|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yes, the bandwidth reasoning is a poor excuse. Adding one more symbol to the
10,000+ they currently transmit wouldn't seem to be too much of a burden on
the bandwidth. Come on BMI, you need to respond to the users needs. We need
a 24 hour, 5 tick per minute "TestSym".
Date: Monday, December 14, 1998 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: BMI and Bandwith??!!
>I received an identical response. I agree about the bogus excuse of
>bandwidth. Too many of us have indicators/systems that can't function w/out
>it ("TestSym"). Now I'm wondering are there other data services that have a
>similar timing symbol that we can substitute (assuming our indicator/system
>code developers are willing to make the change)? A core component of my
>daytrading approach has just gone out the window. If we can make such a
>substitution, perhaps it'll lead a migration away from BMI & its callous
>treatment of its customers.
>
>Michael
>
>
>
>At 07:14 PM 12/14/98 -0500, David Candle wrote:
>>To help the group I wrote in. This was my response to BMI.
>>Thats hogwosh. The amount of bandwith it takes up is super minimal.
>>At 03:52 PM 12/14/1998 -0800, you wrote:
>>> Dear Mr. Candle,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your patience for my response. I am afraid that the
>>>decision has been made to not re-instate the "TestSym". The BTCI2F is
the
>>>symbol that you will have to use at this time. Providing timely and
>>>accurate data is foremost. Having a symbol which provides information at
>>>one time a minute (BTCI2F) as opposed to five times a minute (TestSym),
it
>>>was decided that the symbol taking up less bandwidth was the way to go.
>>>
>>> Please send further questions, comments or concerns to tsbmi@xxxxxxx
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Ray Bamer
>>> BMI Client Services
>>> tsbmi@xxxxxxx
>>> Direct 800.436.4036 choice #2
>>> Fax 510.266.6060
>>>http:/www.bmiquotes.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|