2 ms·

> You personally might not mind, but I suspect the people who license you the ticker feeds might. ;-) You're right... We will double check this with them. Appr

> You personally might not mind, but I suspect the people who license you the ticker feeds might. ;-) You're right... We will double check this with them. Appreciate the nice push here and thank you. It's definitely worth our due diligence to make sure this doesn't breach any "grey areas" for the restrictions we have to not re-sell their api directly.

kylorhall 5y ago
My company pays a lot of figures for xignite and we cannot make this data publicly available without some restrictions (it would cost a lot more to do so). My purely non-legal take is we can distribute price and metadata for instruments relative to a user's portfolio or a defined demo set of data or charts to yours, etc, but not freely distribute price data without an attribution behind it. I _suppose_ a user could add literally all 300k instruments we support to get the price data and that would violate our agreements (similar stuff has happened before, just watch it), but we'd just have to deal with the user via our TOS. Good luck, unfortunately the next level of APIs for financial data and licensing fees can be annoying, from almost free to like 6 figures overnight. Some exchanges are much worse than others, like arbitrary pricing based on how large your company is…
- hippofluff 5y ago
  Thank you for all these insights! We also went "through the ringer" finding good quality financial data, that would allow us to build a consumer web app around. I think it would be worth you time to look into Finnhub, you can tell them "Jake from Stock Unlock" referred you (if you haven't tried them already). I like to think of them as the "anti-Bloomberg", their data quality is great and their coverage is excellent. We also churned through meeting with a lot of the "legacy" data providers that have ridiculous/terrible contracts that make it complex/really annoying to build a consumer platform around. I'd love to chat more about this! Very few people have really had to dive deep on this, so it's neat meeting others that feel the pain. Lastly, the term I use is "data cartel". There is literally a financial data cartel, but I am convinced this is the decade that get's broken up, and entrepreneurs like us will have a lot more "innovation" room. Cheers!
  - traceroute66 5y ago
    > the term I use is "data cartel". There is literally a financial data cartel, but I am convinced this is the decade that get's broken up It won't happen. Full stop. Just the same as the marketing lies perpetuated by Bloomberg terminal competitors that they are the next "Bloomberg-killer". They are not (I've tried some of them, they don't come close, infact they are so far away its a joke). The fact of the matter is financial data is HARD. To ensure consistent quality takes a lot of time, a lot of effort and a lot of money. Data will have errors, some of them will be easy to spot (e.g. missing values) but others will be tricker to spot for the untrained eye. Some financial data requires manual inputs which can't be automated (e.g. fixing bad OCRs, or inputting data that is only available in paper form). The other fact of the matter is BREADTH. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can have a good chance at getting you currency data, or BASIC data on US stocks, that sort of data is common as muck. But only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you TRUE global coverage. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you more advanced GLOBAL data such as swaps, swaptions, CDS. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you true IN-DEPTH and GLOBAL fundamental data for any company on the planet. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you many decades of GLOBAL historical data. You would need billions to properly compete against Bloomberg or Refinitiv. And that's only the startup costs of getting you to the point where they are today.
    - hippofluff 5y ago
      You're speaking my language! I agree with everything you said. We are actually in talks with Refinitiv, they would allow us to re-sell their data on our website (bloomberg will not). Here's my two cents here/my angle. I think that 95% of the data in bloomberg terminal isn't needed for the common investor. Further, companies like ours will not replace Bloomberg terminal, we don't plan to go for their customers, and we know we cannot compete with the ridiculous level of data they have. Honestly, full respect and hats off to them they have worked super hard to build that up and deserve their moat. I do think there's a ton of room for more practical solution that works for the common person (not a financial professional) and that there will be more decentralization of financial data, maybe not all of it, but I see it happening now where companies like Finnhub and others are slowly building their own empires/chipping away at their own custom data and I think there will be competitors that creep up. I guess time will tell though! It really is a fun snaky problem to solve, I love solving problems that people think are unsolvable, maybe I'm dumb (probably) but it makes the process all the more fun when you know you're swimming with sharks

kylorhall 5y ago

My company pays a lot of figures for xignite and we cannot make this data publicly available without some restrictions (it would cost a lot more to do so). My purely non-legal take is we can distribute price and metadata for instruments relative to a user's portfolio or a defined demo set of data or charts to yours, etc, but not freely distribute price data without an attribution behind it. I _suppose_ a user could add literally all 300k instruments we support to get the price data and that would violate our agreements (similar stuff has happened before, just watch it), but we'd just have to deal with the user via our TOS. Good luck, unfortunately the next level of APIs for financial data and licensing fees can be annoying, from almost free to like 6 figures overnight. Some exchanges are much worse than others, like arbitrary pricing based on how large your company is…

hippofluff 5y ago
Thank you for all these insights! We also went "through the ringer" finding good quality financial data, that would allow us to build a consumer web app around. I think it would be worth you time to look into Finnhub, you can tell them "Jake from Stock Unlock" referred you (if you haven't tried them already). I like to think of them as the "anti-Bloomberg", their data quality is great and their coverage is excellent. We also churned through meeting with a lot of the "legacy" data providers that have ridiculous/terrible contracts that make it complex/really annoying to build a consumer platform around. I'd love to chat more about this! Very few people have really had to dive deep on this, so it's neat meeting others that feel the pain. Lastly, the term I use is "data cartel". There is literally a financial data cartel, but I am convinced this is the decade that get's broken up, and entrepreneurs like us will have a lot more "innovation" room. Cheers!
- traceroute66 5y ago
  > the term I use is "data cartel". There is literally a financial data cartel, but I am convinced this is the decade that get's broken up It won't happen. Full stop. Just the same as the marketing lies perpetuated by Bloomberg terminal competitors that they are the next "Bloomberg-killer". They are not (I've tried some of them, they don't come close, infact they are so far away its a joke). The fact of the matter is financial data is HARD. To ensure consistent quality takes a lot of time, a lot of effort and a lot of money. Data will have errors, some of them will be easy to spot (e.g. missing values) but others will be tricker to spot for the untrained eye. Some financial data requires manual inputs which can't be automated (e.g. fixing bad OCRs, or inputting data that is only available in paper form). The other fact of the matter is BREADTH. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can have a good chance at getting you currency data, or BASIC data on US stocks, that sort of data is common as muck. But only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you TRUE global coverage. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you more advanced GLOBAL data such as swaps, swaptions, CDS. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you true IN-DEPTH and GLOBAL fundamental data for any company on the planet. Only the Bloombergs or Refinitivs of this world can give you many decades of GLOBAL historical data. You would need billions to properly compete against Bloomberg or Refinitiv. And that's only the startup costs of getting you to the point where they are today.
  - hippofluff 5y ago
    You're speaking my language! I agree with everything you said. We are actually in talks with Refinitiv, they would allow us to re-sell their data on our website (bloomberg will not). Here's my two cents here/my angle. I think that 95% of the data in bloomberg terminal isn't needed for the common investor. Further, companies like ours will not replace Bloomberg terminal, we don't plan to go for their customers, and we know we cannot compete with the ridiculous level of data they have. Honestly, full respect and hats off to them they have worked super hard to build that up and deserve their moat. I do think there's a ton of room for more practical solution that works for the common person (not a financial professional) and that there will be more decentralization of financial data, maybe not all of it, but I see it happening now where companies like Finnhub and others are slowly building their own empires/chipping away at their own custom data and I think there will be competitors that creep up. I guess time will tell though! It really is a fun snaky problem to solve, I love solving problems that people think are unsolvable, maybe I'm dumb (probably) but it makes the process all the more fun when you know you're swimming with sharks