Yes I have had a look at it, to be black background it felt kind of clean. Sorry Peter, not meant to advertise for them on your behalf.Spreadco's charts may be black, but they don't have transparent candles, lines, etc.
Yes I have had a look at it, to be black background it felt kind of clean. Sorry Peter, not meant to advertise for them on your behalf.Spreadco's charts may be black, but they don't have transparent candles, lines, etc.
Yes I have had a look at it, to be black background it felt kind of clean. Sorry Peter, not meant to advertise for them on your behalf.
Thanks.hi gle101
no problem happy for you to comment on competitors on this site although I prefer to keep it for CMC matters but that is your choice.
tks pc
yep.... frankly I'd be very interested if you could offer a completely non leveraged package... deposit £481, go long bp £1pp kinda thing...
*cough*
(bp was trading 481p when I wrote that, btw. And idea is you would tie up entire £481 so there wouldn't have to be any financing)
Think how much money is in ISAs. Then imagine how much people would WANT to put in ISAs. CMC could have all of that. If you did that you wouldn't just be the largest spread betting company - you'd be the largest retail financial institution.
You could also offer the equivilant of a cash ISA and allow people to spread bet on unit trusts etc to complete stocks n shares ISA equivilant... basically help us get around tax. Would be beautiful
presumably such a product would predominantly interest equity clients, in which case how do they hedge?
option 1.) if they use cfds to hedge they are paying away funding to their brokers, but receiving none from the client = loss
option 2.) if they trade cash they tie up an enormous amount of cash that they may or may not have available, but which regardless they would otherwise be earning on, so on anything other than short term positions (which would defeat the whole purpose of what you're suggesting) = loss
option 3.) they don't hedge. all of the business from 100% funded clients would be buy and hold, and they end up permanently short the market long term (long term losing strategy).
complete non starter IMO - as evidenced by the fact they have wound down their AIM business - one can only assume their margin payable to their underlying brokers relative to the spread received on execution from clients made it an unprofitable business for them (especially since the fsa's enforcement of the client money rules...)
do you want a job...
yeah go on then
hi shortsell
smart guy. but you are not correct in all of your assumptions. but you will have to wait for next gen cfds to find out how we tackle some of the problems.
why do you think we called our technology next gen.
cheers pc
Peter,
Nice to see the chart improvements you've listed.
I have had a live nextgen a/c open for the last week or so. Also opened a GFT a/c at the same time as they have wider range of US equities.
Just traded one instrument on nextgen so far, FRES.L . For the time being, I'm using GFT charts for intraday, however I do find your spread chart useful for setting stops. You seem to have a consistently tighter spread of @1p better than GFT on this stock. You have half the margin requirement, keep the margin based on the original price and have better overnight financing. So far, I'm a happy customer.
As a general point with SB, avoiding paying the stamp duty on UK stocks makes the spread even tighter than interactivebrokers.
Will the 3000 odd extra instruments planned for release on nextgen be at the same time as the charting release or sooner?
I also agree with arabiannights about being able to choose your leverage level. 20 to 1 is a lot more than I'm used to...
Based on the fact that your financing charges net off the non-margined amount, if someone chose zero leverage, your financing charges should work out at zero.
i'm a bit confused by this response as this is not a technological issue. i was responding to arabian's suggestion re: fully funded equity positions in a tax free wrapper. the logisitcs of why you wouldn't be able to offer this are not technology-related.
probably couldnt afford you.
pc
nah... city index couldn't... I'm sure we could come to an arrangement
no problem PC.
What I'm trying to get at is that i don't think the point I've raised has anything to do with your platform/product offering.
Let's take an example.
An IB comes onto your dealers and says that each of their 100 underlying clients wants exposure to 1m shares of Vodafone VOD LN ( I know - you wish ), and each want to put cash up front and pay 0% funding.
that's a combined notional position of c£180m.
now i don't know what you charge, but let's say for a decent IB it's 5 basis points in and out.
so on this trade, you are grossing £180k in spread.
now obviously you can't run this naked, so either you tie up £180m which you don't have, thereby incurring finance charges from your bank (assuming you have that depth of facility with them) to cover the position, or you hedge using CFDs with your broker, thereby incurring funding. i imagine you probably pay c0.5% over 1mlibor, let's say 1.1% total.
now this is a cost to you of c£200k per annum that you're not recouping. in addition you are probably paying away 1-2bps in comm on the cfd, let's say 1, so that's another £36k round trip.
if the clients decide to run this position for 2 years your P&L would be -£256k - not accounting for the cost of having the infrastructure in place to handle the business!
THIS is what i mean about the product not being viable on the scale arabian suggested.
no amount of 'next gen' developments gets around this, but as ever if i am wrong i would love to be corrected.