|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<META content='"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Check out <A
href="http://www.netfutures.com";>www.netfutures.com</A>, they use the LEOWEB
software and system from LFG, rate of approx $19/round turn. I am not
using this system but I am investigating it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2> As I understand it, the system interfaces
directly with TOPS for both CME and CBOT. When you click "submit
order" from your PC the order is assigned a TOPS confirmation number
and is printed at the order desk on the floor. In general a market order
is arbed in and any other order is run in manually. In the Spoo the order
is routed directly to a CUBS terminal in the pit where a clerk handles the
fill reporting and the broker works directly from the screen. I believe
NetFutures uses the LFG brokers and order desks as well as LFG's
software.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In the Spoo where the CUBS terminal handles the deck for the
broker it avoids many of the issues related to Cancel/Replaces which we have
heard so much about lately. I've been told that the LFG CUBS terminal is
the only one the CME has allowed so far. But CME plans to open up in a
couple of months and allow many more. (the competition should be
good) I think CBOT has no CUBS terminals now, but I guess they will
after CME opens it up.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In both cases the LEOWEB ordering process saves a couple of
steps over using a phone based system to call an order desk off the
floor.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I am attracted to the notion of electronic ordering, but I
harbor many reservations in using an ISP and dial up internet (reliability,
security, and what happens WHEN IT BREAKS as is certainly will. Backup
with human order desks etc.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If I am wrong or have misstated any of this I would like to
hear about my errors.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Tom Quinn</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>maposnak <<A
href="mailto:maposnak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>maposnak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To:
</B>RealTraders Discussion Group <<A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Tuesday, June 02, 1998 6:07 AM<BR><B>Subject: </B>online futures
brokers<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I currently have accounts with IRA Epstein, 1st Amer,
Alaron. Paying $25, $20, $15. I am curious about ZAP and other online
brokers. I use Datek for stocks and do like fills in 30 seconds plus the
automatic record keeping of "trade history". It seems only the
bonds and S&P give flash fills in <30seconds. Is anyone getting say
15 second fill in Wheat, corn or beans or any other market using Zap or
other online broker? I always trade at the market.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>G</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Tue Jun 02 08:57:06 1998
X-POP3-Rcpt: neal@xxxxxxxxx
Return-Path: <owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from accessone.com (list.listserver.com [198.68.191.15])
by purebytes.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
id IAA12499 for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:56:08 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id IAA23991;
Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo11.mx.aol.com (imo11.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.33])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id IAA19565
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Peter2150@xxxxxxx
by imo11.mx.aol.com (IMOv14_b1.1) id AEYKa15555
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:13:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <47439b88.35741682@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:13:04 EDT
Reply-To: Peter2150@xxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Peter2150@xxxxxxx
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: DTN vs BMI et al
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
In a message dated 98-06-02 10:51:56 EDT, lel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Same type of thing happened to me. I will NEVER use BMI again. I
> recommend nobody else use them unless you want to encourage this type of
> business practice. I hope they fail miserably.
>
I can understand the frustration, of finding yourself with a contract for
service you know longer need. We all deal with it. But first and foremost if
you need the data, is to be sure you are getting the data you need, reliably.
I have had very good success with BMI, and even have found there tech support
adequate.
|