Recent idea I submitted on the SC forums. Voice your voice there if you agree/desire it so that it doesn't get crushed with a "this is too hard" excuse from engineering.
It's under the thread titled "Staging and modifying bracket order levels before transmitting to server?" (unfortunately I cannot post a direct link to it due to a low post count).
The gist of it is that chart trading could provide an alternate order entry whereby rather than 1-click brackets, it's a 3-click entry->stop->target system where the entry is made, a stop line shows up in already draggable mode - user clicks based on action where to secure it, target shows up in already draggable mode - user clicks based on action where to secure it, order sent.
Some people might thing "yeah but that's slower than it is now," and I'd say, how many people actually do not modify their stop/target after submitting the bracket? It's probably done *every* single time because a generic 1:3 or similar ratio doesn't even mean anything when one is trading based off of price action, support resistance, buy/sell zones, etc.
It would also help Eurex traders (cancellation fees), and OEC traders (who must cancel server side OCO brackets if they want to adjust anything [alternative of client side is a bad alternative]).
People use the chart trading because they're able to surgically and quickly see the areas they want to short/long from and place stops based on risk and where the trade is obviously invalidated and targets based on likely target points. This just streamlines the process.
No thanks, I would rather them spend engineering resources elsewhere personally.
Due to time constraints, please do not PM me if your question can be resolved or answered on the forum.
Need help? 1) Stop changing things. No new indicators, charts, or methods. Be consistent with what is in front of you first. 2) Start a journal and post to it daily with the trades you made to show your strengths and weaknesses. 3) Set goals for yourself to reach daily. Make them about how you trade, not how much money you make. 4) Accept responsibility for your actions. Stop looking elsewhere to explain away poor performance. 5) Where to start as a trader? Watch this webinar and read this thread for hundreds of questions and answers. 6) Help using the forum? Watch this video to learn general tips on using the site.
If you want to support our community, become an Elite Member.
I'm not saying they should drop everything and begin work on this by any means - I was simply throwing it out there as a potential idea for further down the line. I'm also not being paid to manage their workflow - therefore I'm not going to alter my ideas based on that. At the same time I don't expect them to just stop what they're presently working on for new features - that's a losing battle. However, I'd rather not see answers like "sorry, no" to literally everything they don't have the present time for - as that's a copout answer.
The Eurex and OEC issues may not affect you directly, but I'd imagine they do for others. Many systems work around things like order cancellation fees by playing a bunch of client side games on when orders should be modified. In the OEC/Sierra case where people cannot even modify server side OCO brackets, it's pretty obvious that's an OEC issue that should be fixed. Using client side orders as the workaround has it's own issues, albeit not the end of the world (but it could be for those unlucky times when a pending order is out there and your connection goes away).
For the general trading case, most people do the exact same amount of work even with a typical 1-click entry setup. Enter, now adjust stops/targets. I personally know I'm not sitting there putting in tick offsets in a trading window while the opportunity is passing me by.
I agree with Mike. I noticed that you have a couple of posts like this about Sierra. Personally, I am pretty excited about the current direction of their development and impressed with what they have accomplished over the last couple of years.
I'm sure they will have more time for the kinds of things you are looking for in the not too distant future. For now, though, I am eagerly awaiting for them to port to new operating systems. Seems like a huge engineering task to me and maybe other things have to temporarily take a back seat.
Yes, but their platform has made leaps and bounds, and is still near rock-solid stable, and still lean and fast, over the last few years, while some competitors have stayed on the same version for years at a time, not improving, not upgrading, not listening to customers, not fixing bugs. SC's model is light years ahead of the rest. If they won't do the development, they tell you, and you accept it; but much of the time they will do the development, and they fix bugs super fast..
The following user says Thank You to josh for this post:
You have always been a fan of SC from day one, and not a follower of the popular like a herd.
SC, a company that grew organically without paying for ads, rather spends all it's efforts on making a better product.
They should have more users, because people should compensate ONLY those who have customer's best interest at heart.
I should have listened Josh, people with a belief systems like yours win, in life and in business.
Proud of you buddy for always sticking to the same belief system from day one!
PM with any questions about optimusfutures (800) 771-6748 (561) 367 8686. THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF LOSS IN FUTURES TRADING.
The following user says Thank You to mattz for this post:
Go check out my posts on the SC support board and will you see that all I do over there is try and help make the product better and help others where I can, with probably the emphasis more on buggy/questionable behavior rather than pushing feature requests. I've literally pointed out programming logic errors in their own code (of which they claimed 110% confidence in) and they still argue with it even though users are being directly affected by it. There is ego there and it's annoying to have to deal with it as a paying customer.
There's setting healthy limitations and then there's just claiming "no" on anything they don't immediately see as beneficial to them personally. Even simple stuff... "Can we get rays to have a tool config for limited extension so they don't litter the charts for eternity? Answer: No." "When we cut lines, can we preserve their anchors so they actually work right afterward? Answer: No." Don't get me wrong, I definitely love SC and use it for nearly everything. I appreciate their time limitations. I simply don't appreciate the fact the way they come across. It's not tough love, it's "we know better than you" and when people put some real time and effort into trying to make something they believe in better and are basically told to F off (obviously not in those words) it'll just stop good supporting users from offering support/suggestions of any kind.