IB Downtime Update - WIDE SCALE SERVICE DISRUPTION

[OldTrader]

Quote from boost123:

My good friend, you'll not get any advice from me with that kind of post and attitude!!

I would not even advise you to go back to school to learn manners!

Try to read the info on link below first on IB before you post next time! http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112855&perpage=6&pagenumber=3

Have a good 2008 Sir!

Did you read these links yourself??? It doesn't appear you did, or you would not have included the link the first link about developer17.

So that other readers may know, developer 17 held some GOOG call options on expiration date when GOOG closed $.30 above the exercise price. Developer 17 failed to notify IB that he did not want to exercise. Therefore, the Option Clearing Corporation (OCC) automatically exercised the options for him in accordance with the rules as set forth in a variety of places to include the prospectus, and the stock was placed in developer17's account. It turns out he didn't have the funds to hold the stock, and so on Monday AM, IB liquidated the stock. Unfortunately, that morning GOOG was trading $4 under the exercise price, creating approximately a $9000 loss for developer17. Naturally, developer17 incorrectly blames IB for this matter, eventhough the rules for option exercise are well layed out in the Options prospectus and on IBs website.

This is a good example of that type of thread that we often see here on ET. The trader posts that he has been wronged by IB. Later we find out all the facts. Although in this case the trader simply didn't know the rules, and therefore, didn't follow them. It ended up costing him.

Boost123 has continued on with this fine ET tradition, whereby he fails to read the link, and only assumes that it is negative probably from reading developer17's initial post. In fact, it is likely that boost123 does not himself know the option rules applying to exercises, or he might have known from the original post what the problem was and who was responsible.

But frankly, reading the links, determining the facts, doesn't meet with boost 123's objective here, which is to malign IB. And unfortunately, there are a certain number of readers here who will accept boost123's conclusion without determining the facts for themselves.

I don't have the time to read through the other links, so I don't have any idea what they say. Just be alerted to the fact that FACTS are not what boost123 is about. What he is about is maligning IB.

OldTrader

 

[boost123]

Quote from OldTrader:

Did you read these links yourself??? It doesn't appear you did, or you would not have included the link the first link about developer17.

So that other readers may know, developer 17 held some GOOG call options on expiration date when GOOG closed $.30 above the exercise price. Developer 17 failed to notify IB that he did not want to exercise. Therefore, the Option Clearing Corporation (OCC) automatically exercised the options for him in accordance with the rules as set forth in a variety of places to include the prospectus, and the stock was placed in developer17's account. It turns out he didn't have the funds to hold the stock, and so on Monday AM, IB liquidated the stock. Unfortunately, that morning GOOG was trading $4 under the exercise price, creating approximately a $9000 loss for developer17. Naturally, developer17 incorrectly blames IB for this matter, eventhough the rules for option exercise are well layed out in the Options prospectus and on IBs website.

This is a good example of that type of thread that we often see here on ET. The trader posts that he has been wronged by IB. Later we find out all the facts. Although in this case the trader simply didn't know the rules, and therefore, didn't follow them. It ended up costing him.

Boost123 has continued on with this fine ET tradition, whereby he fails to read the link, and only assumes that it is negative probably from reading developer17's initial post. In fact, it is likely that boost123 does not himself know the option rules applying to exercises, or he might have known from the original post what the problem was and who was responsible.

But frankly, reading the links, determining the facts, doesn't meet with boost 123's objective here, which is to malign IB. And unfortunately, there are a certain number of readers here who will accept boost123's conclusion without determining the facts for themselves.

I don't have the time to read through the other links, so I don't have any idea what they say. Just be alerted to the fact that FACTS are not what boost123 is about. What he is about is maligning IB.

OldTrader

Old Trader.

I have read the thread all the way through many months ago.

This problem that Dev 17 had would not have happened to him if he had a UK broker. The UK broker would have afforded to spend 50cents on a phone call to him to advise him about the real expiry time on Goog. Dev 17 is also in the SH!TE because the position is breaching IRA rules thanks to his brokers.

Try reading just the first 20 posts on DEV17 AGAIN you muppet

 

[ChiBondKing]

Quote from dcraig:

Seeing that you are so well informed and are determined to spread the good word with missionary zeal, would you be so kind as to inform us all of which other broker offers the range of markets, universal account, open platform, free API, good rates, financial stability and generally good reliability that IB does.

And I should add a further criteria of no down time at all.


Please come back when the results of your research are available.

Merrill, Citi CIB, SocGen, Barclays

 

[OldTrader]

Quote from boost123:

Old Trader.

I have read the thread all the way through many months ago.

This problem that Dev 17 had would not have happened to him if he had a UK broker. The UK broker would have afforded to spend 50cents on a phone call to him to advise him about the real expiry time on Goog. Dev 17 is also in the SH!TE because the position is breaching IRA rules thanks to his brokers.

Try reading just the first 20 posts on DEV17 AGAIN you muppet

I read ALL the posts you idiot. Did you? I don't give a shit what your UK broker would or wouldn't have done. ALL the rules of option expiration are clearly spelled out by the OCC, the prospectus, and IBs webpage. Anyone with an ounce of responsibility, AND the ability to READ, could have easily avoided the situation.

The responsibility for the situation lies completely at Dev17's doorstep. You just tried to use it against IB, thinking no one would actually read the thread. Good try.

OldTrader

PS By the way, this situation had nothing to do with the expiration time. Please RE-READ both YOUR link and my post for the details of what the problem was.

 

[boost123]

Quote from OldTrader:

I read ALL the posts you idiot. Did you? I don't give a shit what your UK broker would or wouldn't have done. ALL the rules of option expiration are clearly spelled out by the OCC, the prospectus, and IBs webpage. Anyone with an ounce of responsibility, AND the ability to READ, could have easily avoided the situation.

The responsibility for the situation lies completely at Dev17's doorstep. You just tried to use it against IB, thinking no one would actually read the thread. Good try.

OldTrader

Some of the guys on that thread agreed with me!

Go back and read thread again you silly boy! But, this time try taking your brain out of your A.R. S.E.

And do you have any comments on the way the trade effected the IRA rule? I would be interested to hear your view point on it.
This would confirm if your a muppet or not.

dev17 LINK http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=51251

Number ONE RULE with UK brokers is that the broker must ALWAYS ACT IN THE CLIENTS BEST INTERESTS!!!
Do you think IB acted in best interest for their client?? I heard theres nobody maning phones during trading hours most of the time. They use machines for clients to leave messages on and computers for clients to place trades on ie online trading and NO phone lines trading facilities for most part of the day.

Perhaps your employed by his brokers and i can understand you defending IB and NOT DEV17.

Booster

 

[boost123]

Quote from ChiBondKing:

Merrill, Citi CIB, SocGen, Barclays

Plus there are more that are smaller!

And the UK brokers MUST ALWAYS ACT IN CLIENTS BEST INTERESTS AND NOT BEST INTEREST TO THEIR OWN FIRM!

If IB spent 50cents to remind or tell DEV17 on expiry time on the calls options he would not be in the DEEP SH!TE!!! and all because IB loved 50 cents more than their client account!

 

[Parabola]

To many, if not most, money is much more important than integrity and honor.

 

[bali_survivor]

If I just may add my $ 0.02 here.

All these complaints are those of (more or less) small lot traders that have not been around for very long.

Do you really think that a trader with a substantial large position can just get out of a trade when something untowards happens?

Were you around / in a position when September 11th happened?

A "backup" broker won't help you there either.

It is better to take a hard look at your strategy, money management, position sizing habits and risk management. Perhaps take a look at using options to safeguard your short term trading.

Best wishes for 2008
Maria

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from timbo:

Locked-limit days used to scare the hell out of ppl. Now it's 35 min of no access that does it. Sheesh!

Would you like a beverage with that leverage?

 

[Shill]

Quote from boost123:

Plus there are more that are smaller!

And the UK brokers MUST ALWAYS ACT IN CLIENTS BEST INTERESTS AND NOT BEST INTEREST TO THEIR OWN FIRM!

If IB spent 50cents to remind or tell DEV17 on expiry time on the calls options he would not be in the DEEP SH!TE!!! and all because IB loved 50 cents more than their client account!

What bullshit. You are certainly a clever little shill. I would just bet that you have been a team member on more than a few three card monte street teams.

Shill Much