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 : Datek Brokerage $9.95 a trade -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 10:06:00 AM
From: peter michaelson  Respond to of 16892
 
Peter:

I appreciate your post.

Could you tell us how it is that Datek is able to short certain securities when no other firm seems to be able to do so?

Thank you,

Peter



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 12:18:00 PM
From: Len  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16892
 
Peter

It's interesting again to see you poke your head in the door, address a couple of vanilla topics you can handle, and leave the important ones un-addressed. This, while chastising the people who brought Datek to where it is today.

Yes, Peter, the thread used to be an exchange of intelligent ideas, where people did indeed learn about the workings of Island, Datek, and the markets in general. Back then, Datek was the epitome of excellence, rarely giving rise to post, in your words,"bashing and pointless flaming."

So what happened, you ask? I'll tell you what happened, Peter. You got "sidetracked" (again your word), with other things, like, to quote your earlier post, "designing and implementing the new website in five days," and playing with Dilbert so you could attract all comers.

Along the way, you forgot to concentrate on your core responsibilities, namely, servicing your current clients. Perhaps, if you had spent your time listening to some of the posts here, and fixed, for instance, the black hole you call customer service, things might be different. If you truly have read the past 200 posts, you would not call them "pointless flaming." Granted, some of them fall into that category, but you and I both know that the majority of them have complete validity.

As to Datek's sluggishness on active days, come on, Peter. Apparently EVERY day is active, because this has not abated for three weeks, and continues throughout the day, each and every day.

Yes, Peter, Datek is growing, and will continue to grow, since online trading is very hot now, along with a bullish market. More and more people are coming into the markets with their money. But at some point, the attrition from fed up clients will start to outstrip the new signups, and you will be left with the ten trades per month investors, which I hardly think will be enough for new Gulfstream jets and 20,000 square foot mansions.

I sincerely hope I am wrong, for I would like nothing better to have the old Datek around, because back then, you were THE BEST at what you did. Sadly, that is no longer the case. Cheapest, yes. But in the end, you have become more expensive due to money left on the table because of your current shortcomings.

Good luck in getting the magic back.

Len



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 2:58:00 PM
From: jawd  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 16892
 
The amount of bashing and pointless flaming on this thread is incredible.

If you read the 200 posts then you know what people think of your shitty little operation. Look for the account with $2.98 left in it - that was mine, take it go buy yourself a drink. The other $200k is with MB Trading now. I'm not going to waste anymore bandwidth with you. If you want a civilized response then read Les's post again and again until you get the message...



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 3:29:00 PM
From: Dirk Hente  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16892
 
[Short Selling @Nasdaq]

Peter, as far as i know, a short sale is legal even in a down bid situation.
According to a NASD Notice to Members about the 'Legal Definition Of Short Sale' ( nasdr.com ) the IM-3350 Short Sale rule says:
[...]The Association has determined that in order to effect a "legal" short sale when the current best bid is lower than the preceding best bid the short sale must be executed at a price of at least 1/16th point above the current inside bid [when the current inside spread is 1/16th point or greater]. The last sale report for such a trade would, therefore, be above the inside bid by at least 1/16th of a point. [If the current spread is less than 1/16th of a point, however, the short sale must be executed at a price equal to or
greater than the current inside offer price.]


From this, i understand that it should be possible to execute a legal short sale in a 'down market'.

Can you comment on this?

BTW, its of no importance for me because i dont short stocks.



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 4:31:00 PM
From: jawd  Respond to of 16892
 
I posted the message below on April 24, why don't YOU answer it?

I wonder why Datek don't just come out up front and tell us what the terms and conditions are for obtaining compensation? Maybe its only given to he who spends 90 mins on the phone pressing them?

Sounds to me like trying to get blood from a stone.

Who needs this crap?

P.S. Maybe they could convert that little Dilbert ticker to show us the claims received vs claims paid. They could put together a nice fancy web page "Datek Compensation Claim Form" so that when they screw up we can just fill in the blanks.



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/1/1998 4:41:00 PM
From: jawd  Respond to of 16892
 
If you really want to be helpful, how about publicly answering this message I posted on April 25th? We'd all like to hear YOUR explanation:


Absolutely! I'm convinced that Datek makes money in 90% of our trades in fast moving stocks. I remember placing a market order to buy covering a short on DELL where I'd timed it exactly right, and was expecting to make $1,500 profit - it turned into $500 - where did the other $1000 go? Datek took the opportunity to screw me.

Proof? Read the confirmations you receive in the post. Firstly, no tracking numbers are shown, no times of execution, nothing. This makes it very difficult to correlate your facts if you do a large number of trades and wish to complain later. The confirmation is the bare minimum legally required. Datek is only concerned with doing the right thing legally - not morally.

Secondly; look at the Ex (Execution) and Cap (Capacity) codes on the confirmation against each trade; 90% of my trades are C-3 which means this:

C = "Cross transaction" (as opposed to NASDAQ transaction - see below).
3 = "We acted as principle, either buying from you or selling to you. We may have earned a profit on this transaction."

Only about 5% -10% of trades are coded A-2 which means:
A = NASDAQ
2 = "We acted as agent for your account and risk"

Add to this that Datek IS A "non-registered" MARKET MAKER!! They are listed in the Nasdaq Volume reports as shifting huge volumes of all kinds of stocks under their own MM symbol "DATK". For instance, they ranked 4th below Deutsche Morgan Grenfell, Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney in February 1998 as trading the highest number of Amazon stock. They ranked higher than Alex Brown, Mayer & Schweitzer, Montgomery, INCA and ISLD!!!

They don't take order flow??? How about this from their confirmations:

"The firm may receive remuneration for directing orders to particular broker-dealers or market centers for execution. Such remuneration is considered compensation to the Firm"





To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/3/1998 5:25:00 PM
From: Jon Tara  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16892
 
Peter, I think that you are discovering that flames scale - just like servers, backbone connections, orders, and profits.

Problem is, flames don't scale linearly. It's one of those ugly, exponential curves.

The bigger you get, the better your customer service must become. When you have a significant online presense, it will NOT do to just maintain customer service - it needs to get constantly better. And it can NEVER backslide (as I've see happen with Datek several times) because any little twitch is going to be amplified.

Instead of berating people for getting a bit hot over what in many cases are legitimate concerns, why not focus on reaching the point where this thread is flame-free, because nearly everybody is satisfied with your service? If/when that happens, you will know that you have succeeded, in spades.



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/3/1998 5:30:00 PM
From: Jon Tara  Respond to of 16892
 
"You cannot short sell when the "BidTick" is down on NASDAQ."

Are you sure of that, Peter?

My understanding was that you can short-sell NASDAQ stocks at any time. However, if the bidtick is down, you can still short-sell at a limit price above the bid.

I have done so on a couple of occasions, and found that my order did execute, and without a bid-tick.

This is usually only possible on fairly active stocks, of course.



To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/4/1998 4:09:00 PM
From: Mike  Respond to of 16892
 
>2) Options
>If you read my posts, they have been pretty consistent. Options by
>the end of '98. Probably sooner.

Peter,

You have been anything but consistent on options trading. First, it was going to happen in the fall of '97. Then as summer was ending it became 4th quarter '97. Then around December it was Fall '98, and now it is sometime in '98. With consistency like that, it's no mystery why Datek is getting hammered on this thread.

If you can't be honest in a small thing like the roll out of new features, expect more flames. If you don't plan in offer options trading, just say so.

Mike




To: Peter Stern who wrote (8321)5/13/1998 4:24:00 PM
From: WallStBum  Respond to of 16892
 
Hi Peter -

Doing a little catchup. Agreed with your post entirely. Could you update me and others on status of 2 things, and I apologize in advance if these have already been discussed.

a) All or none limit orders
b) NASDAQ Level II

I got pinched on a limit "in the spread" buy order a couple days ago for 1,000 shares. I have limited knowledge of SOES, but my order executed for 127 shares and the remaining 873 languished until the bid/ask moved away from me and I cancelled. I sold the 127 for a tiny profit, but netted out to zero due to commissions.

I know you have no control over this, I watched the whole damn thing happen on Level II. But all or none would help immensely.

Thanks Peter for your candidness.

Dax Stoner