Re: Missing the real point
If your start point is "current IT systems are failing to meet requirements" then yes, obviously IT will be part of the problem. Often it's more a manglement issue, with the symptoms visible in IT, but you may find similar bollocks exists in other areas of the business.
Since you're at the stage where you're solving your work issues yourself, and have your own dev team, I'm a little at a loss why this is an issue. You can do your job currently (presumably making trades) and you already have the tools for it. You'd like nicer tools, that do some of the dull but vital parts of your job, and you've employed people to build them for you. But the issue is that IT weren't prepared to build them for you?
My guess would be (assuming decision makers know the issues) is that there is a suitably slow and comprehensive update planned to solve all these issues, but telling the troops about this is a Bad Idea, and since no-ones bothered to get input from them, it's also going to have a bunch of problems, Which is why it's delayed, and other options to address it are given a "no".
My advice would be:
- document all the change requests, detailed plans and suggestions, along with examples of currently produced solutions.
- show the business case for doing things your way (follow the money etc)
- get some feedback, especially from the hostile groups. That's when you'll (hopefully) discover the real reasons why you've been getting denied
If you've really got things the way you say, then take complete ownership of the systems from IT. Including all support, running costs, and risk coverage.
Just a general comment on traders (which I presume you are). Since they are time and results focused, traders often overlook (or deliberately avoid) anything that can slow them down or stop a trade. This almost always ends up with them getting very close to the line of legality or other complete failure risk. It's also why traders usually hate Risk and Compliance, since all we (appear) to do is shit on perfectly good deals, since no trader believes* they are making bad deals. Having traders who can get around certain checks and balances has led to a number of high profile, and many low profile bankruptcys of firms that should have been rock solid.
I'd presume you where one of the good 'uns, that you're not trying anything dodgy, but it's very hard (from the IT/Risk management perspective) to prevent "tactical" IT solutions from circumventing the strategic ones.
I wouldn't downvote you tho. Even the basic details you've given indicate that a cloud based solution would either be so massivly specialised it wouldn't really count as cloud (maybe hybrid cloud), or someone is telling a pile of porkies to get what they want. Well, more porkies than usual
* or they believe they can pull themselves out of the hole before anyone notices