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 : bad experience in Charles Schwab recently

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mozek who wrote (52)8/16/1997 1:07:00 AM
From: Rick Ryan   of 124
 
Mozek,

In posting #46, reversing an order isn't quite the situation I described. In that situation, the trader would be totally within the rules for doing that. He has no idea that the investor is cancelling an order hoping to "force a fill" (a good way to piss off a trader by the way). He sees a cancel and has the discretion to cancel IF he wishes. If the stock has since moved against the trader, he will most likely reject the cancel and fill the order; honoring the investor's original intentions. However, if it has moved FOR him or stayed even, he can choose to fill the order and reject the cancel request OR honor the cancel. He doesn't have the luxury of time to call the customer or his broker and find out what the heck the guy's trying to do. Believe me, cancelling an order because you didn't get filled as fast as you like and then reentering an order is poor strategy. That pisses off traders to no end and its obvious when it happens. Keep in mind, what I just described may sound like he's getting screwed, but it is also totally within the law.

Now, if you placed an order with ANY actual broker at Schwab, there is no "boating" of orders taking place --that's for electronic orders only and most of them are auto-boated anyway. I don't know which specific contracts you were trading but 60 contracts does NOT have to be represented on the floor. Representation is only a "courtesy" and applies to only 10 or less contracts orders with no restrictions at all (AON etc). They MAY represent you for over 10 orders but they are not obligated to. You may have been due for 10 only because the bid/ask prices only have to be honored for that amount and then they can move them down/up. Other factors such as stock price (ie fast market), open interest, daily volume could have been involved. If open interest is only 300 and you want to sell 60 at current bid, that's expecting a lot with no downward movement. Hard to say with what info I have. However, no one makes money on a non-fill.

It also sounds like this option was not RAES-eligible (Retail Automatic Execution System on CBOE). Check CBOE's web site for details on contract eligibility. Even if it was though, your order was not eligible because you had more than 10 contracts.

Since there were no fills at 7, I seriously doubt you were due. The fast market in the stock didn't help at all. Change/cancels do take a few minutes for options since there is a person physically running around to do it in the pit. It doesn't sound like you were trying to force a cancel as I described above (you were chasing it), but it pisses off option traders especially so. There are few jobs more stressful than an options pit trader.

Hope this helps explain some things. Good luck!
RR
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext