Auto Trade Credit for RPH

Mathew the one client I have that is auto trading RPH is not showing up in trade history on his last trade on 08-29-12. The way I understand it is TradeBullet cancelled his trade, then to synchronize his portfolio 2 minutes after the open he got filled.

It is great that TradeBullet fixed its own screw up however now the trade does not show as an auto trade.

As a once struggling entrepreneur like myself I am sure you understand the importance for me to get this fixed. I am peddling this thing as fast as I can and a head wind created by Collective2 makes it even harder.

Please look into this, give RPH its rightful credit of having an auto trade this morning.

Thank You

Rick Haines


Forgive me, but I think you’re focusing on the wrong thing.

We can’t “give you credit” for a trade because - for regulatory and compliance reasons - we can only say a subscriber has traded a specific signal issued by your system if they have traded that specific signal. There can be any number of reasons why an autotrader - particularly a user of a generation 1 software program (which runs on the owner’s computer and isn’t controlled by C2) - joins a trade late or synchronizes with your position after the fact. Those trades won’t be counted as “official” autotraded signals.

So, regulatory reasons prevent me from claiming someone followed your exact signal when they did not.

But more to the point - I think you’re focusing on the wrong thing. Looking at one single client, and one single trade, and whether C2 gives you a little icon next to that trade… well, that’s not really the important thing. I suggest instead just focusing on building your system results. Let the results speak for themselves. As more subscribers sign up, you’ll get more autotraders, and more of these will use Gen3 autotrade technology (where these sorts of things are less common, but do happen).

As more traders sign up (and they will, if you deliver good results), the actions of one or two outliers will seem less important.

Just my two cents.



I hope all is well with you. I was sorry to see Youtualfunds go away, but am optimistic that this means more resources will be available for further C2 development. Pursuant to your point above to Richard, I wonder if there are any developments as far as bringing on board more Gen3 brokers to trade stocks. I had some friends and family interested in some of my systems when OptionsXpress was available, but ever since OX went away, interest has cooled. They’re more comfortable with the “big five” (Schwab, TD Ameritrade, Fidelity, E-Trade, Scottrade) than more obscure brokers like MB Trading, and to be honest, those five are where the critical mass of potential customers are. Any luck bringing any of them into discussions, or other emerging players like Tradeking (which also has an API, and from all accounts, is aggressively looking for ways to expand)? Even if not for new customers at the moment, I would love to qualify for TOS for my equity trading system on one of those brokers.

On a side note, I have begun advertising for my affiliate site ( on Google AdWords and wonder if at any point in the future, you will allow us to customize the affiliate sites more, or perhaps break the components into some kind of widgets that I can integrate into my own site design. I think the way the affiliate site is set up right now can be intimidating for people who are new to the concept of autotrading and would like to see if there’s a way to present it in a more simple and linear matter.


Mathew I have thought about your response to me for the last hour.

You are right. My focus is wrong. I will no longer presume my single auto trader will be enough to give me credit for an auto trade. To say that when a trade is erroneously cancelled and then sinked 2 minutes after it should have traded is ok with you well then it is ok with me. I agree with you the little icon next to that trade is unimportant.

I will take your suggestion and focus on building system results.

Thank you for your time.

Rick Haines


I wholly agree with your post. First, on the matter of needing more AutoTrade brokers – nothing disappoints me more than the reluctance of the “big” USA brokers to work with C2. I can assure you that it is not from a lack of my trying, nor is it the economics of the deal. (The economics is essentially costless to them; plus they get incremental trading revenue.)

I have found that the bigger the firm, the more risk-averse they are. When you have a “department” for third-party relationships, that department’s manager is motivated mostly by the desire to not make any sort of horrible mistake. Maximizing of revenue or customer delight is far, far down on the list of motivations. That’s a lot different from the motivation of company owners, or managers at smaller entrepreneurial firms, where the incentive is to balance upside with risk. Anyway, I doubt I am saying anything particularly novel or insightful here, but that’s just the way it is. So, my strategy is to keep plugging away at them, until the point in time that C2 starts seeming less alarmingly “new” and eventually becomes old and familiar. I am feeling quite old and familiar these days, when I creak out of bed in the morning. Perhaps it is only a question of time.

But, to the extent you (or other C2 Members) would like to help - I welcome your participation in the outreach! Please write to the appropriate person at your brokerage (CEOs on down), if you want them to work with C2. It seems to me, the bigger your account, the more you will be heard, but a collection of modest accounts might turn on a light bulb somewhere. So, if you don’t mind, send an email and tell your broker how amazingly great it would be for them to work with C2. And give them my name and number. :slight_smile:

Regarding your affiliate / white-label site: I agree the user interface is dreadful, very off-putting, and needs tremendous improvement. I, like you, have been thinking that a more customizable modular approach might be a good idea, but - at a minimum - the entire “flow” of these sites needs to be reworked from the ground up. I hope to turn to this project this calendar year. Hang in there. If you have specific ideas, suggestions, UI sketches, etc., by all means send them my way.




I certainly understand what it is to deal with bureaucracy and share your frustration. I have accounts with three of the big five and have had accounts with the other two in the past, and periodically ask them to support C2, only to get the formulaic “we’ll take it under consideration” response. I’m certainly not large enough to push them around, but at their size, few are. Just throwing this out there, and imagining the costs and compliance issues, I don’t ask this lightly–but have you considered starting your own affiliated brokerage? I don’t imagine it’s easy, but perhaps if the brokerages won’t play ball directly, they might do so as part of a joint venture. Placetrade licensed Interactive Brokers’s platform, so there’s that way as well.

As far as the white label site, it appears that the trend these days appears to have the look and feel of a site like or Take a look at your competitors and you’ll see what I mean. I don’t know if it’s the best way to go about it, but it certainly feels more mass-market and welcoming than the current utilitarian site.

I told Fidelity they would lose my account and several associates accts, totalling 7 figures with plenty of trading activity, if they would not enable C2. They just shrugged and said goodbye.

Reminds me of a speech a colleague once gave at a banking technology conference. He started with a question: "Why do people hate banks?" This stunned the audience. Then he answered: "Because banks hate people".

Indeed, they don’t seem interested enough to care what I do with my funds or the funds of my relatives, either. That’s why I’m thinking that setting up a brokerage may end up being easier. I have no idea how difficult it would be, but I noticed that a lot of C2’s emerging competitors are setting up affiliate brokerages (though some are still using the big guys to custody the funds). The other option might be to set up as an RIA and then run C2 as a separately managed account service through one of the brokers. That said, I am not familiar with the costs or regulatory requirements of doing something like this, so perhaps it’s not in the cards for C2.

At the end of the day, I guess I don’t understand why C2 even needs permission from those brokers who have an API. If the customer has an account at the brokerage, and C2 can supply the software to interfece through the API and trade there, the customer should just be able to supply the login and pw and get [auto]trading. What’s the difference between that and connecting to the brokerage through eSignal?

I suggested that C2 look into setting up its own brokerage simply because C2 is already a regulated entity and has some of the compliance infrastructure already set up. My thinking was that setting up a brokerage might present a manageable incremental cost to C2 given the business opportunity.

It’s much harder for us as system vendors to get involved. I imagine the regulatory and compliance costs would be staggering, and I’m not even sure we would be able to be owners of a brokerage and simultaneously offer a system to trade, as it would present a conflict of interest. In addition, unlike the management of C2, we don’t know how many paying users there are, how many active systems there are, or what kind of order flow goes through C2 that we might be able to capture as a new brokerage. (I am skeptical about the stats on the C2 splash page given the discrepancy between the nearly 20,000 systems claimed and the less than 1,000 that show up in the grid).

That said, if you decide to go ahead with your project, best of luck to you.