Quote from nomoreoptions: Alan, I don't know the questions to your millions of (angry) questions when I raise my own questions and doubts. Now that I have your attention... You are not just "raising questions". You are always making accusations of ethical violations, with absolutely no evidence to back them up. I suppose it is possible that, because your "first" language does not appear to be English, your tone is being misunderstood, as mine would be if I attempted to write in Spanish, I language I know just well enough to where my writings might look like yours if I were in a hurry. However, I think I would be far more careful for that reason, certainly when writing something confrontational. Or perhaps it is normal and inoffensive in your culture to routinely question someone's ethics in this way. Do understand, though, that in this business (trading), and in this place (ET), many/most interpret your writing in this way. Might I suggest that you avoid using slang (e.g. "blow off" and "f'ing around"), and instead use more precise language to tell people what you mean? This is a big part of what makes you hard to understand. Between that and the attitude, most people just don't bother trying to figure it out, just assume you are off on another rant, and respond in kind. But why this is in software forum? It's about a feature of TWS, a TRADING software, quite legitimate. It's not about a feature of TWS. It's about you accusing TWS of having some "feature" which would be harmful to customers if it worked as you have said. You've not given any rational reason to suppose that it would work this way - there's certainly nothing in the description of this unique new feature that would indicate that it could do what you describe. With regard to your further questions, which are again difficult/impossible to understand, I can only again suggest that you learn the difference between "assignment", which is what can happen to you when you are short an option, and "exercise", which is what you can do when you're long an option. Exercise, not assignment, is what TWS will now allow one to do in real time. It clearly states that if you attempt to exercise an option and you do not have sufficient margin to hold the resulting underlying position, it will reject the exercise, not dump the position into your account and then immediately liquidate it, as you have accused. Your comment about the PDT rules (again), which appears to be at least one of the sources of your animosity towards IB, is misguided. Many brokers (including IB) spent millions of dollars on legal expenses and thousands of hours of their time on trying to influence, and then understand, these rules, which do nothing but hurt their business. They already are on your side - they just can't do anything else about it. Or do you (again) think that they should just ignore the exchange rules and laws and risk huge fines (or worse) so you can do what you want?
Alan, well said but too long to quote. Let me get this straight. You think I am blasting, I am blasting. It doesn't matter I am blasting or not. If I was not intend to blast, I want to blast now. That's the way it is. It is not my culture. It is just my nature. It is not the languages I use. It is just what I think. So this is the way it is. But thanks for a nice try to straight me out in public. Why do you want to straight me out? Why not straight "they" the crooked out?
>It is not my culture. It is just my nature. >It is not the languages I use. It is just >what I think. Ok, I get it...you are just a Moron. Suspicion confirmed. JB
Inherent problem I think of realtime exercise is that who takes the other side from whatever time of exercise to the time of assignments. What if the market moves big time in this period and most of the other party are all settled or hedged? Deek in the air?
Quote from NoMoreOptions: But thanks for a nice try to straight me out in public. Why do you want to straight me out? Because you are accusing and defaming someone without cause or proof. Why not straight "they" the crooked out? Again you say "crooked". If you have proof, show it. Otherwise, it's libel. Because civilized society considers this to be undesirable, most jurisdictions have civil law that make such statements actionable. libel: 2 a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b (1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means (3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel."