[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Using DS for S&P Trading --- Re: BMI Sat Question



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Dear Ian,

I was a BMI satellite customer from 85-99, when I switched to DS +
QFeed.
Not that that combination doesn't have its own problems, yet in many
ways I
find it preferable to BMI satellite for trading S&P on a short-term
basis (my
main trading screen is a 2-tick screen).  For backup, I use Ben
Lichtenstein's squawkbox and also have a cell phone at the ready.  I
haven't
experienced data lag (as I did with BMI), but occasionally DS simply
stops
dead on me without any warning (as it did today), and usually I can't
get it
going again unless I reboot my computer, which generally takes around 5
minutes for reboot plus restarting both DS and TS.  Occasionally, my
telephone line (for cable modem) dies (often due to construction crews),
and
then of course not only don't I have data or squawkbox but I also can't
call
my broker on my desk phone --- hence the reason for my cell phone.  I
would
encourage you to reconsider using DS for S&P trading.

Sincerely,

Richard


Ian Cunningham wrote:

> Thanks to all who responded. Great info as usual.
>
> >>These suggestions assume that you are aware that many BMI satellite
> customers
> (including myself) have found that BMI's real time feed is consistently
> running  20 to 2 minutes behind actual exchange quotations.  I have been
> with
> BMI and its predecessors for 14 years but am about to move to DTN
> satellite,
> because I cannot abide these delays in my trading. <<
>
> Yes, I am aware, I have been with BMI 10+ years myself. I use TS4 so DTN
> is not an option. I have checked out Dynastore and after monitoring their
> list don't feel confident that is the answer for RT trading SP's. Until I
> finish the
> learning curve of VB and convert all my stuff to Traderware I find BMI is
> the best
> of a bad bunch for my needs. By having BMI feed TS4;  running QCharts and
> listening
> to Squawk I know where I'm at ........... most of the time anyway!
>
> Thanks again,
> Ian.