though many people give you a hard time, you're posts have never bothered all that much me before. you are trying to run a business, so you post teasers to get people to come to bright. that's fine, and i can respect that. but, when you flat out lie to make bright look better than it is, it's disgusting. thank you GHJ everyone knows that ETG has among, if not theee, highest commission rates in the industry. so, leaving slk for instinet will lower commissions for the traders while maintaining the hefty profit margins that ETG has enjoyed in the past, and provide rebates (?) for adding liquidity to instinet. so, ETG will be MORE competitive, not less. yes, some traders are dismayed that they will be losing redi because they are comfortable with it, but i'm looking forward to it since it will lower my costs. and, who knows, maybe it will be a better system. the charting is certainly better, which will save a few grand/year alone. by the way, etg has been with slk for 10 years and did 2.5 billion shares last year (all public and on the website), so that alone calls your quote into question. on a side note, bright trading is not owned by goldman..period. you are a client. right on once again GHJ redi+ has not been updated once since i started using it six months ago. redi+ is notorious for freezing and crashing, though it's the only system i've used, so i can't compare. I lost a lot of respect for you don. if i ever do need another prop firm, bright will be the last place i look into. oh wait, you're a brokerage firm, recruiting retirees, not a prop firm.
Once again I am forced to call you on this stupid idea about SLK, Redi and the rest. As you can see by the posters who are not biased by their own emotions, Redi is an excellent system. As far as Redi losing clients or SLK worried about customers, just read their annual reports, and those of Goldman Sachs. The note about Redi and Arca is not "apples and oranges" and just refers to the system backbone and server farms. I agree with the post about the Introducing Brokers, and middleman ....but there are so few left in that category that I doubt anyone who does due diligence would bother with them...much like anyone doing due diligence would bother with a "sub llc" or or a "franchise type' operation. Most of the software is similar in any regards, no matter how much some firms try to make theirs sound better..remember the Hold Bros. and their "grey box"?? " It is a poor mechanic who places blame on his tools." We all have excellent software, and good traders will do well no matter what. The calls I get daily, asking for the differences between several firms, get the same reply..."do the due diligence, check the financials, no "sub llc's" etc. Be sure you can get your money back immediately if you decide to leave, and all the standard stuff." The person who posted about the competition between Clearing Firms is absolutely correct, and we are always being courted and we continually negotiate for better deals....we are selective however, since we don't want to sacrifice security for a few pennies in costs...and traders should be the same way. Let's all keep growing the business we love from the new people out there...work hard, train well, and have a good success rate...then we can all enjoy a similar measure of success. Don
redi+ has not been updated once since i started using it six months ago. redi+ is notorious for freezing and crashing, though it's the only system i've used, so i can't compare. . [/B][/QUOTE] You think I'm lying?? I have updated versions dated Feb, Mar18, April 12, and have a new one coming soon. Since I use at this every day, what sense does it make to challenge me on this. When it ocmes to software, people get used to something, and no matter what others say they don't want to change. I stand behind my previous posts as to viability and reliability of Redi Plus. I hope we can stop this part of the "battle" since software is such a small part of trading in the first place. Let's focus on trading methodology and techniques, doesn't that make more sense.
"I hope we can stop this part of the "battle" since software is such a small part of trading in the first place."-Bright How can you say that? Speed of execution and reliability (especially in times of huge volume surges, i.e.-10:00 numbers or breaking news) are what many traders look for when choosing a firm.
don, we differ in what each of us mean by 'updated versions.' when i think of an update, i think of new features. when you think of an update, you think of bugs being fixed, which you don't see, but have been done. while we're discussing redi+, and you have clout with slk, would you mind seeing if they will fix the quick update bar for NYSE stocks? sometimes it works, usually it doesn't. it works really well for OTC stocks though. (the quick update bar allows you to cancel and replace up increments...ie. .05, .10, .25, etc.)
its all just economies of scale to me. All of the really big firms self clear because it is much cheaper for them. If a firm doesn't self clear it is just because they aren't large enough.
Now this is a good thing...a suggestion for improvement. I will talk to my people and see what they say. If it is sporadic problem, then it may not be the Redi problem, but an NYSE problem (not passing any buck, I just wonder when a problem comes and goes). Don
You're right to a point about the economies of scale...but what has happened is several cases, the trading volume has been cut back so much that the self clearing has become a burden. It made sense at 50 million shares/day, but may not at 20 million shares per day. Since the clearing firms are competing for our business, we like to keep the options open....and when we open our retail operation, then perhaps self clearing will be the right choice. Don