ShareScope Development

[Dentalfloss]

naz has now got a wabsite with intraday/eod day scanning for us/ik and fx.free trial.looks really good.he has beaten you to it sharescope

 

[Dentalfloss]

at www.ta-ngo.com.lots of technical scans.well needed.no fundamentals.fantastic

 

[SScopeMarketing]

At ShareScope we take the integrity and accuracy of our data very
seriously and we make all attempts possible to ensure that the data we
provide is of the highest quality. Sometimes differences in calculation
methods do exist (especially for indices and accounting ratios) and we
are happy to explain to customers any instance where our data may be
different to that of other sources.

With regard to your individual comments:

1) Zambuck - we do check our data before it goes out. Occasionally
we do find errors and we correct these before the data is released or we
delay the release of the data until the error is corrected. We are
looking into the items you have identified now as a matter of priority
and contacting our data providers where necessary. We will post here
when we have more information, hopefully later today.

2) Gerard - we are aware of this problem and it is being rectified.
However, it is in a development bug queue and unfortunately there are
some items that have affected more users and accordingly have taken
higher priority to date. Again, we will post here when we have more
information.

Regards

SScopeMarketing

 

[zambuck]

Thanks

If it helps then I can send you *.txt files of errors existing in my computer...

But I am sure you would be able to check these anyway...

regards

 

[SScopeMarketing]

We have been investigating the data issues.

We have processes in place to test our data and its integrity. Your post earlier today highlighted that one of these processes was failing and has been for some time. We have now fixed this process and identified the data anomalies. The anomalies amount to less than 0.0001% of our data but we are still taking them seriously and taking steps to rectify the historic data.

Specifically:

Gilt prices – we are investigating this with our data provider and are awaiting their response. We hope to be able to resolve this issue shortly.

US indices – we will resolve any current anomalies and these should be reflected after Friday’s update. We are exploring other sources for this data to ensure greater integrity in the future.

LSE shares and FTSE indices –the inaccuracies with LSE data are largely due to not receiving a closing price for the share/index concerned on that day. We are putting systems in place to ensure that these are identified and rectified before the data goes out. Again, all existing anomalies should be resolved and reflected in Friday’s update.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Please do contact us directly and as soon as possible if you identify any problems in future.

 

[zambuck]

Thanks

Your efforts are appreciated. This gives user confidence that you listen to the users comments and take necessary actions to resolve the issue.

regards

 

[zambuck]

SScopeMarketing

Another question...

If existing anamolies would be resolved by this Friday then I assume that a typical daily download take care of all historical anamolies?

Or would users would have to refresh the data history?

regards

 

[SScopeMarketing]

Zambuck

Updates will simply replace any anomalous data already identified and corrected.

 

[zambuck]

Thanks.....

I thought that would be the case....

regards

 

[DaveJB]

Hi,
could I ask if the earlier reply to Gerard,
"Gerard - we are aware of this problem and it is being rectified.
However, it is in a development bug queue and unfortunately there are
some items that have affected more users and accordingly have taken
higher priority to date"
- really does mean that you have higher priority items than ensuring volume isn't 100% overstated, as that is how I read it? I can understand that Sharescope is fundamental in nature, but volume is rather important to anyone using TA.... I would also think that those using any volume based indicators, which includes a few old TA favourites, would prefer not to get 'overbought' or 'oversold' readings, divergences, and so forth due to a data error. Surely it's possible to check the volume data for the suspect period, and replace anything that is so much out of whack? This isn't 'development', this is data integrity, and if your data isn't right then it ought to take priority over pretty well everything else - if you can't trust the numbers what point is there in relying on anything you do with them?

Dave

 

[SScopeMarketing]

We have now resolved the majority of the data anomalies identified by Zambuck earlier this week. Corrected data is included in today’s data update.

There are a handful of items that we are still looking into and we should have resolved them soon.

Zambuck – if you find any data that you think we may have missed please email [email protected] with the items and we will deal with them.

With regard to the anomalous volume data identified by Gerard, this issue has now been escalated to the Managing Director, although I am told that rectifying this anomaly is not as straightforward as it may seem. The way that ShareScope compresses data means that there is a development issue we must address before we can amend the volume data. In addition, late trades and volume adjustments during the period contribute to the complexity. Rest assured that this is a priority.

 

[zzaxx99]

If you're looking into how to back-load the data, can I ask if there is any chance of ever being able to import OHLCV data rather than just CV?

 

[Rainmaker]

And .... is there ANY chance of getting OHLC UK equity data before mid-June 2000?? Pretty please.

 

[zambuck]

OK, I am making exception here posting...as i will not be posting anymore...

I am quite prepared to give Sharescope a chance to recify the errors.....

I think that Sharescope has been more than forthcoming with the actions they are taking to do so....

Best thing is to give them chance to prove that, rather than opening a critical dialogue..!!!

Hi,
could I ask if the earlier reply to Gerard,
"Gerard - we are aware of this problem and it is being rectified.
However, it is in a development bug queue and unfortunately there are
some items that have affected more users and accordingly have taken
higher priority to date"
- really does mean that you have higher priority items than ensuring volume isn't 100% overstated, as that is how I read it? I can understand that Sharescope is fundamental in nature, but volume is rather important to anyone using TA.... I would also think that those using any volume based indicators, which includes a few old TA favourites, would prefer not to get 'overbought' or 'oversold' readings, divergences, and so forth due to a data error. Surely it's possible to check the volume data for the suspect period, and replace anything that is so much out of whack? This isn't 'development', this is data integrity, and if your data isn't right then it ought to take priority over pretty well everything else - if you can't trust the numbers what point is there in relying on anything you do with them?

Dave

 

[zambuck]

Thanks for the offer...

I will download the data today and test it...

If there is something obvious, I will post the results directly to you, to keep you posted...

Thanks for taking time to address the issues raised on this site...

regards

We have now resolved the majority of the data anomalies identified by Zambuck earlier this week. Corrected data is included in today’s data update.

There are a handful of items that we are still looking into and we should have resolved them soon.

Zambuck – if you find any data that you think we may have missed please email [email protected] with the items and we will deal with them.

With regard to the anomalous volume data identified by Gerard, this issue has now been escalated to the Managing Director, although I am told that rectifying this anomaly is not as straightforward as it may seem. The way that ShareScope compresses data means that there is a development issue we must address before we can amend the volume data. In addition, late trades and volume adjustments during the period contribute to the complexity. Rest assured that this is a priority.

 

[DaveJB]

Fair enough Zambuck,
but I don't think that was an unreasonable point to raise - I don't think a data supplier should have a priority system that has ANYTHING above data integrity in the queue, and I raised the point as I was surprised to find Sharescope seemed (I stress 'seemed', going by their reply to Gerard) to think there were things more important than getting price and volume correct.
Sorry if that somehow offended your sensibilities.
Dave

 

[zambuck]

No I am not offended by your post...it's just that I am not going to participate on this site anymore...and that is nothing to do with your post or content......it is something else....!!

I will never take offence from your posts at any time...!!

 

[DaveJB]

Ah right,
sorry to have misunderstood, and I'm equally sorry to hear you are leaving - all the best for the future then, hopefully you are so busy banking the profits that you're cutting down on BBS visits, though I fear that's not the case.
Good luck,
Dave

 

[zambuck]

Thanks.....and all the best...

 

[SScopeMarketing]

Thanks to all who contributed to this discussion. A product like ShareScope is never finished and your comments will help shape our priorities.

One comment suggested ShareScope has “less charting functionality than with some other packages”. It would be helpful if any of you could list the specific charting features you would like added.