BlowFish

I would have liked to have seen a bit more about the training they got, I believe it was 2 weeks? Not much time but then again enough to cover the important things. There does seem to be a leaning towards news and swing type time frames. The army guys pairs trade was interesting presumably they got some training on pairs? Towards the end I found the bit where they all got a bollocking for all being on the wrong side of the market without having the risk better hedged interesting (though not enough info to really work out what was meant by that). Could have got a bit more in depth treatment without loosing Joe public.

And of course lets not forget buying to open, buying to close and selling to open, selling to close.

Ahh OK my mistake I thought it was from freak...that was the one I enjoyed Seems to me that to conclude the costs of a business are going to approach zero because of plummeting 'IT costs' is a non sequitur. It conveniently ignores the other costs of doing business. Even assuming these companies can get there costs close to zero (can't imagine customer service will be up to much ) the majority of companies will still need to produce 'stuff'. Of course everyone could become third agents I suppose but without stuff to sell I don't suppose they would last long. I wonder what ebay's balance sheet looks like? That has to be one of the closest models to what is being talked about? It would be interesting to compare them to other webcentric companies (google maybe) that actually produce things.

I quite enjoyed it though being reality TV don't expect anything too illuminating.

OK one more -- http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/151/vsa-volume-spread-analysis-part-ii-3428-206.html#post56791 Seems to be the first post.So looks like it started on the hour. The posts seem to be 'proper' as they are quotes from earlier in the thread however they are just 'random'.

and again http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/30/woodies-cci-technique-2103-4.html#post56818 OK they ADT has kicked in I'm done despite there being other new 'spam' users. most of the recent posts are this spam bot. Not sure what its objective is it seems to take random threads cut a random paragraph and add that to the end. It makes 3 posts under each new user name.

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/30/number-of-markets-to-trade-307-5.html#post56813 yet another.

Another http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f30/time-and-sales-and-floor-traders-5237.html#post56802

Not sure but this looks like one too http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/30/price-action-only-5074-9.html#post56807

That weird spambot is back http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/30/do-courses-help-5137-2.html#post56803 is a cut and paste from earlier in the thread.

I called up a GBL chart. I rather like the look of it. It seems smooth and fairly sedate but it does move. Also the volume appears higher than most EU indices (stoxx may well be an exception). Actually a really nice trade set up while I was watching. Maybe that biased me a bit Thanks for the heads up.

Note it is the cost of doing business i.e. overheads. Actually the statement is flawed the 'web presence' is just a small portion of the cost of doing business. The largest portion will always be things like staff power transportation (presuming you deliver something physical). Flawed thinking and logical fallacies, all well and good but you expect better from 'academics'. Having said the I enjoyed the book when I read it

I haven't used PATS since they re-wrote their software. Could it be something to do with there settlement with TT over patent infringement? TT's patent was for a static DOM. Some vendors settled with TT in return for paying them a fee for each order entered through a static DOM. Others implemented self centre (so not static). So it might be a licensing issue. (This is educated guess work) Some one should stand up to TT and kick there arses....PATS was one of the first to cave in to there very heavy handed threats of litigation.

Possibly. Though FX, Scalping and Newbie sounds like a recipe for disaster. I think you might be unaware (from your other posts) that most FX 'brokers' are in fact bookies. Not only that but you are betting on prices that are not centralised so the bookie can manipulate them a small amount for a short period of time. Add in that most times they are the counter party to your bet and I would give you long odds that it will end in tears.

With a small bank roll it is probably prudent to examine how much they can loose before making that 10%. Thats if you buy in to there claims in the first place. Neglect risk of ruin at your peril.

A distinct feeling fo deja vu with that post DB. Some things bear repeating for people new to the discussion or for those where it still has not sunk in.

Im happy with Interactive Brokers though their margin requirements are high (personally I don't think that's a bad thing). I haven't had a major glitch for years.

Another though. Much as we would like it to the volume doesn't always occur on one bar. You will often get a 'hump' in the volume histogram. Actually I like to see this as it shows that buyers are supporting price over time.

Many peoples view of types of market participant, their motivations, and their methods, is naive in the extreme. Harris (Trading and Exchanges: Market Microstructure for Practitioners) details participants, there motivations and considers which tend to loose when another category wins and the conditions this will occur under. There is so much miss information floating around (actually its mainly rhetoric and sound bites rather than information) I am starting to think that some sort of text on market microstructure should be mandatory reading for novice traders. Sadly Tradeguider do little for their own credibility or for the credibility of VSA by presenting this half baked rhetoric as a fundamental truth and a corner stone of their marketing. On the subject of keeping threads on topic I think the benefits are plain for most to see. If they are not take a look at the Wycoff corner and compare it to reading say the first VSA thread. As has been pointed out people are free to start their own threads with their own particular view. Mind you the suggestion that the purists leave made me simultaneously :o and :bang head:

have a search Archie, this question crops up from time to time. The usual recommendations seem to be Interactive Brokers, OEC (mainly by Brown ), Mirus, Amp, and a couple of others.

I havent used IQfeed beyond a trial a few years ago. I got that number form their website. I would not be surprised if there where if's and but's for some of the less common instruments.

mcfotos, Probably the best way is to look at charts until you get a feel for it. Look at the threads here and the Whycoff area too. There are some rules of thumb that seem to work OK. for example for 'low volume' Tom has advocated 'less than the previous two bars'. You can come up with your own rules of thumb if that helps you. Actually just thinking about that might help you to quantify and recognise things.

Eurex has a system where you are charged if you change limit orders too often (compared to actual trades). It's fairly nominal however.

Indeed. One common theme regardless of which 'school' of volume you come from is, at the end of a move, you will often see high volume 'capitulation' followed by a low volume test. Also corrective moves in an established or developing trend ('pullbacks' if you like) often end with trade drying up and price just 'hanging' there for a bit. This pattern should catch those well.

You are that hypothetical trader!! 3 is a good number having said that occasionally zooming out even further to get the even bigger picture can be useful. One way to use that particular information is to look for confluence.