|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>I have used FutureSource data approximately 3 years with TS 4.0. I have
had intermittent problems with tipcards and receivers. Each time,
FutureSource quickly (as in overnight) sent replacement equipment. It has been
my experience that FutureSource is one company that delivers more than they
promise. The data is clean, the service is excellent...feel free to contact me
if you need a name in the company to contact.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Joe Cansler <A
href="mailto:jcansler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>mailto:jcansler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon May 17 12:43:26 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail02.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 17303
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 May 1999 15:19:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id MAA18012;
Mon, 17 May 1999 12:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lego.zianet.com (lego.zianet.com [204.134.124.54])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id MAA17880
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 May 1999 12:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [204.134.124.26] by lego.zianet.com (NTMail 4.20.0009/NT1100.00.c5a99e31) with ESMTP id vkphbaaa for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 May 1999 13:16:05 -0600
Received: from r093.zianet.com (r093.zianet.com [207.66.42.102]) by nova.zianet.com (NTMail 3.02.13) with ESMTP id ka823144 for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 May 1999 13:12:02 -0600
Message-Id: <01cc01bea099$dee48030$662a42cf@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:13:21 -0600
Reply-To: eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Earl Adamy" <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Timberhill based systems..
References: <199905171503.IAA01388@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <37403A96.A59D65F5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-To: "RealTraders Discussion Group" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: c250fb14f2bbb7f62c6dd291ee733424.07
Just to clear up a few misconceptions. It is the TH Interactive Brokers
(retail division of TH) e-mini only version of the TH workstation for which
no backup is provided by Interactive Brokers.
The TH full workstation is leased to traders via retail brokers (e.g. EDF
Mann, Summit, Refco, etc.), communicates directly with hand-helds in
numerous pits including S&P, and backup is provided by the retail brokers.
There are another group of brokers (e.g. PMB) which use the TH backbone
front-ended with the broker's own servers and browser based software and
also provide phone backup - this has the advantage of no software lease fee
and the disadvantage of another layer of hardware/software.
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Roos <roos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: Timberhill based systems..
> Eliot:
>
> Did you miss the posts a few weeks back about how you need another
> account to hedge your timberhill position when the TH system goes down?
> The story was that you are unable to call in an order in a time of
> system outage, so you are in big trouble without a hedge acct with
> another firm.
>
> In terms of "slow fills" in reference to LEO systems, not sure what the
> comparisons were made from. If you trade the spoos, there is no system
> that rivals the "direct to pit" order entry system of LEO brokers.
>
> I agree, the LEO outages are annoying, but I just quit trading if it
> goes down (the outages are almost universally related to the CME CUBS
> sustem, which has been improved). Otherwise the floor has too great of
> an edge.
>
> I would not consider it adequate to not even be able to call in an order
> during a technical glitch to cover a position. (Timberhill users will
> correct me if I am wrong, but check it out).
>
> No assoc with LEO brokers, just a client.
>
> Don
>
>
>
|