Who accepts me, a daytrader?

Discussion in 'Prop Firms' started by qdz, Nov 9, 2002.

  1. Some people were very annoyed with IB, not for changing the rules which was not their fault, but for completely giving no kind of notification that the rules were going to be changed, or that they had been changed, or any explanation for their changing.

    It's very nice that def is here to respond to people's remarks, but while the rules were being changed in October there was no response to the many posts and questions on IB's own discussion forum from anyone at IB.

    I have been satisfied with IB, I have had no complaints, but I have to say that the changes in policy of this kind definitely deserve at the very least to be communicated to us in the e-mail Communique, if not in fact responded to on their own boards. There are a lot of IB customers here, but this is not IB's own board. Explanations to their own customers ought to take place first of all on their own boards.

    If some people got fed up with IB, not for the change of rules, but for refusing to give any explanation or notification of such a crucial change, that's to be expected, and that resentment is something they brought on themselves.

    Rather than tell someone who got annoyed with pretty good cause that he is a fool who has no business being in this business as a trader, they should face the fact that giving people cause to be annoyed is going to cause people to be annoyed. This is an important thing for IB to consider if they want to be in this business as a broker.
    #11     Nov 10, 2002
  2. qdz


    hii a_ooiioo_a, thanks for the explanation. But it may not be necessary to IB. IB was a failure to me anyway. This is not the topic here.

    Please do not take wrong on merely $2K. I will take care of myself and offer you what you deserve. What I ask for are trading freedom and equality same as other market participants. Of course, I shall never put you in risks. Just watch over my shoulder and pull me out whenever I give you a margin problem or something like that. All right?

    Thank you.

    #12     Nov 10, 2002
  3. You might want to put this in the Pro Firm topic of the Direct-Access Brokers category.

    They have other fees, though. And they may make you agree to not trade stocks or options from a personal account.
    #13     Nov 10, 2002
  4. The PDT rule is industry-wide; it's an SEC regulation and any and all brokers will have to honor it.
    #14     Nov 10, 2002
  5. qdz


    Thank you.

    I know prop firms do not have to. Some retailer firm do not have to neither. The PDT rules is discriminatory, criminal and sucks. Whoever honors it will answer for it.

    #15     Nov 10, 2002
  6. qdz


    Webmaster of EliteTrader, please remove this thread or move it to Pro Firms forum.

    Instead given chance to pathetic IB employees hiding somewhere, to insult their ex-customers, I duplicated the topic to Pro Firms. But found it was deleted lately

    Please instruct me what I should do before I duplicated there again.

    Thank you.

    #16     Nov 10, 2002
  7. You have my agreement on that one. It's total bullshit, and what makes it worse is that they give >25k accounts 4:1 margin. So what the SEC is saying is "we want to protect the little guys, oh and by the way. Here's twice as much rope to hang yourselves by."

    What a crock.
    #17     Nov 10, 2002
  8. def

    def Sponsor

    Once again you show why you only have 2K. It must be some system. I believe I need to respond to your post because once again you question the financial integrity of the IBG.

    1. If you figured out how to read a financial statement, you'd find that IB is in a better financial position than the two firms you mention. The brokerage unit and the firm have no debt and plenty of shareholder equity. And lo and behold, they actually make money.

    2. High quality: if browser based applications, the sale of order flow and fixed commissions is your determination of quality, I guess they got us and all the other DA brokers beat.

    3. You insinuate that other IB employees are defending the firm on these boards. I'm almost positive that is not the case and if I knew of it, I'd ask them to stop.

    4. The PDT rules are criminal and any firm following them will get their due: that's a good argument that will stand up in court. The actual number of customers affected by the options rule is quite low. Unfortunately, it should have been commuicated better but there were other issues to consider.

    earlier on this or another post I made the comment about the high cost of the under 2K accounts. you're doing a good job of proving this point.
    #18     Nov 10, 2002
  9. qdz



    Thanks so much for having this thread moved. Appreciate it.
    #19     Nov 10, 2002
  10. With all due deference, I don't know what the "other issues to consider were", but I sure think that if IB representatives had made any kind of appearance on IB's own discussion forum, to offer some explanation and response to customer inquiries the last month, you wouldn't be in the position now of trying to defend the firm against complaints from a dissatisfied customer on here.

    Instead of wasting your energy refuting every little accusation that qdz makes on here, as if they're going affect the firm's professional standing and ability to carry on business (is his voice really that powerful?), why not stop in to the IB Discussion Forum once in a while to respond to the questions of hundreds of people who are still trying to trade with IB? Or at least nudge some of your colleagues to get on there and respond to your own customers (some of whom have quite a bit more than $2,000). It would be a definite improvement.
    #20     Nov 10, 2002