I don't have specifics but it sounds like he set a stop limit. The stop limit gets triggered and a limit order is sent to the exchange. Then the stop was moved but as the limit order is ALREADY at the exchange the limit order is not changed. Once the stop is triggered, logically you must change the order that is created.
OK. Got a reply. Wow. The IB staffer thinks that the issue is confusion about orders (note that he did not use the words below). 1. You can do what I and most people do which is move stoplimit orders or move the stop and limit independently as long as the stop has not been triggered. 2. Once the stop has been triggered this is no longer a stop limit at IB's server, at the exchange or anywhere in God's cyberworld. There is only a limit order. So investwthme is trying to move a stoplimit after the stop triggered. And that is what you can't do ... you are fiddling with a limit order. To change the stoplimit order you must cancel the stop limit to remove the live limit order from the exchange and resubmit a stop limit order with your new parameters. This makes perfect sense and is another example of IB's technology doing exactly what you would expect. Hell, and of the exchanges technology doing the right thing. All is right with the world. I can carry on trading, happy in my sandbox (not being as old as oldtrader yet) PS. I am not a stubborn defendant of IB. I simply have a highly tuned "Wanker Detector" and get joy out of attacking said fools. And boy we sure see them in amongst those who create anti-ib threads. The threads with the loudest titles usually have the stupidest reasons from the most foolish posters! Note that I don't wish to imply that Investwthme is a W, just a little confused. If he had been a W he would have started a thread with an incendiary title saying how evil IB was and what terrible things they had done to him. The OP on the other hand does show every sign of being a W. Cheers and good trading to the non-w's amongst the ET community.
Then why does tws allow me to submit the change. Shouldn't I get an error when I change the STOP LIMIT after the limit was touched. What benefit does changing the stop limit order have (once the limit was touched). If I wanted to change the stop I would have moved that. If I wanted to change the limit I would have done so. I wanted to change the stop limit. All I am saying is tws should give me a pop up warning or something like "you have set a stop limit order where limit price has been touched, if you want to change the stop limit order hit cancel and resubmit your order"
I hope IB has powered up some lobbying effort. If the "trader tax" passes, and it looks like it is heading that way, short the hell out of IB and every broker that handles a lot of retail accounts. I love IB, but can you imagine what will happen to their revenues? Gonna be ugly. Def or other IB reps - any comments on the trader tax stuff?
I transmitted a stop limit order to buy one ES though the main screen of TWS, I put the stop where I knew it would get hit, but I put the limit way too low to get filled. When the order is first transmitted the order status is blue, and I can change both of the prices. But when the stop gets hit the order status changes to green. Once the order status is green I am prevented from changing the stop price, I can not get the cursor in the box to type or bring up the price wand. Only the limit price may be changed then. The order ticket screen is different though, if you right click on the order line and select modify-order ticket, the stop price field is not disabled on that screen after the stop has been hit. They missed that one, you can still type a new price in the stop price field, but it wont turn back into a stop limit order when you transmit it.
You have to be new at this. These are huge whinges just because you're whinging about something so minor. Sure its worth pointing it out to IB .. particularly the last posters point about catching half of the problem but missing one point. But lets be realistic about how complex tws is and how one fix is likely to lead to other problems no matter how well Ib's programmers do their jobs. You know what happens. Accept it. Get over it. Take responsibility for the only thing controllable in this game and trade well. Good luck.
What is the root of all this discussion? I think it's that IB is a company that sells a service. As with most companies, some customers never have a problem and some do. But if I were to voice a complaint about my internet service, TV service etc.. no one would bat an eyelash. But for some reason, if you voice a complaint about IB on ET other IB customers seem to take it personally and feel a need to defend them. I find that strange.
It was explained why so it's not strange at all. Most of those who complained about IB in the past and continue to do so were and are unjustified in their complaints as the issue was almost invariably their own fault or not IB's. It's like complaining that Verizon(phone company) installed phone wiring to your house but you didn't plug a phone into the phone jack, yet complain and conclude that Verizon service sucks. Expect to get a ribbing by people. It's so pervasive on this site that occasionally people with legitimate complaints who can't articulate their issue properly at the onset get an initial ribbing by some of the resident IB defenders.
"It's like complaining that Verizon(phone company) installed phone wiring to your house but you didn't plug a phone into the phone jack, yet complain and conclude that Verizon service sucks. Expect to get a ribbing by people. " Maybe it's more like not having your digital phone work because you didn't notice the 4th paragraph on page 34 of the 62 page manual regarding the specific sequence of numbers needing to be entered to do a certain function. I design websites and I still have trouble navigating to the right section of information on their website for questions I have. And are you telling me that if you heard a fellow Verizon customer complain about something in the service they were paying for you would feel the need to respond to them and defend Verizon?
That's a valid analogy. But lets' not confuse pointing something out and placing responsibility where responsibility is due with defending a vendor or service provider. In the above example, I would point out that section of the manual. That in and of itself would let the poster know they should have read it and failure to read would be their fault and not Verizons. Would you operate a complex product without reading the manual? Or at least the sections which deal with how you intend to use the product? Plus you keep bringing everything back to your own experience with the resident IB defenders and are failing to see WHY they react the way they do to every other anti-IB post. Now I agree that their website is at times difficult to navigate. And also that some features in TWS could use more text to explain. Good thing they have a simulator so you can test out the features that don't have enough descriptive text to see what they do. What's more, sometimes new features have no text at all. These are legitimate gripes. But that's not what most of the complaints look like. I remember reading a post years ago that had an inflammatory thread title. In the end, the poster had to admit that the issue was his fault and did the right thing and apologized to IB. But that's a rare thing. Then you have honest posters who simply ask questions on the forum about a IB TWS feature or IB protocol. And they tend to get many good answers. It's all in the approach. The anti-IB posts that will get the most reaction are those which demonstrate that the poster hasn't read, doesn't understand basic trading mechanics, fails to take personal responsibility for their losses, etc, or that start a thread with an inflammatory title for an issue that's not nearly as inflammatory as the title suggested. That's what I have observed reading many of the posts here. Other forums don't seem to have this issue to this degree - on either side of the fence.