Discussion in 'Retail Brokers' started by NickBarings, Jun 21, 2005.

  1. Ok, I will make a call to Jeff Ganis re-
    garding the delisting on the Pats cus-
    tomer list and let you guys know
    what's the present situation.
    #31     Jun 25, 2005
  2. Yosemite


    Any update?
    I am getting curios about this....

    #32     Jun 27, 2005
  3. JayS


    I spoke via email with Douglas Zalesky the CEO because I'm interested in using them. He said they have their own J-Trader servers they own and maintain at the CBOT interstitial room beneath the CBOT Financial Trading Floor. They also have redundant servers located at RCG.

    He seems to be a stand up guy from what I hear and I plan to give them some of my business in the near future. As a former employee of a clearing firm I understand how some of these things work and to me everything looks top notch. (This is just my personel opinion).
    #33     Jun 28, 2005
  4. Yosemite


    Hello Jay, all you wrote makes sense.I've heard good things about Zalesky.
    but can you please be so kind ( as a former FCM employer) to clarify a little bit what all this means?

    interstitial room, redundant servers.....

    #34     Jun 28, 2005
  5. Here is the answer from Jeff Ganis ;

    I apologize for the delayed response. In answer to your question we use a
    combination of RCG and eLocal. Our connection to the web is through our
    network and a very robust fiber connection between you and our web servers.
    Our web servers are redundant auto fail over located at a level 3 hosting
    site on Canal street here in Chicago. This site has multiple power grids,
    custom cooling, Halon fire protection etc. This has nothing to do with RCG.

    Our Pats servers are Super Tas's located at the Equinex facility where most
    firms in Chicago house their servers (including some exchanges). The
    servers are RCG's but we have dedicated machines just for our firm. Here in
    Chicago the line is getting very fine regarding server location etc.
    I hope this answers your question.
    Again I apologize for the delayed response and I look forward to answering
    any other questions you may have.

    Jeffery C. Ganis
    eLocal L.L.C.
    312-521-7331 Fax
    #35     Jul 13, 2005
  6. Yosemite


    I Think he was meaning Equinix...

    Anyway this answer clarify most of the issues raised....
    #36     Jul 13, 2005
  7. Indeed, both Jeff and Doug are

    stand-up guys and be sure to speak

    with Martha , the secretary.
    #37     Jul 13, 2005
  8. bump

    Any other opinions which of the FCMs from the list

    offer good PATS systems (of their own)? And at the same time offer competitive fees ?

    It looks like the options are:

    Do they all support SuperTAS? What else should one be looking for?

    I'm suprised this discussion doesn't come up every week here in ET, considering how few the choices are.

    Just look how many threads are started every week about IB issues. Apparently PATS users, regardless of FCM, experience no issues ??? :confused:
    #38     Sep 28, 2005
  9. cmaxb


    I don't have a problem with GHCO. Miss the ACH transfers of IB. One thing I have a beef about is the PATS API. One of the most frustrating and difficult processes I have ever programmed for. Several things I'd mention:

    1) Lack of good testing server. You have to buy time on their servers to test your app. You get up to a month. Most of that time is taken up with arguing with the techs over problems one encounters.

    2) Different behavior across exchanges. It would be nice if the same procedures could be followed across each exchange, e.g. order statuses, fill reports, cancellations, etc.

    3) Upgrades. Seems to be no quality control with software releases. I just upgraded a point release (comes out every few months). I send an order to Eurex, and it is rejected as invalid order. Even the header files had to be modified heavily to get it to compile.

    Overall, though, I give kudos to low margins of PATS brokers, customer service, and once you're app is working, speed and stability seem quite good.
    #39     Sep 28, 2005
  10. cmaxb


    Sure enough,

    Subject: Global Futures- Eurex Eurobund Orders Being Rejected on Patsystems Trading Platforms


    We are currently experiencing a technical problem with Eurex Eurobund contract orders being rejected on Pats Systems trading platforms (*This is not affecting Trading Technologies X_Trader platform).

    Orders are being rejected because of a backend system problem. We are working to get this resolved as soon as possible. Please feel free to place any order you wish at our 24 hour order desk numbers listed below. Thank you and we apologize for the inconvenience.

    #40     Sep 29, 2005