
What should we expect?
The current influx of retail traders, modestly facilitated by us, is a completely new phenomenon for the financial markets. Liquidity providers and regulators are still navigating this new environment. We are here to stay and we will always to strive to provide you with the best services available.
Phil it’s not excusable what has happened here.
Negligence more like it on behalf and 212 and its intermediary.
Pure Negligence. Simple as that.
I see now David, appreciate a lot for taking time to write these to us. We’ll see what the final verdict will be. Thank you!
Ps: the only thing that is suspicious is that these stocks were added months ago and none complained about them then and somehow allowed to be tradable.
@stockszen We’ve already covered this - they’re not eligible, hanETF’s directors themselves confirmed that. Instead of building a “case”, emailing the said companies for a confirmation would probably take no more than a few minutes.
We won’t tolerate the spread of misinformation, consider this a last warning.
What will the final verdict be.
Obviously they can’t have a listed PSE stock while it’s not a PSE.
Confusion creates animosity here.
It will be either delist the stocks from platform or freeze them until they become PSE
David I don’t appreciate the threat towards me as valued community member here because I’m sharing my opinion on a public forum thank you.
What will happen to my investment?
How should i know? @David knows that detail
What i can do if you choose to delist this stocks ?? You can transfer my positions to other platform ?
@David For the love of sport could you please add “ MWXRF “ ? Its a PSE stock i would like to move my $ from GAXY here. Thank you sir
With BTCE that should really be discussed in the BTCE thread. But you can’t force a platform to provide access to a particular stock.
So even though UK retail legally can’t buy the stock anymore, T212 don’t have a legal obligation to continue to provide it to non UK customers. I don’t know what lawyer, or legal team, would take that case.
I have already mentioned listing a non PSE stock is not an issue. They could start adding non PSE stocks, its just that they either choose not to, or are forced by IB actions.
T212 can add or remove instruments as much as they want, obviously if they do it when it isn’t warranted all they do is piss off their customers. By piggybacking they have to accept the flak when IB removes access, because their customers won’t know about the intermediary unless T212 choose to make that known.
Also to note, T212 aren’t financially benefitting in anyway by removing the BUY option. They are simply providing the access to trading with other people/businesses around the world.
Not talking at you but there seems to be a massive misconception that T212 are almost like a betting shop, and paying out or taking the loss.
That’s a good one!
You brightened my day.
The legal team in question:
Great show. I was thinking Lionel Hutz…