SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : CYBERTRADER

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: William W. Dwyer, Jr. who wrote (2625)6/8/1999 9:30:00 PM
From: Sir Francis Drake  Read Replies (3) of 3216
 
Bill - again good points. My take is that yes, if I knew I would have an accident a week, I'd do as you say. That is why I don't trade that way w/ Datek. But if I was told - yeah, an accident a week is a given when you drive a Pinto w/ these shitty brakes (Datek etc.), but this here Humvee (Cyber) with excellent brakes, a vehicle you paid a fortune for, is much, much safer (and if the brakes are not up to the job, you'd be justifiebly upset) - I'd take it on a high speed highway. Sure, I understand there are no "guarantees" - accidents do, and will happen. But it's right that you mention cars - after all we all know that accidents happen, and the risk is there. Therefore we buy a big safe Mercedes, and drive it faster, than a Pinto - so you are right on (love those examples from real life<g>). And another example from real life - even more relevant to our discussion... taken from your post!

<<I don't know, but I imagine the market makers have more redundancy in their systems that they never even think about having a system outage. I just cannot imagine them accepting that risk, especially with the amount of money they have at risk and since they're accustomed to having everything set to their advantage anyway.>>

Ahem... THAT is what I'm expecting from Cyber who is supposed to be at the very forefront of making trading reliable! We are not talking about Etrade here - that's why we are paying the big bucks. After all, why should we have less robust a system than the MMs? And that also proves that it is TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE to have a robust system, so that I as a trader <<never even think about having a system outage. I just cannot imagine them accepting that risk, especially with the amount of money they have at risk>>. Couldn't have said it better myself :) If it works for them, then it can work for us - and again, we are supposed to be with a broker that has *daytrading* standards, not some web-based Ameritrade or Datek. That is the whole crux of my problem with Cyber.

So, basically I agree with you - and that's why I feel it important to hold Cyber to the standards that they themselves invite.

Regards,

Morgan

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext