China Bank's crude oil treasure incident was notified by the Chicago Stock Exchange half a month in advance. Is China Bank wrong?

Tell a joke: While trapping more than 30 billion China, the United States scolds China.

First of all, the contract design scheme of BOC Crude Oil Bao complies with China laws and regulations, and there is no violation. Although the design of one-way liquidation is not very comprehensive, the key point is that the sales of such products need customers to understand in the contract what will lead to losses and the risks that customers will bear after losses. This needs to be made clear to the customer in person. Now the customer has already checked when operating the contract online. Either face to face, or simply introduce how easy it is for products to make money, and describe and avoid the losses caused by losses. At present, the Bank of China crude oil treasure has a big oolong incident in which the principal is not clear enough and it has to make up the position. All customers say they don't know this situation, but they don't look at the terms of the contract carefully and don't know what the terms are. This is a sign that people's financial investment is immature in the process of social development. Therefore, the lesson we should remember is to pay attention to the contract and see all the terms in the contract clearly, so as to stay away from those meaningless things.

1. Does the Bank of China stipulate that there are loopholes in the rules of making friends near the date of US crude oil futures, thus giving international capital an opportunity? 2. When you learned at the Bank of China that the United States temporarily changed the rules in order to take decisive measures to avoid risks, such as making friends in advance, did you realize the coming of negative oil prices? For example, inform investors one by one that oil prices may be negative? Not to mention the announcement, no one knows, and the announcement did not mention the possibility of bad oil prices. This requires the Bank of China to make its own rules changes to avoid losses. 3. Did BOC take any measures to avoid falling into the trap after 10? The answer is obvious, no, otherwise it will not be settled at the final exchange rate. In other words, after 10, the Bank of China will not be able to level the primary crude oil before the final unified exchange rate. It can be said that the Bank of China is afraid of taking risks to change the rules, watching investors suffer heavy losses step by step, but it is the Bank of China that takes the initiative to step into the trap. If the Bank of China really thinks about investors, taking the following measures can completely avoid everything. As mentioned above, it is very risky to change the date in advance, but it is no problem to hedge its own funds for investors in good faith after 2. 10, with the strength of BOC, but unfortunately BOC cares more about its own interests. 3. Choose to make friends in kind. Investors have no right to extract crude oil, but the Bank of China has the right. Looking at the negative oil price, the Bank of China simply closed its position at the lowest point, instead of trying to save it and take care of its own interests.

Personally, if CCB, ICBC and BOC are the same, it can basically be judged that it is not entirely the responsibility of the bank. If CCB and ICBC take measures to effectively avoid the occurrence of this incident, then China Bank must have an unshirkable responsibility!

Many customers simply didn't know that crude oil changed the rules of the game, and China Bank didn't fulfill its obligation to inform customers by SMS. They just received the liquidation notice from China Bank at 10 on the evening of April 2O, and then forcibly moved their positions. But it didn't. The responsibility must be the Bank of China. When it comes to territorial issues, if trading places cheats in Chicago, he only needs to inform the customer of the trading rules, and the customer can only follow the rules of the platform. Bank of China doesn't understand the rules and acts as a fat man. Bank of China wants to be an agent of crude oil futures business to improve its business level first, otherwise it will quit related business in the future and convince investors!

It doesn't feel right to talk about your own routine. First of all, you have enough reaction time. Besides, we don't know how much of this $30 billion belongs to the Bank of China. Many institutions such as India, South Korea and even the United States also suffered losses. Finally, the rules tell you that you don't care. This is not a routine. Strange, only themselves to blame!

Because China doesn't have its own security system, all the information of instant messaging software such as WeChat, a big customer, can be mastered in the United States through the Android Apple system. Everyone is immersed in the carnival before zero is about to make a fortune, and they are numb. In fact, Wall Street is waiting with their mouths open! China Bank has the same responsibility as its customers, because customers will not fall into the pit if they don't run away in advance, and China Bank's business is unskilled and careless, and it can't escape the responsibility. As for the United States, they are all unreasonable, what's more, China has not dug up anything about the United States this time, saying that he changed the rules and told you in advance. How can I trap you if I'm not greedy

The key is the rules, whether the risks are informed in advance and whether the investors operate on their own. If it is, then I don't blame anyone. I am willing to lose the bet. And whether the contract has the obligation clause of BOC's forced liquidation and stop loss locking, which takes precedence over my operation right, then BOC will bear the losses accordingly. It is important to understand the terms, otherwise the lawsuit will not be big. There is also the risk of problems in the information channel. There must be an emergency plan, otherwise don't play! The bank's project raised the customer's funds, and even if it lost all the principal, it became the customer's creditor. If it is done by an individual, it should be called financial fraud and extortion. Crude oil treasure is a product produced by Bank of China. If it is sold to customers, it will automatically close the position and the customers will be killed. However, it is said that even the warehouse can't work, and there is no stop-loss suicide product. Bank of China also dares to sell it, knowing that it will die. Bank of China gives it to customers and says it will die.

It's not that banks don't understand, it's that banks understand and inform customers, but some people are greedy and think they can make a lot of money, so they want to buy near the delivery date and don't want to close their positions. They want to get rich overnight and collect money from their pockets for tens of dollars in the morning, hehe, but things don't work out. By the time they wake up, the market has fallen by tens of dollars, which is a huge loss. Now they sell badly, saying that the money in their pockets will be randomly invested? Don't understand? Don't understand? Don't! Greed deserves no sympathy.

Why do so many people question banks and investors, but why don't those who question them understand the reasons? In fact, a very simple truth is that the Chicago Board of Trade has discovered the problem, knowing that there may be a negative oil price, and accordingly modified the trading system and gave a hint. Speculators continue to buy and are convinced that they are responsible. What about the bank? The responsibility of the bank lies in the design risk of this product. After the risk occurs, there is no stop loss, and investors are directly sent to the capital predators for hunting. Why do you say that? Such a big multi-head contract, and it is a company with no trading ability, must be strongly awarded to a capable company, while the Bank of China actually turned itself into a lamb by not staring at the market and letting it be slaughtered. Is it safe to be killed in the long run, but it is not safe in the future. Or they could be hunted. So the only safe way is to cooperate with the delivery ability or other means. Generally speaking, the responsibility of BOC is that there is a problem in risk control, which makes domestic gamblers become international lambs.