Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Easy PRT fault that IG have not bothered to get fixed yet

Recommended Posts

IG PRT has a fault, which I have brought to IG's attention weeks and weeks ago.

They thanked me for bringing it to their attention and added this can be fixed with a simple pin.

But nothing has happened yet.

 

I had often thought that IG's service and commitment to quality was usually second to none. -

 

When scrolling through PRT lists (manually set up and pre-set watch lists to trade) there is a pin in the corner, so you can pin your watch list on top of the charts.  This enables you to scroll through your watch lists using the down arrow key on your keyboard very quickly to eyeball each chart and move on quickly. This is how lists should work.

 

But with the list created from the Pro Scanner the pin has gone missing. This means that as you eyeball each stock generated by the scan you have to tab back through your open windows to your generated screened list in order to  move down the list to view the next stock.

 

I would like to use the Pro Screener every day but this slows the process right down and with a generated list of 50 stocks it is a right pain in the fingers and I often think, sod this I can't be bothered and miss out on trading opportunities.

 

I believe this is a simple fix and this shows a lack of commitment to quality by IG.

 

Thank you

 

Jason

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Jason,

 

Is the pin on the Lists window - I don't see it on mine?

 

Can you upload a screenshot?

 

Regards

Stef

Share this post


Link to post

Hi ,

 

Sorry to hear about the issue you are having with regards to pinning your watchlist on the platform. I would be glad to have this investigated further for you.

 

So that I can quantify this for the ProRealTime team do you know when this feature you noticed was missing and with that they can identify what could have contributed to the problem you are having such as if they released an update.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Topics
      13,162
    • Total Posts
      66,787
    • Total Members
      89,596
    Newest Member
    Majawis1402
    Joined 02/12/20 01:39
  • Posts

    • Thanks for clarifying. The support person clearly did not understand this at all, and the website is very vague! The 0.5% is something I'm used to from other platforms, and much easier to absorb as a cost on small positions when making a good entry
    • There was another fork the other day - Bitcoin Latinum - the world's largest "insured" digital asset. One wonders if every time another variant is created it simply draws away potential investors from the original version. I bet committed Bitcoiners wish these variants would all just fork off 😉 I saw something the other day that happened to mention that a Bitcoin was worth about 10 ounces of Gold.......then it hit me - would I prefer to be offered one Bitcoin out there in the ether or ten ounces of physical Gold in my actual possession? 10 Bitcoin to buy a single ounce of Gold intuitively feels like the more sensible way around as I'm certain that Gold is safe but several times less certain that Bitcoin is - so we could be out by a factor of 100! But whilst fund managers all start allocating the odd fractional percent to get exposure to Alpha for minimal portfolio downside the price will probably hold or bubble up even more. It will be interesting though  if national regulators later turn round and ban funds from holding cryptos - then they will all have to rush for the exit at the same time. Maybe that's the ultimate expected outcome.  According to Wikipedia in March 2018 0.5% of bitcoin wallets owned 87% of all bitcoins ever mined. Imagine if  transferring that 87% to fund managers at peak prices is the intended end-game before it all collapses? It would make Bernie Madoff look like a mere pick-pocket.  
×
×