Talk:Interactive Brokers/archive

message: The recent edits are very negative.
1)  When I opened my IB account, I wasn't charged a dime in service fees for the first month, even though I opened around the 20th of October.  Even if they did charge you a minimum $10 commission for the month, is it really that big of a deal?  What is AMTD going to charge you, $10 a trade, $20 a roundtrip?
2)  Strict and conservative margin policy?  Are they really worse than any other brokers?  Or are you complaining that some special reduced margin requirement isn't being applied to certain combinations of options trades such as calender spreads, condors, etc?  Once again, I think you need to keep things in perspective here.  
3)  Basically every broker has tier discounts and bonuses for margin lending and credit balances, so its not very unusual (despite your claim).  What's AMTD's best margin rate, LIBOR + 200bp or worse?  IB charges LIBOR + 150bp at the most on any money borrowed (with a few exceptions, for instance, if you borrow pesos), and it gets cheaper from here.  
4)  I didn't find anything about IB's calculations or online instructions confusing.  IB is a stock/futures broker, not a savings bank.  If you want a savings account, I am sure your local bank would be glad to set one up for you.
5)  Hidden fees?  No, IB discloses everything.  Its all there, right infront of you.  And if you do more than a couple trades a month, the savings with IB are dramatic.  
Might I add, on EliteTrader, IB is pretty much the top-rated broker, and complaints are extremely few and far between.  I don't see the point in wasting an entire page of wiki dealing with complaints that Interactive Brokers is not as competitive interest-wise as a high-interest savings account like HSBC or EmigrantDirect. 
64.110.251.69 02:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Negativity

message: LOL! The edits here are very negative, not to say one-sided.
Lo and behold! Commentators are boldly selective and keep complaining the bad points, but no one ever try to complain the good points, for example, no one mention to delete the statement margin lending rates are one of the most competitive in the industry. Where's the comparison? This is also grossly misleading according to their standards.
Things like not for hand-holding, strict and conservative margin policy have never been discussed by them. I don't see anyone complain about competitive margin rates, or high-level platforms. According to the commentators' standards, they should all be removed.
What is bias? Bias happen when someone make false statements or untruth to attack or protect the subject. See the comments made by 64.110.251.69. I really suspect his identity. (1) - (5) are amusing. You should know his purpose.
What's wrong to mention facts stating that fees are applied to the whole month? Every broker has tier discounts and bonuses... Tell me, which firm will charge interests pro-rata? top-rated broker, and complaints are extremely few and far between... top-rated? extremely few? Do you have proof? How neutral are you?
People should learn more about losses. IT IS LOSSES. Court will take interest losses into account. Have you ever heard of opportunity costs? One says not written in neutral tone? Then what should we call? Interest gains? 
Well-documented? No hidden fee? Are you working at IB? Any firm will explain their fee somewhere, but this does not mean it is not a hidden fee. A hidden fee is they hide it in somewhere so people will not notice or misunderstand it. If IB is plainly innocent, why not state this clearly under the interest table, for example, it is charged pro-rata. Interest will never be paid in the lower tier?
Where can I find resources which explains how much interests I could lose per year? None. No such resources. It tells us exactly what real interest rates we are receiving. This is also great to reveal its dirty marketing gimmicks. I don't care much about interest, but it is the policy I find it disgusting. It is very dishonest. It is to take advantage of people ignorance or misunderstanding. I doubt anyone here know all the story of the policy. Well done, Wai Wai!
After all, readers should see through these commentators. They merely don't want to hear anything which may sound negative. They try to hide every fact which is true but hurt the firm's profit. 
IB staff!? Who knows?
Conclusion: The whole section should NEVER BE DELETED. There is no bias. Facts are not biases.
Finally I have to say I am in no way in favor of either party. I judge with my 2 eyes open. I merely comment on the facts. --Lee On
: Agree! I find the "interest" section "interesting although I do not use IB. It should be kept intact. Thanks to the article, I have learned something new, e.g. I should look for related costs and don't just take it directly. Unfortunately the whole section is missing today. I find out there's a vandal who delete a handsome number of texts. It is inappropriate to delete people's contributions, so I restore it-- walkers09:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree! The word gimmick is not necessary since it is derogatory in nature, but I don't think it is well documented. The website stated the calculation method with examples. However it mentions nothing about how this affects our interests and interest rates. I realize I should not expect this from IB, but that is why there is value of this article. It focuses on the effect side which I am most interested in, rather than the calculation side. This part is not necessary as it is documented. If possible, I hope the author can provide a few examples to illustrate the interest costs or losses, and explain more on how to calculate real interest rates. As regards history, you can always read it on its website. I don't think it is interesting. -- walkers09:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral for others, biased for IB loyalists