• Dependence upon electronic transaction services providers like BrokerTec, TradeWeb and eSpeed has increased significantly over the past several months, as traditional voice brokering has lost already slim profit margins, and has taken a horrible blow from the 9-11 tragedy. 
  
• These transaction services are now becoming available through traditional vendors as a fee-liable third party service, or as part of their core offering, often times and low or no additional cost.
  
• Key broker information is now available on a multi-vendor basis, particularly with the discontinuation of the Cantor exclusive with Telerate. Exclusive relationships in the e-broker community are beginning to emerge.
  
• Some vendors have created whole new product lines for their fixed income clients, including Moneyline / Telerate, ILX, CQG, etc. Other vendors like Reuters and Bloomberg have added certain strategic data sets and transaction services to their fixed income offering in response to these changes and to the changes within the IDB community.
  
• Notable data quality differences exist among e-brokers, brokers and vendors. 
  
• Most organizations surveyed do not have an understanding of their fixed income data sourcing options at the vendor / product level. For instance, what is the best source for real-time yields on the 10 year?
  
• From an end-user perspective, data source options are also not fully understood at a page/instrument level across the various businesses. For example, what are the specific pages / records and fields needed for viewing, and storage, from each of the vendors?
  
• In certain instances, new distribution platform technology is required to support these new sources, particularly if they are to be integrated with existing platforms for front and middle office applications.
  
• Overlapping vendor platforms and technology exist within many firms. And, given the uncertainty of product quality and the increased need for redundancy of service, fixed income market data costs have increased unnecessarily. Many firms have either the incorrect vendor mix, or major vendor redundancy at the desktop level in fixed income. 
  
• None of the firms surveyed had a specific fixed income plan in place, or even under consideration. Many firms evaluated vendors on a case by case basis, rather than developing a cohesive fixed income strategy

       The need exists to identify the right vendors / products, at the right core price point, with the right data quality standards, for all of your needs for real-time fixed income content, online trading systems for execution, and distribution platforms. This applies not only for the fixed income sector, but also for all areas of your trading floor. 

• What do your end-users require from a content and application standpoint?
  
• Do your vendors have the necessary, best of breed content from market-makers, inter-dealer brokers, third party analysis and news services?
  
• Which vendors provide the best real-time, interactive window into the world’s financial marketplaces.
  
• Which vendors provide the highest quality data, for key fixed income instruments, and why.
  
• Will these vendors allow all your end users to monitor and participate in securities as they trade across the marketplace?
  
• Are the proper procedures in place to root out market data redundancy at the desktop, to best control market data costs?

• Which systems will generate liquidity and transparency for your end-users and their clients?
  
• Which trading system will make your content (sector manifolds, dealer inventory, research and pricing) more available and tradable
  
• Do your vendor systems have the ability to attract order flow from a broad distribution of institutional, middle market and retail clients?

Distribution platforms:

• Are new vendor application platforms compatible with your MDS and e-commerce strategies?
  
• Are your platforms scalable and flexible from a network capacity standpoint, so content and services can be added without limitation, and fully support exponential client growth?
  
• Are your platforms compatible to industry standards for data distribution and accurate transactions capture. 
  
• Offer redundant services, load balancing, recovery management and quality assurance.
  
• Is your current platform easy to use and administer?