|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Bilo,
what exactly do you mean by scanner, what would is that it would need?
++yet another one is to keep adding features to the platform... they badly
++need a good scanner because scanners are what pros use nowadays
++( scanners are basically half ass systems )
Thanks.
Volker Knapp
Wealth-Lab Inc.
http://www.wealth-lab.com
http://www.wealth-lab.de
++-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
++Von: Bilo Selhi [mailto:biloselhi@xxxxxxxxxxx]
++Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. März 2002 20:53
++An: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
++Betreff: Re: TRAD Stock Slides further
++
++
++that's what they need now more than anything.
++with under a buck a share i'd buy them in a heartbeat
++if i were Bear Sterns... so i see something on the
++horizon. :) and who knows who's selling and for what...
++
++however consider this, the system trading market is still very small...
++there is probably less than 10 systematic traders per every 100
++descretionary,
++ie 90% are still methodology traders. but even at those number TS can
++survive off those system traders...
++the reason is it's hard to develop a good system...
++however the future of trading is in systems...
++
++take a look for example at there CNBC adds, they are geared toward
++systematic traders only... where if you visit a typical trading
++shop and talk
++to traders, they typically frown on trading fully mechanical systems.
++ typically you hear from experienced traders: systems are too
++stiff, need to be flexible, systems only
++only work on paper and in the past, are hard to code ....
++and you hear from newbies: TS is too hard to use, i need to
++know programming...
++all of those are basically valid points considering again that
++systems are hard
++to code a good one , so at the end the majority of experienced
++and new traders
++say thank you but no thank you... and they choose a less
++sophisticated platform...
++
++it might be a good idea for trad to develop a decent system and
++go partially proprietary ie. go manage money... i bet they'd be
++making more that way instead of depending only on systematic traders...
++
++that or tilting the marketing toward not only systematic but
++desc. traders
++is also the solution...
++
++other option is going 100% proprietary...( least expected )
++
++yet another one is to keep adding features to the platform... they badly
++need a good scanner because scanners are what pros use nowadays
++( scanners are basically half ass systems )
++
++in any case they have several options to pursue here if they
++are smart...
++
++bilo.
++ps. i wonder how much $ would it take to take em over...
++they've done to lot to stay afloat: data on demand, routing
++executions, etc...
++i mean they got some value...
++
++----- Original Message -----
++From: "Jim Bronke" <jvbronke@xxxxxxx>
++To: "Alexander" <alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
++Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 1:50 PM
++Subject: Re: TRAD Stock Slides further
++
++
++> Bear Stearns would do pretty good buying them out. They are probably
++> considering it.
++> That stock is doing well.
++>
++>
++> Jim Bronke
++> Phoenix, AZ
++>
++>
++>
++> ----- Original Message -----
++> From: "Alexander" <alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
++> To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
++> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:41 AM
++> Subject: Re: TRAD Stock Slides further
++>
++>
++> : So then what happens?
++> :
++> : I go back to TS5? Someone buys them? I would think there's
++enough value
++> there
++> : for them to be acquired. I've got a few bucks in my wallet...
++> :
++> : alexander the bottom-feeder
++> :
++> :
++> :
++> :
++> : --- TFutures@xxxxxxx wrote:
++> : > Jim,
++> : >
++> : > I would ask you to think about the number of companies that
++> realistically
++> : > slide into sub $1 price levels that ever really recover and become
++> : > successful.
++> : >
++> : > I think the caveat "the trend is your friend" applies..
++> : >
++> : > They may survive, but I think most statisticians would
++agree, this dont
++> look
++> : > good..
++> : >
++> :
++> :
++> :
++>
++>
++>
++
|