Uh, ktm, I think you mean Jesse Livermore. His pseudonym was Larry Livingston in Reminiscences Of A Stock Operator. "All gamblers die broke, and most of them become degenerates along the way." -advice to Victor Niederhoffer from his father -v
Turok I just love how you can second guess IB's every motive and intention. They're doing this because of that...and they're doing that because of this... You don't have a clue as to what they have in mind now or in the future. "Yeah...so what you forgot is that you don't speak for [IB]" You're not even a daytrader are you? You're one of those investors, aren't you? If IB won't let the under 25K trader trade, then the under 25K trader is going to go where the under 25K trader can trade. That's just commonsense. AND they will lose those who want the additional leverage. Now please don'ttell me again how awfully dangerous more leverage is. We are all intelligent adults here... and besides, you ain't my daddy. It's a question as to the number of under 25K traders IB has but I would venture to guess quite a lot were attracted to their low commissions, so it's loosen up IB or BYE BYE. Oh...and BTW the additional leverage IS very useful to those who know how to manage the risk. (Like me tradeRX
I find myself in 100% agreement with TradeRX. IB better wake up and smell the coffee. I will stop trading with IB unless they increase their margin to 4:1 And smaller traders will be FORCED to stop trading with IB unless they introduce real-time buying power in their cash accounts. We are all off to other brokers until or unless IB realises that its stringent rules are just darn so unprofitable for its own bottomline. So, IB, its bye-bye to my (substantial) commission dollars P.S. Def, please pass on my commiserations to the management accountants at IB, who will soon have so little retail work to do that they will be laid off.
I've got a small cash-only, IB account and use it to essentially "paper trade" while I'm learning. I've got no interest at this point in doing margin/options. On Friday, IB told me that whenever I closed a trade my funds would be frozen for 3 days. Can someone please tell me why IB would adopt this policy? There's no debt or leverage involved in what I'm doing, so why do they feel they have the right to grab a little interest float off my account for 3 days? It just doesn't make sense...
I love the way everyone is threatening IB - "if you don't do this or that I'll take all of my business elsewhere". They know exactly what they want and what risk profile they wish to assume. They have obviously made a risk/reward calculation. If they wanted your business they wouldn't have done things the way they did. I am quite happy with 2 to 1 margin and having accounts over $25,000. If you are not happy with that, then you have your choices to make. They have a big business to run and have to make corporate calculations for the risk they wish to take. They have obviously decided that they don't want either poorly capitalized traders, or highly leveraged traders. Its their business. Your trading is your business. They made their decisions, now you make yours.
RX: >Yeah...so what you forgot is that >you don't speak for [IB]" Yeah, I know...most bright people would just figure out from what IB has done that they are a conservative company and wouldn't say moronic things like 'there's no reason not to give 4X margin". Unfortunately, those poor folks need some minor lessons in credit extension risk and I'm proud to be of service. Stevene9 said it best: >>They have obviously decided that they >>don't want either poorly capitalized >>traders, or highly leveraged traders RX again: >AND they will lose those who want >the additional leverage. Yes they will, but I'll bet the retention percentages will surprise you. Not everyone is interested in 4x. >Now please don't tell me again how >awfully dangerous more leverage is. >We are all intelligent adults here... >and besides, you ain't my daddy. You've never read me attempting to sway you (or anyone else) from 4x. From IB's perspective, it is simply statistically more dangerous to offer 4x. If they feel like they will make more money with 4x they will offer it. If they feel it will cost them, they won't. I'm pretty confident they will make the most profitable decisions in the long term. >Oh...and BTW the additional leverage >IS very useful to those who know how >to manage the risk. (Like me You're never at risk RX. You clearly need to utilize that 10x at the pro firms. You always know when to get in and when to get out. You're the master, calling the bottoms and polishing those tops. Risk?...you must be kidding, as you can't even imagine what people are talking about. >You're not even a daytrader are you? >You're one of those investors, aren't >you? Tell that to my whining broker who lost 10+K per month in commissions when I switched to IB JB
>"They know exactly what they want and what risk profile >they wish to assume. They have obviously made a >risk/reward calculation. If they wanted your business they >wouldn't have done things the way they did." IB is probably still trying to figure out what to do. If you guys beleive that IB "exactly know what they want" than you are naive. IB has become one of the favourite brokers among the small traders and I don't think that they wish to lose those customers. They will wait to see what will their competition do and act accordingly. As def said in one of the discussions: some among their competition have much more political clout with SEC and IB is just being cautios. However I do beleive that IB will have to allow daytrading in cash accounts if other brokers do, and they will also have to allow 4:1 margin if they wish to remain competitive.
Well said, MichaelDay. I agree with both you and TradeRX on the issue of IB. Unless it is part of IB's hidden agenda to revert back to being a broker for institutions, there is no goddam way on earth that IB can expect to remain competitive in the retail arena unless it matches the facilities its competition offers. 4:1 margin is more valuable to me and, I guess, to many others than cheap commissions. Obviously, if we could get both at IB, that would be great ... otherwise: 1) it is au revoir to IB from the well-capitalised traders who wish to employ strategies to take advantage of 4:1 margin AND 2) it is au revoir to IB from the less well-capitalised (under $25k traders) who can easily move over to firms like CyberTrader and trade long-side cash accounts to their heart's content
"IB has become one of the favourite brokers among the small traders and I don't think that they wish to lose those customers." In my opinion, IB has established the closest thing to an all electronic brokerage in existance today. I don't think they have sought the small trader, it is just a natural consequence of the system they have developed. They wanted a system that was essentially extremely expandable and where the marginal cost of the next trade is miniscule for them. While no one wishes to lose business, every dollar helps, the small trader is not a market that they specifically went after. None of this really matters though. It is a rsik/reward calculation. If a firm's main target for growth is the small trader, then that firm may certainly decide that the reward is worth the risk. I think IB's gameplan is different. It is to have the cheapest marginal cost per trade. While it doesn't turn away the small trader, I do not believe that that market plays a major role in their growth plans or in their risk profile. Sure they like any extra money they can get from small traders, but not enough to risk their larger corporate structure. I may obviously be wrong about this, but I think they are being conservative and are probably not just feeling their way around this situation.