IB raises monthly fees

Opra · Oct 7, 2006

Quote from def:

under account management, you can subscribe/unsubscribe to markets as you please. (note: keep in mind if you subscribe at any time during the month, you'll be charged since that's how the reporting to the exchanges work).

The question is if I can avoid $10/month if I do not subscribe to market data in my other accounts.

I have several accounts, and the primary one generates many many times of the $30 commission per month, whereas others vary (longer term, IRA accounts). Now IB basically treats each account individually (discontinuing account linking), thus forcing me to trade or pay monthly fee. If this is case, I have to move them to some other brokers.

Does IB really need this $10 to pad its bottom line?

Opra

kiwi_trader · Oct 7, 2006

Quote from Opra:

Does IB really need this $10 to pad its bottom line?

Thats a darned good question IB. Would you rather have a few low usage accounts as part of a portfolio or do you want to encourage people to find another broker for the low turnover accounts.

The downside for IB is that once someone starts looking elsewhere it might not be long until the rest of the account disappears.

As always its your choice but it seems to me that treating a high commission generator well is good for your business. Maybe you just have to set a different bar - say 300 of commissions in account a) protects accounts b and c?

Even my bank gets that ... and we all know how tight banks are.

Bitstream · Oct 7, 2006

yeah not a good idea, 10bucks for sec acct bring in a laughable extra income to ib yet it is another fee trown at us and it adds up. all the deposits u lose cuz many will move their second acct elswhere are gonna cost u much more than what u get from the extra fees.

Tums · Oct 7, 2006

Quote from def:

If you have one account, nothing changes. Data is free for US markets if your commissions are > $30.

If you have two or more accounts, each account will have to generate $30 or more in comissions to have the $10 min waived.

It's very straight forward.

I think that's fair.

If you are managing multiple accounts, all you need is for one account to have data feed.

zdreg · Oct 8, 2006

Quote from LeonPhelps:

They f**k you, and they f**k you, and they f**k you. And just when you think the f**king's over, that's when the real f**king begins!

why don't you make real money by producing t- shirts with your statement.

kiwi_trader · Oct 8, 2006

Quote from Tums:

I think that's fair.

If you are managing multiple accounts, all you need is for one account to have data feed.

Ignoring the question of how one treats ones high revenue customers (ie, do you mouse milk to suck a few extra bucks out of a low usage account when the overall revenue from the customer is big) and whether that pisses them off enough to get accounts with other vendors ... and ultimately fuck off into the sunset.

Ignoring that

Are we saying that if you have NO US data feed on that other account you will have $0 of extra charges. I thought that we'd gone from $10 for data to "minimum fee of $10." So, ignoring the question above, if someone turns off their US data feed for a sub-account will they get a $10 bill or a $0 bill?

(If IB has hired some marketing weasel from some scumbag bank somewhere I bet its $10 whether the account has a US data feed switched on or not --- thats just the way those warm cuddly little rodents think

)

Opra · Oct 8, 2006

Quote from kiwi_trader:

Ignoring the question of how one treats ones high revenue customers (ie, do you mouse milk to suck a few extra bucks out of a low usage account when the overall revenue from the customer is big) and whether that pisses them off enough to get accounts with other vendors ... and ultimately fuck off into the sunset.

Ignoring that Are we saying that if you have NO US data feed on that other account you will have $0 of extra charges. I thought that we'd gone from $10 for data to "minimum fee of $10." So, ignoring the question above, if someone turns off their US data feed for a sub-account will they get a $10 bill or a $0 bill?

(If IB has hired some marketing weasel from some scumbag bank somewhere I bet its $10 whether the account has a US data feed switched on or not --- thats just the way those warm cuddly little rodents think )

The whole crap started with "free market data" which isn't free at all in reality. That allows them to hide the real charges. I'd rather they say that there is a charge for market data for each exchange you subscribe, but if you trade a certain amount, we will refund you the exchange fees. Think about it, I have four accounts with IB, and each time I added an account (same owner with same ID number residing at the same physical address using same e-mail as communication but different account type), I had to sign off agreement to get market data from different exchanges. But in reality, do exchanges really charge me 4 times the exchange fees through IB, or does IB impose some account fees as exchange fees? This is the illogical part. In the past, IB's allowing customers to link accounts of same ownership made this situation a moot issue, but now the whole scheme doesn't smell good, to put it mildly.

BTW, I have been with IB for over 8 years, with its take-it-or-leave-it business/service model, which is fine with me. This change just doesn't make sense.

Opra · Oct 8, 2006

Quote from kiwi_trader:

Ignoring the question of how one treats ones high revenue customers (ie, do you mouse milk to suck a few extra bucks out of a low usage account when the overall revenue from the customer is big) and whether that pisses them off enough to get accounts with other vendors ... and ultimately fuck off into the sunset.

Ignoring that Are we saying that if you have NO US data feed on that other account you will have $0 of extra charges. I thought that we'd gone from $10 for data to "minimum fee of $10." So, ignoring the question above, if someone turns off their US data feed for a sub-account will they get a $10 bill or a $0 bill?

(If IB has hired some marketing weasel from some scumbag bank somewhere I bet its $10 whether the account has a US data feed switched on or not --- thats just the way those warm cuddly little rodents think )

The whole crap started with "free market data" which isn't free at all in reality. That allows them to hide the real charges, it seems. I'd rather they say that there is a charge for market data for each exchange you subscribe, but if you trade a certain amount, we will refund you the exchange fees. Think about it, I have four accounts with IB, and each time I added an account (same owner with same ID number residing at the same physical address using same e-mail as communication but different account type), I had to sign off agreement to get market data from different exchanges. But in reality, do exchanges really charge me 4 times the exchange fees through IB, or does IB impose some account fees as exchange fees? This is the illogical part. In the past, IB's allowing customers to link accounts of same ownership made this situation a moot issue, but now the whole scheme doesn't smell good, to put it mildly.

BTW, I have been with IB for over 8 years, with its take-it-or-leave-it business/service model, which is fine with me. This change just doesn't make sense.