My order on EUR/USD was closed due to serious spread. The platform blamed it on the liquidity provider. Besides, the service manner is offensive!
The platform hasn’t answered my phone. So I want to inquire the truth, while the customer service blamed it on clients themselves! How could? I kept the the unconnected voice message as the evidence. Instead of furious at your mistakes and holding off time, I just used the sentence “The severe slippage and spread was caused by the insufficient liquidity in extreme environment”, But why the spread still had implications for my locked position. I indeed know that the spread on XAU/USD is expanded due to the insufficient liquidity. But why so is EUR/USD?
The following is the original recommendation
歐美對鎖單卻因點差過大而被平倉,回應是流動性不足?!且線上客服處理方式非常冒犯!
被平倉後寫信詢問,對方來電但沒接到,因此回信再次詢問希望能得到真實情況,不想莫名被平倉。
結果內部溝通不良怪到客戶身上,質疑客戶陳述真實性!(詳附圖)
我真的接到電話怎會再次詢問客服?
且我有未撥通的留言音檔當證據,怎可用此言語質疑?
你風險同事說有打你就信,那你有證據嗎???
我都沒發怒你們內部搞錯狀況、拖延時間、說明不清!!!
只用「较大的交易点差和滑点都是由于市场在极端环境下流动性不足造成的。」
我鎖單了滑點不會影響,那點差突然的加大真的不理解!
歐美對怎突然有流動性不足問題?歐美對不是黃金!黃金明確有新聞跟數據顯示停產跟關廠,要像黃金一樣明確有流通性不足的實質證據才可以把點差加大啊!他的歐美對的依據為何?怎可以這樣隨意調整漫天喊價?