Right, and infact that is exactly what they are going to get with such a limitation: people asking glass of tap waters.Quote from oldtime:
the first time I got told that was when I ordered some crackers a glass of water and some toothpicks
Quote from fullautotrading:
I am warning you guys so that maybe you avoid what happened to me.
IB has introduced limits to the amount of paper money in paper trading account.
I know this sounds absurdly ridiculous, as the purpose of a paper trading account is to <b> let people and funds test before committing real money</b>.
Evidently they don't want to big funds to simulate operations, or me to simulate operations for hedge funds which are relying on my solutions, and are after a few housewives ....
The reason ? "save on bandwidth" (quoting literally "Brian" from Customer Services). What has bandwidth to do with the amount of paper money, maybe is something that only some genius at IB knows. I am also seriously concerned about this "bandwidth" problem.
So don't reset your paper trading account or you will be "locked" there forever. I am forced to close the "locked" account which i used for fund operation simulation.
I will also probably move my platform to another broker, if they don't correct this and other absurdities. This should free a lot of bandwidth! ;-))
Tom
or better yet, charge a resonable fee for a paper account. You sound like a reasonable man who has knowledge of computers and exchange data feed fees.Quote from fullautotrading:
Right, and infact that is exactly what they are going to get with such a limitation: people asking glass of tap waters.
Assume a fund (not even a big one) wanted to perform some tests and strategy simulations (perhaps using multiple automated instances) for a period before committing the real thing. Or similar scenarios.
100K are surely the ideal amount .... ;-) yes for a fund of consisting of a couple glass of tap water and toothpicks ;-))
I would really suggest to delete this absurd limit (let the user specify whatever he needs: it's just paper!), which would only hurt IB business, with no shred of advantage whatsoever, and let's say it a was just a misunderstanding ... Let's devote that programming time to more useful features, like for instance an account view to the Gateway or making the autologoff optional (don't dare propose more ideas) ...
Tom
Nothing, because that is not your core business as a broker. If you need to charge that, then it's better that you close the business. At least this is the way as i would do it, if i should embark in such enterprise (with the right capital).Quote from oldtime:
or better yet, charge a resonable fee for a paper account. You sound like a reasonable man who has knowledge of computers and exchange data feed fees.
If you and I were to go into business together offering paper traders unlimited access and account size, how much would we have to charge a paper trader?
yeah well, the fact that you will probably die before you ever come up with a consistently profitable system isn't really much of a concern to me. If I am a broker I make my money from traders with real money. Kind of hard to make a living from dreamers. Maybe you should apply to the government for a grant. They are always pissing away real money on dreamers. And if you are a salesman, there is no better client than the government. They are not just individually gullible (which is hard to sell) but collectively gullible (which is very easy to sell.)Quote from fullautotrading:
Nothing, because that is not your core business as a broker. If you need to charge that, then it's better that you close the business. At least his is the way as i i would do it, if i should embark in such enterprise (with the right capital).
There are even some "brokers" who think they can make money on API.
Another one i saw placed a limit of a week (rotfl)
while creating a trading system takes many years, and is actually a mostly service which favors primarily the broker. I call is "business stupidity"
The result is practically none uses their systems. The purpose of a paper trading facility is to make the investors confident before committing real resources or providing the developers a structure for test and simulations of trading operation with that given broker. There is an umbelievable number of tiny details which need to take care when developing serious systems, and it may take many years to get it right.
There must be no hindrance toward the final goal, which is to attract funds and investors who confidently invest their money. And know exacly the risk.
In general and especially COMPARATIVELY (good execution + paper trading + api) IB has been doing very well so far (apart that i would probably cut the heads of some programmer over there ;-))), and that is also the reason of its vast success. But when i see something that hurts their own business, i do try to raise a flag.
As i many times have said i have always considered this broker overall among the best (and that is why i also invested heavily in it), but that is also the reason i get pretty disappointed and upset when i see something which does not meet the expectations and actually hurts their prospectives. (Also i know well many technical aspects and details that could be improved as i work daily with many of their clients or interested prospects and i know pretty well what helps and what does not.)
Tom
50K ? I don't know what you are talking about.Quote from bwolinsky:
I don't like IB for futures. ....
They give you a $50,000 account ...
...
What are your strategies results? And have you been able to match them?
If you reset your account I think you lose your results, and since you are hogging bandwidth it's pretty funny that they know it is less likely for you to become a customer when you can't even implement your own strategy.