When we started offering Ninja we were at a huge disadvantage because we came many years after it was offered to customers by 2 dominant brokers who controlled the landscape. We could have come to the race with pricing only, but that would not got us here today. We decided to provide reasonable commissions, and specialize in the back end technology we run over Ninja.
We take the time to learn the technology we support, and provide practical advice to traders that use us to bounce of ideas. For example, many times I have advised customers to reduce their frequency, not to over leverage, etc This was practical advice that could save them thousands, not pennies.
Over time I put the resources of our company to find better staff, better software, and explore other resources to help customers. So your money goes back investing into you as a trader.
Over the years I have discussed things with highly capitalized traders, profitable traders and others who have been trading for a long time. They wanted good commissions, but 10 cents per side was not their priority. They have provided me with invaluable information, and I hope to attract traders like them and further hope that our current group of traders will become better at what they do because of the infrastructure we provide.
If you have grown to the point where 10 cents per side makes a difference, then you should consider getting a CME membership. Your broker should help you with that and that could make a much larger difference than 10 cents.
THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF LOSS IN FUTURES TRADING.
PM with any questions about optimusfutures (800) 771-6748 (561) 367 8686. THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF LOSS IN FUTURES TRADING.
Last edited by mattz; July 20th, 2014 at 12:20 PM.
The following 3 users say Thank You to mattz for this post:
This is factually incorrect. Your contract with Ninjatrader has not changed. You are still able to connect to all of the brokers that were in place when you signed up for the lifetime license. In fact it just got better. I'm also a lifetime license holder and now have an additional choice, NinjaTrader brokerage.
The point about new customers is a completely separate issue. It is true, prospective mutli broker NinjaTrader platform customers now have fewer brokers included in the license. The prospect then needs to evaluate whether the smaller pool of brokers satisfies the traders needs.
This is no different to Big Mike changing the terms of the lifetime license. The cost was $20, then $50, now $100. If you want to join as an elite member and you perceive the $100 fee is too much then move on.
Optimus have never been customers of Ninjatrader. It's the license holders that are the customers. Optimus has been generating revenue from their customers that use the Ninjatrader platform. Optimus was probably perceived as adding limited strategic value to the "new" NinjaTrader which is why they were not selected as an ongoing broker.
I get that you have love for Optimus etc, but Ninjatrader has no obligation to Optimus. In fact, I'm concerned with all the promotion of Optimus in this thread particularly given the continued risks. Optimus could be perceived as a high risk brokerage by the fact that they use Vision as FCM.
Last edited by djkiwi; July 21st, 2014 at 03:12 AM.
The following user says Thank You to djkiwi for this post:
Optimus have helped those of us who used NinjaTrader equally if not more than what NinjaTrader did. I am a programmer, C# script writer so my needs are a little higher than the average point and click. Let me decide who provides what value…strategically.
Those of us who want to see NinjaTrader to keep optimus is because we benefitted from their cooperation. They each bring different strengths to the table. Optimus has been a broker for many years and I trust their decisions because brokerage customers are not software customers.
When Zen blew in everyone face, I don’t recall any other broker here on futures.io (formerly BMT) who has helped them as much as Optimus. Mirus was nowhere to be found, and today they will set an example with Ninja for a new brokerage?
The following 2 users say Thank You to Jfairtrade for this post:
It appears you edited out part of your original post. But You said "as this path has been trodden many times." I can't find any examples that are similar to what NT is doing. My comment about "back that up" was in reference to that and you failed to mention any examples.
It doesn't matter how Tradestation started, it is a very liked and successful platform with out supporting lots of brokers.
This is not an introductory offer and we have no plans to raise our commissions.
We retained both legal and accounting professionals to perform in-depth audits of Mirus Futures. This was an arduous process that spanned several months and in the end, there was nothing to be concerned about allowing us to conclude the deal.
Background checks are required by NFA, so this was completed for all registered brokerage staff. The integration and adoption of the NinjaTrader culture has been going very well.
While there were some initial delays in account openings due to the sheer volume of applications after we launched NinjaTrader Brokerage, we remain very focused on delivering the same high-level of customer service clients have come to expect from NinjaTrader.
We have had a relationship with Dorman for nearly a decade and they have been a good partner to both Mirus and NinjaTrader during that time. However, we understand the importance of having multiple FCM options and are working on plans to enable that offering.
Managing risk is a critical component of a brokerage operation and we take this seriously. Our ISV partners have built in risk management tools we use in conjunction with our FCM providing a dual layer of risk protection. We intend to complement these tools with internally developed applications that are customized to our processes providing an additional third layer of risk management.
The following 3 users say Thank You to NinjaTrader for this post:
Interactive Brokers could also be perceived as a high risk broker which is another reason existing NinjaTrader license holders should welcome the opportunity to spread risk to a new brokerage.
Traders using IB face similar risks as MF Global clients i.e. their broker has the ability to re-hypothecate (broker uses customer-pledged collateral) to back their own trades and borrowings. This is perfectly legal under US Federal Reserve Board Regulation T and SEC Rule 15c3-3, whereby a prime broker may re-hypothecate an amount up to 140% of the customer’s liability to the broker.
The problem was MF Global found a loophole in the UK where there is no mandated limit on re-hypothecation. So they re-hypothecated customer collateral many times over to place a heavily leveraged $6 billion sovereign debt bet which turned into a massive loser and put them under.
I'm not suggesting that IB is being reckless like MF Global but my understanding is the UK loophole still exists and who knows what "new and improved" synthetic off balance sheet instrument wall street will invent next to leverage returns at the same time staying ahead of the regulators.