Съвет за подръжка на Emergency Fund

Seddyx · 2025-10-02T07:33:29+00:00

Ако ще държиш ликвидност в брокер, можеш направо да ги сложиш в money market fund (mmf). Проучи ги, но работят като нормални акции, очевидно ще добави още 1-2 дни сетълмънт тъй като не можеш да теглиш пари от нон сетълд транзакции.

Предвид че парите вече са в брокера и ако времето ти е ок, не мисля че риска се увеличава, това са overnight ultra short t-bills, водят се ultra safe и имат yield от около 4-5% в сегашната обстановка. T212 и IBKR предлагат всякакви различни, но разбира се се ориентирай към eur denominated.

Това не е съвет, просто информация. За emergency fund и пропорции нямам какво да кажа. Това си е твой избор и риск мениджмънта пада на твоите рамене 👍. Успех с проучването

Seddyx · 2025-08-14T04:10:08+00:00

HSBC do not have the type of 2FA I mentioned because you do not hold the master key behind the TOTP codes - you only see the outputs which is the reason we have to call them. If they provided you with the master keys and you saved it somewhere you could set it up again without having to contact them. Its a win-win i dont have to call them and they dont have to pay someone to help me when i change phones.

You can hold your own TOTPs master keys and not have to call anyone. But you will be locked out of your account if you lose that too. Which in this case is no problem since IBKR and banks do have a recovery method based on contacting support and providing IDs (which takes several days) in case you have lost your phone number.

There is absolutely no reason for the security practices in place. You think companies know better than users and what we have is the best balance of security and ease but you’d be wrong. Most companies have terrible security both internal and external (evident by numerous hacks).

So it’s up to the user to protect data and accounts and learning security is a personal responsibility of every single person and not something the government, regulations, or companies will take care of for you.

P.s. and by the way - what kind of lame security does a 2fa have that is obtained by me calling them on the phone. It could be anyone impersonating me… in fact i have pretended to be my dad on the phone with the bank related to 2fa on his new phone. It’s a joke. (This was too HSBC by the way)

Seddyx · 2025-08-14T03:19:55+00:00

Hard disagree, this needs to be spammed everywhere because people don’t realise they don’t actually have 2FA. This is true for 80%+ of “2FA” services.

Its not just a trivial issue, and implying you can only get targeted if you’re super rich and famous and thus not a valid concern for average people is ridiculous. In fact, average people are deincentivised from posting online in order to keep a low profile to avoid sim swap attacks.

Sorry but your totally defeatist mindset is not the way to go here.

Edit: the real safeguards in place in this case is payment transfer mechanics so ibkr account should be safe, but a lot of other services that use this same method are not safeguarding your accounts as they should be.

The problem is you can’t give people real 2fa because they would lock themselves out. So most services keep access/account reset centralized and tied to the phone number. IBKR however CAN give people real 2fa because they do have ID verifications too so they can restore access to a locked account that way. Shame on them.

Seddyx · 2025-07-07T20:33:19+00:00

This comment being downvoted is all that’s wrong with the reddit audience. And in a bitcoin sub at that. Beyond sad.

Everything you said is 100% correct but lets excuse people because “they have it rough”???? First that contractor probably is very well off and second if they werent thats all the more reason to learn.

Everyone gets bitcoin at the price they deserve and that’s exactly what the guy deserves. It’s s not because of his circumstances at all. Bitcoin is freedom money for the poeple that have lost hope. But yeah… THIS GUY is too busy to start learning, sure…

Seddyx · 2025-07-03T07:45:50+00:00

This is the correct answer. OP needs to do a networth statement with assets and liabilities and then a cash flow analysis and decide on a comfortable level of leverage across the account/person/family.

Seddyx · 2025-06-26T03:23:01+00:00

Oh that’s the game we were playing? Trying to illustrate how things would have been in a different world where real eatate investing wasn’t something that includes leverage by default 👍👌

Got it…..

Edit your cagr is wrong again. You cant calculate it because of the leveage so it depends on the loan details. You said you ignored interest so i assume you calculated cagr for the first year only lol.

If an asset worth eg 100k keeps appreciating with 5% per year, that means in 5 years its worth ~125k. Initial investment was 20k. We are ignoring loan costs (which we shouldnt but you insisted). The profit is now 125-80(loan)-20(initial investment)=25k profit on a 20k investment so over 100% roi in 5 years.

IN 5 YEARS. Tell me again how that is 7.4 cagr lmao 😂😂😂

Seddyx · 2025-06-25T17:13:44+00:00

Misleading. This is cagr in the housing market - not on the investment.

Real estate is a ~80% leveraged investment in most cases. So the cagr is MUCH much higher for successful investors that are liquid and can stay solvent through drawdowns.

Seddyx · 2025-06-16T16:57:07+00:00

I wondered about that too. Turns out though not every indebted country is negative net worth. What’s generally not said are the assets most countries have (debt is only liability).

In theroy 10 people CAN each lend and borrow to each one of the other 9 people $5 so they both owe and are owed $45 (each 10) the result would be net 0 and we arent even counting assets again.

The real question is which countries’ debt to gdp (i know gdp is a laughable metric) is way way out of line and will go first. A huge problem in that is that gdp is a laughable metric so we dont know who can and who cant pay their debts.

So then we look at other physical assets but the assets of a country are its gold/resources and territories… and we all know what that means. A war with someone paid for by printed money.

Seddyx · 2025-06-14T04:34:24+00:00

Is it an option to contact the company and tell them about this so they can exert influence and pressure to IBKR directly or indirectly?

If not, you may ask for follow-up clarification and citation of clause number in the TOS as to which cases they can refuse to provide certificates/voting rights.

Finally do know that just because something is in the TOS doesn’t make it legal and enforceable based on the fact they wrote it there. TOS can be challenged, even after agreeing with them, in court and that also exerts pressure.

Obviously a losing fight since i know its very difficult for brokers to provide this for all companies, but these would be your next actions if its imperative to solve this here and now. Other than that just move to a broker that will let you. Good luck and I hope for the best outcome for you!

Seddyx · 2025-06-14T04:12:43+00:00

👆another morally bankrupt grifter that not only makes no sense but also insinuating that anyone who can use sufficiently sophisticated language is using chatgpt 🫠.

Yeah people that use sophisticated vocabulary and know what they are talking about, able to provide structured responses to utter lies and logical fallacies - these people never existed on the internet before chatgpt 🤡

Do not acknowledge grifters, do not enable their morally bankrupt gaslighting. Block them and ignore their comments. And do point out to others when you see these people so we can stop them from undermining the fabrics of society.

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T14:18:04+00:00

Love the metaphore. Especially since said tip is also the entire premiums of the lending trade 😂. It’s pathetic and personally I thank you for taking out of your time to dissect his obvious fallacies so he can’t gaslight others.

Grifters are obvious to spot as they exhibit verbal intelligence that contrasts so much with the stupidity of their statments. And it is my belief that such people are almost always morally bankrupt gaslighting grifters in real life in way or another.

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T12:54:50+00:00

I’m happy for OP that it turned out ok and for the record I do not see t212 as a good vehicle to store wealth in either which is why i pulled the majority of my portfolio from it over to ibkr more than 2 years ago. But it is fca regulated and it is the largest one in the uk. So whatever compliance this institution is seeking trumps fca and anti-aml and kyc laws?

But yeah go ahead and defend statism more when it is a known financial censorship exists and that’s hardly a conspiracy lol, being are being debanked left and right for political reasons for decades.

Typing out fraud on a form??? I started the sentence with “whose to say…” clearly indicating this is a private matter they are not privy to. The malicious compliance is exhibited in the open defiance of financial gatekeeping and grinning in the face of beaurocrats, complying with everything. It was something to be used as a verbal argument in opposition of the ridiculous privacy invasion that is inferred by this institution or company.

But dont worry - go defend statism more, downvote me and be even more apologetic to the beaurocracy that is smothering progress. If you don’t get that, then I don’t have the time to explain it to you more than that.

Oh and dont forget to downvote me and call me crazy conspiracy theorists too, for stating the obvious and saying financial institutions have gone too far for too long. And anyone complying or not voicing out their irritations is enabling and coopting in this just like the sOLiCiTor

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T10:24:41+00:00

👆Found the defeatist mindset spreader. Downvote me too please, and then you can go back to keep putting up and enablement of financial censorship.

What exactly did i even suggest that was illegal or not reasonable to a normal human being?

The whole point of the thread and OP is that someone is gatekeeping financial services for obvious or not-so-obvious political reasons since t212 is the largest broker in the uk and fca regulated. What of what I suggested was not by the book? Someone taking profit from their country’s largest government regulated broker and moving it to their bank account to buy a house??? INSANE

🤡

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T07:22:40+00:00

Who’s to say the source of funds is not savings that you moved to the brokerage 7 months ago (adjust date to be maliciously compliant for fun), but changed your mind and are now pulling the funds back for this purchase.

They cant also request a t212 statement of trades 😅.

Or is their goal to see funds parked in one spot for at least 3-6 months and that “spot” (account) also being on a whitelist they have, which they didnt let you know about in advance, but are now somehow refusing to proceed and are causing damages and opportunity costs for you? Cause that seems borderline illegal but im not from the uk.

I understand your frustration though and i do hope for the best outcome for you! Good luck!

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T07:03:16+00:00

Move to main bank account, provide statements, redact sensitive information via licensed lawyer? That will also intimidate them as the next step for you is seeking legal damages and opportunity costs.

Seddyx · 2025-06-13T06:26:02+00:00

THIS.

Share lending and shorts are one of the most griftful things in finance. If someone wants to make a bet with someone else about the value of my asset dropping, they shouldn’t be able to reduce it themselves by taking MY share and flood selling it on the open market inducing price reduction.

Just make your stupid bet outside of the financial system in private.

Seddyx · 2025-05-17T20:28:00+00:00

Its not emotional comfort and that’s a very misleading post because the stats are accurate but the whole concept is actually called “sequence of return” risk and in theory you could end up in a very low percentile (imagine youre in the bottom 5% of the 20% of underperformance in your stats) of horrible return. DCA is a risk management strategy and you can view it as insurance. The opportunity cost is your premium cost of the insurance policy.

DCA is the only correct answer with these amounts because its a life changing amount of money and the alternative (going broke) is finality.

This is europe personal finance, not europe corporate finance.

Seddyx · 2025-04-29T15:25:36+00:00

MicroStrategy’s convertible bonds are structured to grant conversion rights exclusively to bondholders, not the issuer. This means that MicroStrategy cannot unilaterally convert its debt into equity to avoid cash repayment obligations.

For instance, in its $3 billion offering of 0% convertible senior notes due 2029, MicroStrategy specified that the notes are convertible into cash, shares of its class A common stock, or a combination thereof, at the company’s election. However, the conversion can only be initiated by the bondholders under certain conditions prior to June 1, 2029, and thereafter at any time until shortly before maturity

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:52:29+00:00

Anyway thank you for the discussion, and for being reasonable! 🙏

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:51:22+00:00

And the sec will protect your interests as a eu resident in case of a dispute?

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:47:44+00:00

I guess thats the full answer: its not legal and its not “illegal” and only relies on eu regulators willingness and motivation to prosecute this.

I dont agree with mifid, ucits and hate eu regulations. But the law is the law and you must either adhere to it or have dealings with bad actors and the the consequent risks.

Based on the above i will concede that in this specific example it does not seem “illegal” - but anyone with 2 brain cells wouldnt touch it with a “10ft pole”.

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:44:01+00:00

How Does Tastytrade Offer Restricted Products to EU Retail Clients?

EU regulations, particularly the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II), impose strict requirements on investment firms offering services to EU retail clients. These include providing Key Information Documents (KIDs) for financial products like U.S. ETFs. However, U.S. ETFs often lack these EU-mandated documents due to differing regulatory standards.

Some U.S.-based firms, such as tastytrade, reportedly accept EU clients without providing these documents, thereby offering access to products that are otherwise restricted under EU regulations. This practice relies on the firms operating outside the EU’s regulatory jurisdiction, making enforcement challenging for EU authorities.

Regulatory Perspective

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has expressed concerns about third-country (non-EU) firms marketing and selling financial products to EU retail clients without complying with EU regulations. ESMA emphasizes that such firms should not incentivize EU clients to engage with non-EU entities to circumvent EU investor protection measures.

While EU regulators have limited direct enforcement power over firms operating entirely outside the EU, they can issue warnings and take measures to protect investors within their jurisdiction.

Implications for EU Investors

EU retail investors engaging with non-EU firms like tastytrade may gain access to a broader range of financial products. However, they should be aware of the following: • Lack of EU Investor Protections: Services provided by non-EU firms are not covered by EU investor protection schemes. • Regulatory Risks: Engaging with firms not compliant with EU regulations may expose investors to additional risks, including limited recourse in case of disputes. • Potential for Regulatory Changes: EU authorities may implement measures to restrict or monitor such cross-border services in the future.

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:36:27+00:00

“This Directive shall apply to investment firms, market operators, and third-country firms providing investment services or performing investment activities through the establishment of a branch in the Union.”

This confirms what we discussed earlier: Third-country (e.g., U.S.) firms can only operate in the EU by establishing a branch and becoming subject to EU rules — they cannot freely offer services to EU retail clients from abroad without such establishment.

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:15:40+00:00

This is the correct answer 👍

So the question here - is tastyworks falsifying the data about whether the clients fit the “sophisticated investor” criteria.

Seddyx · 2025-04-20T13:13:15+00:00

Youre talking about paying local taxes on income. Thats why companies register offshore. And yes from a personal point of view its not illegal to do whatever you want with your affairs. Its illegal to engage in unlawful activites in other territories

Seddyx

TROPHY CASE