IB Listed Trading - a word of warning

Mr. da-net

Are you on crack?

Where did you get the wild a** notion that I am not a retail customer? You certainly didn't get it from anything I've ever written here on ET. What a mighty swing and a total miss that was on your part.

For the record - I am not, nor never have been a BD. I am not even a full time trader as I hold a normal wage paying job unrelated to the financial industry.

JB


Quote from da-net:

Mr. Turok,

As a BD it is not "your money" that is at risk like the retail customer. The retail customer is concerned because it has an effect upon not only his wallet but his mental attitude as well. You as a BD could care less because it is not your money at risk.

So the increased liquidity is a very sharp double edged sword. The retail person is at a disadvantage because if he complains the "establishment" turns a deaf ear since his small amount would not even be lint in their pockets, but let it be an institution and the game changes drastically.

What the thread starter is asking for is a level playing field, but that will never happen as long as organizations like the NASD self police aka "FOX WATCHING THE CHICKENS" and arbitration is the only choice the retail customer has.
More...
 
Phlub:
>Another person said that this feature can serve you well -
>and you are correct as long as the stock has a ton of
>liquidity on the ECN's and regionals.

I am that "other person", and again I don't wish to say or imply that your experiences or conclusions are faulty regarding routing. I will however say that your above assumption is incorrect. Our computer is allowed to trade *any* listed stock that has an ADV of more than 150k. We trade *many* stocks with marginal liquidity on the ECN's and again have had excellent average experience using SMART.

Everyone has to use what works best for them of course.

JB
 
da-net:
>What the thread starter is asking for is
>a level playing field,

Phlub:
>I was not trying to make any kind of statement
>about "level playing fields, etc."

No balls, two strikes on da-net.

JB
 
Quote from Phlub:

I was not trying to make any kind of statement about "level playing fields, etc." I used to be a market maker myself (regional and Nasdaq) so I know ITS trade through rules backwards and forwards.

I was just commenting that IB's SMART logic in NYSE Stocks that are lower in volume (Such as my BG example), are suspect to these kinds of experiences (bad quotes like what NYSE did). And, the SMART logic does not factor this in.

Another person said that this feature can serve you well - and you are correct as long as the stock has a ton of liquidity on the ECN's and regionals. Another person said - be warned! He directs orders in stocks like BG to NYSE - NOT SMART. That is moreless the point of the post.

(BTW - now that I identified that stock from my example, please excuse my error - I said I was filled at 56.49 - what I meant was 58.49. If you look at the chart on Wed, you can see the 52-week high of 58.49 this little IB episode falsly created!)
More...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Phlub;
Thanks for the word of warning and ;
helping by mentioning semi-liquid stock=BG

Have noticed more bad quotes in SPY & QQQQ on wide ranging days ! and;
not to make a prediction,
but on a multitude of candle charts ,BG is still making
higher highs,
higher lows,
higher closes:cool:
 
Quote from Turok:

Mr. da-net

Are you on crack?

No, but I do appreciate your concern for my health.


Where did you get the wild a** notion that I am not a retail customer? You certainly didn't get it from anything I've ever written here on ET.

05-20-05 11:31 AM I can't quickly calc the number of listed shares we've moved (millions upon millions) just in the last few months using SMART with no problems.

Your above quoted response was to a post from Mr. Phlub "05-19-05 08:29 PM the NYSE put up a bad quote. I believe that they meant to put 56 at 56.10." Which he later clarified the numbers "05-20-05 02:23 PM BTW - now that I identified that stock from my example, please excuse my error - I said I was filled at 56.49 - what I meant was 58.49. If you look at the chart on Wed, you can see the 52-week high of 58.49 this little IB episode falsly created!"

Your reply of "we've" implied to me that you are either a BD or a stockbroker or a very large investment group. Your reply of "listed shares" implies that you knew the difference between pink sheet stocks and exchange traded securities. Your reply of "we've moved millions upon millions of shares in the last few months" implied that you or your firm or investment group was trading these. I believed that you had no reason to lie because of the anonimous nature of these forums and therefor all that you said was to be taken as truthful and at face value.

According to the data from the major exchanges most people trade or invest in securities in the $20 to $40 range. With that understanding then math tells us that "millions upon millions of listed shares over the last few months" gets into some pretty big money. Which I seriously doubt if a meaningful percentage of posters here could have the necessary resources to place or maintain postions of that size in the listed markets. Hopefully I have answered your question as to how I arrived at the thought of you being a BD.

What a mighty swing and a total miss that was on your part.

I never was worth a hoot at baseball or most sports for that matter. Again, let me thank for being so concerned about my health.

For the record - I am not, nor never have been a BD. I am not even a full time trader as I hold a normal wage paying job unrelated to the financial industry.

Since you are capable of trading those volumes of shares in listed securities in what must be a personal account, then you must be extremely wealthy or make an enourmous amount of money at your job. If it is the later, would you be kind enough to share where that is. I am sure that lots of people reading these forums would LOVE to make money on that scale, heck even I would consider returning to the work force for that amonut of pay. Thank you very much in advance for the info.


JB
More...

To Mr. Phlub,

I totally missed the major point of your post. Thank you for clarifying it. Please accept my apology for misconstruing what you were saying.
 
Me to Mr. da-net
>>Are you on crack?

da-net:
>No, but I do appreciate your concern for my health.

and later in the same post, na-net:
>Again, let me thank for being so concerned about my health.

That would be strike three when it comes to the accuracy of your assumptions on this thread -- I haven't expressed a single shred of concern for your health.

As to the additional, apparently crack induced assumptions in your most recent post...I'll get to those in a while.

JB
 
Me:
>I can't quickly calc the number of listed shares we've
>moved (millions upon millions) just in the last few months
>using SMART with no problems.

da-net:
>Your reply of "we've" implied to me that you are
>either a BD or a stockbroker or a very large
>investment group.

Funny -- and I thought that "we" only implied a described first person group of more than one. I have yet to find any documentation for "we" that implies anything related to a choice of career or employment. In this case "we" simply means two guys who share ideas, code, data feeds and a single computer programmed to trade while we go about our normal (but enormously wealthy and hugely monied) lives.

>Your reply of "listed shares" implies that you knew the
>difference between pink sheet stocks and exchange
>traded securities.

Ahhh -- yes...and of course, only a "BD, stockbroker or large investment group" could possibly be aware of that most obscure distinction. I see what you mean -- you've almost convinced me that my normal daily life MUST be a fraud since somehow I have been privileged enough to become privy to such tightly held secrets. I guess I must be movin' on up.

>Your reply of "we've moved millions upon millions of
>shares in the last few months" implied that you or your
>firm or investment group was trading these.

Finally a non-Bolivian based assumption. Yes, we have traded "those".

>According to the data from the major exchanges
>most people trade or invest in securities in the $20
>to $40 range.

Good on ya...we use $30 as our number.

>With that understanding then math tells us that
>"millions upon millions of listed shares over the
>last few months" gets into some pretty big money.

What is this -- "Elite Investor"? "Elite Buy and Hold"? I think not. Let's remember that we are on Elite Trader and listen to that math one more time...

50,000 share a day is an ~million per month. This not only meets the requirements of my statement, but also happens to sit nicely in the range of what "we" trade. Take 50,000 / 2 and you get the # of position shares per day (25K). Now, I've taken you about as close as I'm going to take you to my finances, but let me toss out a few hypotheticals...

1: A day trader can purchase 25k of $30 stocks, holding them ALL AT ONCE with an account only mildly into 6 figures ($188k).

2: A day trader with a daily turnover of only 2x can exceed a million shares per month with an account of LESS THAN 6 figures ($94k).

3: A day trading scalper can exceed a million shares per month by going 8 (yes only EIGHT) round trips a day utilizing an account of only $25,001.

(of course remember since there is a "we" involved, you can divide all of those account sized by the shared "two" to meet the described requirements.


da-net:
>Since you are capable of trading those volumes of shares
>in listed securities in what must be a personal account,
>then you must be extremely wealthy ...

Yes of course, one must be "extremely wealth" to have a two way shared trading account that meets the PDT rules -- after all, that's $12,500.50 each. Even if you pick hypo #1 and assume we are doing it the hard way, it still means the "extremely wealthy" Mr. Turok only needs south of 6 figures to gain said data points.

>... or make an enormous amount of
>money at your job.

Yes, that's it. Also that's the reason that I was unable to get back to you until today -- I actually work weekend nights (truth).

>If it is the latter, ...

It is.

>would you be kind enough to share where that is. I am
>sure that lots of people reading these forums would LOVE
>to make money on that scale, ...

(and as shown above, that scale is truly stupendous).

I show up at venues and cater to the whims of people who want to watch major sporting events.

>heck even I would consider returning to the work force
>for that amonut of pay.

Ok deal. PM me and perhaps you can work the Yankee/Red Sox game next Sunday. Pay starts at $7 for a 10 hour day (they provide lunch). Work hard and you too can make "enormous amounts of money" and be "extremely wealthy". Perhaps you will eventually even be able to own TWO fine automobiles of more than 10 years of age, just like mine.

>I never was worth a hoot at baseball or most
>sports for that matter.

As your posts and the math shows, you are no better at assumptions.

JB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top