You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
NYSE Claims It Does Not Engage In Flash Trading
From an interview earlier with NYSE's Larry Leibowitz, who is surprisingly vocal against Flash trading. Larry - since the NYSE does not engage in Flash trading, can you please indicate whether or not the SLP program provides advance notice to Goldman Sachs ala Direct Edge's ELP program. Regardless, the escalation in the ECN wars is starting and should be a very interesting one to follow, especially now with a toothless and clueless Mary Shapiro stuck in the middle.
»
- 5857 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:
- Goldman Sachs Principal Transactions Update: Collapse In Agency Program Trading Volume
- Goldman Sachs Principal Transactions Update: Collapse In Agency Program Trading Volume
- Goldman Sachs Principal Transactions Update: Collapse In Agency Program Trading Volume
- Goldman Sachs Principal Transactions Update: 613 Million Shares
- Is A Case Of Quant Trading Sabotage About To Destroy Goldman Sachs?
Of course the NYSE does "allow" flash trading as you describe it, they just allow something that achieves exactly the same purpose with some idiotic euphemistic name--like "rapid liquidity bridging".
NTL, if it walks like a duck,....
It should say, "...the NYSE does NOT "allow"...."
Sorry for the FU.
Mr. Liebowitz:
Thank you for addressing the Flash Order matter in regards the NYSE. Zero Hedge has asked that you respond to the following: "Larry - since the NYSE does not engage in Flash trading, can you please indicate whether or not the SLP program provides advance notice to Goldman Sachs ala Direct Edge's ELP program."
As a trader participating on your exchange, I request that you respond to the inquiry as well. Thank you.
"Yes, we do have the ability to do something similar to what you describe, only it is not illegal/immoral when we do it. No more questions please."
"If you kill someone that's a crime, when we do it it's not"
Besides, NYSE is saying that it does not do it. It just facilitates this action for selected platforms for a percentage. Or; "It's a fabrication". Fabrication indeed.
How do parties find eachother in a dark pool if not at least one of them announces its intentions in some way?
They shop at the same liquor stores.
since the dark pool is dark and no one supposedly knows or learns anything in there, it might well be the liquor store.
Hi Mary.
Since you are probably reading this, I am just saying HI & you could do better - job integrity wise .
Not that you have any (integrity, i.e.) left.
Karma's a motherfucker
She's been a double dealing shill forever
who's Mary ?
"...and the wind cries, Mary."
J. Hendrix
Shapiro, google her
Watch his eyes,where he gazes, and how often he blinks when he gives the denials (stress?), leading into the first question (stress?), then how often he blinks when he is explaining the distinction between HFT and flash (not lying).
He has somebody standing to his right distracting him so that he doesn't look left and up while he fabricates his answers.
rofl ... my thoughts exactly Dixie ....
Not everybody looks the same direction anyway.
For purposes of lying, that's the typical direction - with a lot of blinking. This crowd knows its stuff, I am in good company!
Yeah... not always though. Might be statistically likely, never use it untested though. Learned that early.
I'm not a gambler, I'm a hypnotist.
Again.
who is he looking all the time ... i don't want to sound paranoid, but its odd to me, that he's looking at someone/something during this whole interview ....
Everybody - PLEASE STOP TRADING ON THE NYSE IMMEDIATELY - and send them a letter telling why you did. Hit 'em where it hurts folks. Trade on another exchange, trade commodities, trade forex, don't trade - whatever - but DON'T trade on the NYSE. Let's make an example out of NYSE so these A--HOLES know we mean business. This is AMERICA and you CANNOT STEAL FROM SOMEBODY. PERIOD.
I think going forward, America SHOULD NOT trade on ANY exchange where Goldman is allowed to. Let them rot in their own s--t. Who will they steal from then?
I will call my broker and ask him to do that.
Thanks deadhead. It seems we have one true warrior at least. And although nobody acknowledges this - yet - this IS war - the same war that our forefathers fought - a war between the banksters who want to loot and pillage us and those of us who will not let them - who will not be slaves to ANYONE no matter what.
Ironic that one of the primary instigators of the American Revolution was the institution of fractional banking as employed by the Bank of England. Amazing that this conversation is happening once more as the reality of built in debt fabrication to enrich the banking sector and its institution, the central bank operated for the benefit of its members and not the society in which it operates is realized.
One thing is certain. Anyone that engages in commerce with the NYSE is simply applying the restraints to themselves as are folks that continue to engage in a debt structured way of life.
Like your point paul94611 as the elliot wave guys would say, Am revolution came at the end of collapse of last super cycle and now we are entering the next super cycle crash, so maybe second Am revolution. I think GSacs epitomizes a lot of Am colonists were revolting about, the Boston Tea Party as an example, they did not like a govt favored monopoly unfairly competing with them and ruining their small, native born businesses. They had a lot of eocnomic beefs along with civil liberty and tyranny issues, the economic greivances part often gets ignored or primarily re-cast as anti-tax issue, but really they were railing against the unfair business advantage it gave to the English company super power of the day and revolting against their lack of input into the tax, they did not say they were against taxation, but against taxation without representation, because cleary, if they had their way, the corwns favored companies would not get taxes arranged to the company's favor. The bank and AIG bailouts were taxation without representation, as 80-90 percent of people opposed and yet Congress did not heed us. Dems may not like paying taxes for bloated global imperial "defense"/military or did not like paying for Iraq war, Repubs may not want taxes going to health care, "stimulus" but these policies at least have support among a large group of a AMericans, close to or past the majority.But the bailouts that so helped Wall Street, fiscal conservatives, progressives, libertarians, black/white, poor/middle class etc were all greatly opposed to them, by super majorities. Short of the brazen everyday military tyranny of the british crown, we are in much the same situation as fore fathers...
I hope you don't think Toronto is any different...
Boycotting the NYSE will at least set an example for the others.
GG has a point here....by way of reference, look at the heat GS is taking, not just from ZH. My fav is HuffPo, home of the Obama worshippers. I always find it amazingly ironic that the one matter where they vehemently diverge from Obama has to do with Wall St, the banks, etc., and the shining example and target (deservedly so) is Goldman. There's yet another piece on their front page about GS today. I also note that the MSM is focusing much more on Goldman and their antics.
Sometimes the rifle approach is more efficient than that of the shotgun.
True.. Unless you use a slug round...
Deadhead, I voted for Obama but as progressive would have liked a much more progressive candidate, ala Ralph Nader..What would a progressive like Nader have to say about Wall Street's treament...do you think he would have Rubin Sumner Giethner lurking around his Treasury Dept. Besides, we also part company with how Obama is dealing with Iraq war, with how he is handling civil liberties, past admin torturing, warantless domestic spying etc..
All the progressives I know had two beefs with Hill that made then go towards Obama more than Hill and they didn't rush to Obama because they thought he'd be an amazing progressive...one was the Iraq war, the other was Hill's obvious sell-out to Wall Street, banks (credit companies as evidence by her vote for 2005 bankruptcy bill)and big corporations. We knew Hill had no populist cred, could only hope unknown new guy would be better. as a nation were screwed. I would have voted for McCain despite my disagreement with him on almost every other issue if he opposed bank bailout and Obama had not.
I'd vote for Ron Paul because I agree with him on most things financial and on civil liberties. Even tho I disagree with his liberation economic anarchy, no regulation schtick.
During election I could see McCain was at best, no worse on econ/financial/wall street issues than Obama. McCain's staff and econ advisors included close Fannie Freddie ties, and Phil Gramm, for God's sake, not exactly mister small govt, no favors for Wall Street kinda guy. Obama's econ advisor were similarly mobbed with Wall Street ties too.
So while Obama policies on social and domestic policy issues are more aligned with my progressive politics and both McCain and Obama were econ/financially hopeless, why would it be odd or a surprise to you that I would vote for Obama but still be highly critical of his financial policies. Again, I would prefer he be Nader, so given that such a progressive, somewhat populist position of criticism of Obama is perfectly predictable given his admins behavior. Just 'cause Obama was the most progressive option we had and we went for him over Hill, as Move On and Huffpost crowd showed, does not me we thought he represented all our views.
Conservatives always seem to think we all thought Obama was our liberal/progressive dream...far from it, we all thought he was pretty moderate but we preferred him to McCain and had gotten tired of throwing close elections to Repubs by voting for Nader. Look around you, progressives have always been against undue corporate advantage and always have wanted fair, unmanipulated markets, have always been on the side of consumer protection, have always been opposed to corporate welfare, have always had issues with that private org posing as a govt entity, the Fed, getting to print our money, I'm shocked you don't get that we would dislike Obama's unprogressive ways in these matters and would be totally opposed to Wall Street's and in particular GSacs undue influence on govt and markets.
Perhaps we need a new exchange, a Zero-Hedge exchange where transparency is its currency. We should also look to see if these crooked folks have anything in common, what's the lowest common denominator - then boycott anyone of their ilk.
Oooh, good idea.
Such an exchange would take a large chunk of market share intantly.
I'd be there.
You're a little late to the party Gordie. Many of us pulled our liquidity weeks ago. Welcome aboard, only don't kid yourself. It's a problem in all equity markets. If you want any transparency at all you need to trade futures or forex.
I was just sounding a clarion call for everyone to do a formal boycott. It's either Goldman (and its ilk) playing with itself on the exchange or us, but not both, not together. Would you do business with a career criminal? Me neither. If this is a problem in all equity markets, then let this be a message to all markets. ENOUGH. I think I can survive without trading shares for a few months/years/ whatever. In any case, there are many other asset classes poised to do a hell of a lot better than stocks for the next decade. In fact, if this problem is so widespread, then lets just not buy shares altogether - period. Let Goldman buy and sell the IPO's to itself.
And what makes you think I didn't pull my liquidity before you?
SEC Rule on 'Naked' Short-Selling Now Permanent- AP
Federal regulators are making permanent an emergency rule aimed at reducing abusive short-selling, which was put in at the height of last fall's market turmoil.
(breaking but not surprising news)
Except the TARP banks were doing most of it. Why not just cut out the BULLSHIT and just flat out tell us to our faces that "Federal regulators" will do whatever the banks tell them to - PERIOD - no more, no less.
most humans don't trade much anymore, however you ve got to remember that some of us MUST re-balance our not so efficient modern portfolios, hence there is little we could do. (but chase ether yields, low duration or dividends/none existent fundamentals.)
Also most retail clients, managers & advisers are VERY risk averse right now, so who has the high flying junk on their books is a million $ question.
"so who has the high flying junk on their books..."
The Fed? I mean after all THAT is the biggest trash can in the entire United States (the world?) right now.
true, but there is got to be someone else. I doubt the "140 bl in Bearer Bonds" will be the last "bizzaro" finance story of 2009. Someone has got to implode. :)
Thats great..banning naked short selling yet there are no borrows available out there....just great. I think I am going to start stripping down to nothing in front of my computer and start shorting anyways.
Don't forget, this only works if you open up your curtains. Without the back light, your image doesn't transfer through your monitor to the exchange.
Yeh, they probably will stop publishing the bi-monthly failed to deliver list. You see what you can't see is never done. Everything is a proprietary trading strategy.
"The five SEC commissioners voted in April to put forward for public comment five alternative short-selling plans. One option is restoring a Depression-era rule that prohibits short sellers from making their trades until a stock ticks at least one penny above its previous trading price. The goal of the so-called uptick rule is to prevent selling sprees that feed upon themselves -- actions that battered the stocks of banks and other companies over the last year.
Another approach would ban short-selling for the rest of the trading session in a stock that declines by 10 percent or more."
Uh, naked short selling is already banned, the SEC just doesn't enforce the ban, and these things don't adress it specifically.
This is just obfuscating the issue. Bullshit.
The SEC forgot that in trying to keep up with Ginger Rogers, she did it in heels not flats.
I'm pretty sure it's always been illegal... all they did was issue a public nastygram.
Anyone know otherwise?
Larry is in support of HFT because he is a Goldman tool (he was afterall CEO of REDIbook) and that's where they are cleaning up. He also supports co-locating servers at the NYSE for the same reason. He's against Flash Trading because the NYSE doesn't do it (wink, wink) and we could get those other guys to stop, everything would be better.
Yeah, ok
what the \nyse is saying is essentially true they do not allow flash\bolt order but the issue is that other venues DO! now if you will allow me to explain i will demonstate...
I submit an order to buy 1,000 shrs of CAT at a price i see through my superfeed platform there is 1000 offered at 42.83 in the market. to my broker Theiving brothers incorporated. they route the order to their perfered exchange... which happens to be direct edge or BATS... where the order is delayed or "flashed" to the elite circle of inner HFT traders for a period of up to 25ms... now they can either fill my order right there and then OR and this is the really clever bit using the magic of HFT they can go and fill my order well a very similar copy using the NBBO from the exchange where that liquidity is posted in a number of cases this will be the NYSE itself. BUT because the HFT community has a 25ms head start speed advantage over my order they can very easily arrive at the NBBO buy up all of the liquidity there and then offer to sell it back to me for ohh say 48.93 presto just made $100 almost risk free arbitrage ... flash orders essentaily allow legalised front running... its sick... and I can see why the NYSE is up in arms about it... it brings the whole market into disrepute...
your order is "flashed" ONLY if it cannot be filled on the exchange first. The "flash" occurs prior to re-routing your order to another exchange as per Reg NMS. The "flash" doesn't occur prior to your order getting a chance on the exchange first.
He's not denying that NYSE allows HFT to do that thing Karl Denninger talked about where the HFT's will probe for the limit prices of other traders to sell to them at that price. I guess I'm confused, I was thinking that that was a flash order. Everyone involved here seems to suggest 'flash orders' are THE problem, it's starting to smell like a red herring/limited hangout type of thing to me.
Tyler -- To answer your good question: Supplemental liquidity providers (SLPs) receive the same information as everyone else. They don't get an look advance look at orders, as do participants in "Flash," "ELP" and "Bolt" programs from other markets.
Thanks. -- Ray
I should reiterate, for those who don't know, I'm with NYSE Euronext PR.
Mr. Pellecchia:
Thank you for taking the time to respond via your post at Zero Hedge. Irrespective of how the issues are debated, it says a lot (to me at least) that you have responded in this venue.
And judging by the warm welcome, probably the last. But he's the PR expert, I'm not.
And please everybody, when a comment goes out with errors, typos or such, please use the edit function after the comment is posted.
Yeah, thanks Mr. Pellecchia, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to call BULLSHIT on that. Sorry.
Hi Ray, I'm curious what you think of allowing all orders to be visible for a minimum of one second before they can be canceled? Thank you.
Hi Ray, me again. I withdraw my question (though still curious) in hopes that you'll feel free to answer Tyler's below. Thank you.
" Tyler -- To answer your good question: Supplemental liquidity providers (SLPs) receive the same information as everyone else. They don't get an look advance look at orders, as do participants in "Flash," "ELP" and "Bolt" programs from other markets. "
This is like saying that the top players in Vegas casinos don't get the presidential suite, but they're thrown in the basement and said that that is all they'll get ... like Gordon i also call BULLSHIT .... but we all appreciate that you answered the question via this blog ...
Thank you Ray, As per my earlier email to you, can you also confirm that a dominant SLP firm like Goldman Sachs is barred from advances looks (Flash, ELP, Bolt) on other exchanges/ECN and then applying the "Flash" knowledge on the New York Stock Exchange? Unless that is the case, I fail to see how any policing on the NYSE, when there is rampant "front running" compliments of Bats, Direct Edge, etc., is relevant if in the 25ms or so interval a firm such as i.e. Goldman Sachs has more than ample time to use Flash knowledge gleaned elsewhere to trade per its prop strategy on the NYSE.
Thank you,
TD
I hope you can respond to Tyler's question, Mr. Pellecchia; it would be appreciated.
Yes Mr. Pellecchia, are you willing to say ON THE RECORD that even "Goldman Sachs is barred from advances looks (Flash, ELP, Bolt) on other exchanges/ECN and then applying the "Flash" knowledge on the New York Stock Exchange"? If so, I am willing to withdraw my earlier statement.
That's a really good point! It would be wicked difficult to get that sort of speed, but doable.
Of course, it wouldn't strictly be NYSE's "fault" if Goldman is doing this. They can't police the other exchanges, or really Goldman for that matter.
Then again, who can police Goldman?
I am sure they'd be able to figure it out if this was going on... maybe... but it would be suicide to try doing much about it. Men are brave... corporations can't be. There just isn't a facility for the application of courage in any major commercial institution.
Thanks for responding here.
Mr. Pellecchia - you are wasting your time here. Your attempts to explain all of this will be met with myriad replies that use a partial set of facts, incorrect definitions, and healthy does of conspiracy theory. The gross misunderstanding after many attempts over the past months by many people that actually know the facts and understand how they market structure operates is shocking.
Perhaps the only thing more difficult than explaining flash orders, high frequency trading, program trading, etc. on this forum would be convincing regular participants that the moon landing actually occurred or that most of the films made by Oliver Stone use a hefty does of poetic license and could likely be classified as fiction.
Good luck to you, sir. You will be earning your money for the foreseeable future.
Wow, could you crawl any higher up the butt of the people who are ripping you off, you sycophantic douche? You realize that the NYSE has a blog - you are more than welcome to lick Ray's ass over there if you so despise everything here so much... no, instead you keep coming back and insulting everyone and everything this blog stands for: the pure definition of pathological trollery. You have not provided ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE TO DEFEND YOUR MYRIAD FACTLESS POINTS. NOT A SINGLE ONE!
But keep coming back, Tyler needs the page views compliments of pathological cases like you.
Yawn. What did this blog stand for again? "Err, Madison, Jefferson, they all would have hated high frequency trading if it were anonymous, or, er, flashed, or, um programmed."
The mocking tone is used because factual references to refute the inaccuracies of many posts on this site have simply been ignored or SHOUTED down. You and anyone else on this site are entitled to their opinion with one exception. You cannot have an opinion on a fact. One plus one does equal two. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. Obama is the POTUS. You cannot have an opinion on topics such as this. You are either right or wrong. So when multiple posters take the time to write detailed examples of how flash orders and order routing work, reference and explain how high frequency trading works, or even the guy that keeps referencing the definition of program trading on the nyse website and it is all ignored, one can only assume that this site has devolved into the same useless shouting match and echo chamber that most such forums become when the masses get involved. A shame, really, as so many of the posts on other topics, analysis of papers, and original content were quite good. No longer the case with the HFTFLASHPROGRAMTRADING taint on the site now.
let's recap the situation:
1. On zero hedge you have seen:
-"Facts" by self-professed (anonymous) experts on the field in defense of Flash and/or HFT versus,
-"Facts" by non-anonymous field practitioners, a former Chairman of the Nasdaq, executives of ECNs, and even the NYSE in refutation thereof;
2. You say: "You cannot have an opinion on topics such as this. You are either right or wrong."
I ask you to reread 1. and find the falacy of your statement.
Nice clean takedown, Tyler. No fuss, no muss.
This is more about you. It is your expertize that is not shining through because you seem to conflate many issues as you go. Since you are the conductor, the orchestra is sounding cacophonic. If you are searching for the truth, you are not going to get it that way as the experts will move on. Hopefully that's not what you want.
And if you think you know the truth already, say so and state it clearly, and present some solutions.
anon 16358...as to "Your attempts to explain all of this will be met with myriad replies that use a partial set of facts, incorrect definitions, and healthy does of conspiracy theory."
You may or may not be correct in regards to your description of the anticipated replies to Mr. Pellecchia's response to Tyler's question posed elsewhere in this thread. How about we wait and see if Mr. Pellecchia responds to the specific inquiry?
I'll put on my conspiracy hat for the moment and bet that Mr. Pellechia will not respond to the specifics of the question posed by Tyler. I will add that I hope I am wrong.
Just so there is no confusion, here's is the question on the table:
by Tyler Durdenon Mon, 07/27/2009 - 16:52
#16167
Thank you Ray, As per my earlier email to you, can you also confirm that a dominant SLP firm like Goldman Sachs is barred from advances looks (Flash, ELP, Bolt) on other exchanges/ECN and then applying the "Flash" knowledge on the New York Stock Exchange? Unless that is the case, I fail to see how any policing on the NYSE, when there is rampant "front running" compliments of Bats, Direct Edge, etc., is relevant if in the 25ms or so interval a firm such as i.e. Goldman Sachs has more than ample time to use Flash knowledge gleaned elsewhere to trade per its prop strategy on the NYSE.
Thank you,
TD
Can you rephrase the question?
you're a pretty funny guy Ben.
10,000 comedians out of work and I get you.
I was dead serious. But never mind, someone who knows what this is about already took a stab at it. And did a pretty good job.
Thank you for seeing my point. If I were Ray, I would not respond, mostly because it is a loaded question and also because he has no duty to defend what is a legal practice. No exchange with a flash order is breaking the law. One may not like the law, but they are not breaking the law. It is insinuated over and over again on this site that they are breaking the law, let's face it, the proprietors of this site continue to perpetuate factually incorrect information (see rant on correct definition of HFT, flash, program trading, etc.) and tie lose or coincidental affiliations between various individuals and exchanges together as if they are all members of some gargantuan corporate nemesis that somehow can coordinate their plans in secret and despite hundreds of employees and countless requirements to make public all their plans and designs (they do, they are called SEC rule filings, they are publicly available) pull them off. Back to the question.
What is a "dominant" SLP firm? Given that flash order executions represent an insignificant amount of executed orders on a daily basis, what percentage of the insignificant percentage would Goldman need to have to dominate?
As for seeing an order on one exchange and using that information on another, there are several problems with this premise. First and foremost the NYSE only trades in securities listed on the NYSE. BATS, Direct Edge, etc. all trade stocks listed across the whole market. The NYSE as a whole is about 10% of the market every day. Given they are only 10% of the market every day, the statistical probability of learning something on one market and applying it at the New York SE is limited. Factor in that the NYSE is the slowest of all markets and the ability to use the information is reduced again. Layer on top of all of that that by nature of the orders sent for flash execution, the size is small and the order is likely fully executed at that other exchange which would mean that establishing a quote at the NYSE would be pointless as the other side of the trade would not show up. Put another way, you could act in the way the proprietor of this site implies, but you would not make any money.
I can smell your desperation, Buddy.
Smells like victory.
I think you are wrong. If an entity is able to respond to "flash orders" and enter the market on the NYSE as part of the NBBO to provide the so called "liquidity" that would entitle them to a rebate. The fact that the NYSE is slow relative others only reinforces the argument. Your point about 10% of the market I assume is in reference to volume ? NYSE/Arca market share is higher than 10% .
Ray: You should have taken the buyout, I know, mortage, kids college, etc....but Dude, dead wood is dead wood...besides you don't meet the new GS IQ requirement for employment....University of Staten Island Santitation does not count.
Hey, you could always go back to driving Dick Goniff..I hear he is generous with compensation...just ask Zito.
Isn't naked short selling illegal and by virtue already banned ?
essentially, yes. i believe specialists/market makers are allowed to do this and have been for some time.
lol ... yes that's true ... and you know what they call that rule ... Madoff exemption ... i bullshit you not ... google it ... the man himself wrote it ...
"Indeed, Madoff seems to have written many of the SEC’s rules. For example, Madoff was the principal author of an SEC rule that exempted market makers (i.e. Madoff) from various regulations governing short sellers (i.e. Madoff’s friends).
Madoff’s rule ensured that market makers (Madoff) could, among other things, engage in so-called “naked short selling.” To sell “naked” is to sell stock that one does not actually possess. That is “phantom stock,” according to the SEC Chairman and many others.
Sometimes, short sellers (who profit when shares lose value) offload massive amounts of phantom stock to drive down prices, destroy pubic companies, or even crash the market. That is why there used to be restrictions.
At any rate, I don’t think Madoff had an office at the SEC. He certainly was not employed there. But the SEC was glad to have Madoff write a rule exempting Madoff from the rules. The SEC was so thankful that it named the rule after the great man himself.
It was called, “The Madoff Exception.”
After Madoff wrote that rule, market makers (e.g., Madoff) proceeded to “rent” their exemption to hedge funds (i.e. friends-of-Madoff).
It remained against the law for hedge funds to sell phantom stock to manipulate the markets. It was also against the law for market makers to help hedge funds orchestrate such schemes. But under the Madoff regulatory regime, unscrupulous short sellers (i.e. friends-of-Madoff) could engage in this illegal activity so long as they did so with the illegal connivance of a law-breaking market maker (i.e. Madoff).
A few months ago, this naked short selling was implicated–by numerous academics, the U.S. Chamber of Chamber of Commerce, the Secretary of the Treasury, the CEOs of Wall Street’s biggest banks, respected law firms, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and numerous congressmen – in the near total collapse of the American financial system.
The SEC has not prosecuted anybody for this. After all, there is an “exception.”"
http://www.deepcapture.com/tag/the-madoff-exemption/
First off - HAHAHHHAAAAAHAHAHHAAAHA!!!! The biggest (well, actually second biggest - first being the US Government) Ponzi Scheme operator in the world has been writing SEC rules! No wonder Wall Street markets have (much) worse "regulation" than...well, pretty much everything else that needs to be regulated.
Second, I'm willing to bet my last dime that Goldman et. al. must have been at the forefront of this "naked shorting" activity last fall, except when the hunter became the hunted the "rules" had to be enforced somehow, but even then on everybody else but not Goldman-and-friends. An illegal, immoral and unethical activity and Goldman is not involved? I don't think so.
i will name you the top three naked short sellers who caused more damage in the fall of 2008 than any of the other participants in the market ... and i know this for a fact from a reliable source, which, normally, i can not name here for his own personal protection ... they were
1. Goldman Sachs
2. Steve Cohen's SAC
3. George Soros and all the funds under Quantum Fund umbrella
combined percentage of the stocks that were sold naked by these three market participants was app. 64% of all naked short selling ... and i know i can believe the guy who told me that information, because a) i know him for 20 yrs, and b) he's in the position to know ....
If this is true, what do the leaders of these three organizations have in common? What about the former and current FED chairmen? Now we will see how intelligent the ZH crowd is, what is the lowest common denominator that links these three organizations? Do you know, without reacting with any pre-programmed emotion but merely facts to direct your reasoning?
i know very well what the lowest common denominator is that links those three orgs .... but i will not say it, because i do not wish do be call a ... well you know what A-S, because i really am not. i'm just anti-z, but not anti-s ... and yes this is true .... but you won't find out this information from the SEC if you ask them ... they call ti " keeping the positions secret in respect to blah blah blah " oh and my source is a SEC employee ... so he has first row access to this data ...
A collusive group can easily beat a diverse group of competitors. The membership of the collusive group will promote diversity outwardly, but also conflict amongst those differences and divisions to distract and disorganize. As those diverse groups fight amongst themselves about trivial matters, the collusive group remains focused and profit handsomely in zero sum games. We need our own defense league, since someone is playing offense.
Yes. Reg SHO states this explicitly. Most claims of naked short selling are baseless as with almost 100% participation, the executing broker will deliver the shares by T+3 if their customer does not deliver it. This is to avoid the broker being put into the SEC "penalty box" for that particular stock. Once in the "penalty box" for a stock, the broker must pre-borrow that stock before selling it short for customers or its own accounts, significantly inconveniencing that broker's customers and driving up the broker's costs which in turn leads clients not to sell short the security in question through that broker.
Isnt naked long buying illegal and by virtue already banned?
it was temporary (!) banned prior to today. It might be one of the factors affecting market neutral funds performance. I think the basic model was, post a margin, sell short and buy long on proceeds; there must be a way around it but it could be more expensive. (not my expertise, would love to see a comment on way around for a market neutral strategy :))) )
These people are desperate. I know many people with alot and i mean alot of money that are not in the game anymore. Just look at the volume on NYSE it is pathetic. Oh sure it is the summer etc. all just an excuse. Volume is down 30-40 percent since May. Would you play in a poker game if you felt the deck was marked?
"I know many people with alot and i mean alot of money that are not in the game anymore. Just look at the volume on NYSE it is pathetic."
Good for them. This is exactly what we need.
good point 16146...volumes are anemic and your reasoning as to why is most solid. With the remaining volumes, it seems to me that approx. 70% is handled by the top 10 primaries, with GS typically accounting for 50% of that, give or take depending on the reporting period.
I think we should all leave Goldman alone on the NYSE to play with itself.
If Goldman convinces the regulators to change the rules allowing them to "look" at each trade to prevent errors, they too will have advance orders and the NYSE rationalization goes out the window. If Goldman doesn't officially get a "look" than the NYX is risking a multi-billion dollar model error (as laid out by Lime Trading last week).
So the question for NYSE is would you rather let Goldman (the only SLP) front run, or let the computers risk the integrity of the system?
Friday, July 24 Criminal Behavior: Goldman Sachs
link: New York Times 7/24/09 article on GS computerized front running
http://tinyurl.com/nvv3lo
http://www.deanlebaron.com/index.html
Its probaly worth highlighting that there are 3 important and distinct issues at work here.
1. ELP, Flash, Bolt, are just completly wrong. at best they allow a select group of market makers/exchanges a monopoly on order flow. at worst they are a form of organised front running/ arbitrage / theft.
2. Low latency/co location connections to the exchanges which are often a prerequisite for high frequency/low latency trading. The exchanges see this as the legitimate facilitation of an arms race between their memebers for the best technology the fastest execution the fastest moustrap. they have been moving towards the facilitation of this for a long time now because their members request/demand it. back in the day it used to be that everyone was delayed by the same amount and everyone had a phone to their guy on the floor and thus it was "fair" at least among the exchanges own members... however a number of changes occured not least the rise of co-location services, now the playing feild is level only for the select few who pay up for the favored data center access because public information as it comes out of the exchange by definition reaches the closest participants first. the trading pit is the same and has all the same club mentality of the Pit of yesteryear only without the remorse the pit traders are just binary they dont feel, they dont flinch they can run for days on end without turning up to work coked out of their brains. they are legal perhaps not, entirly ethical though, but thats the price of competing in the market. in many cases you get fast or you go home... at least if you are trying to make markets with the big boys...
3. Market structural liquidity provision rules such as SLP ELPS MM preferencing, DMMs PMMs, SLPs, LLPs any and every sort of taker and maker structure you like.... its all really really silly but ultimatly the same... there are theoretical models which suggest that such market structures enchance liquidity just look at chiX for evidence. in some cases they are right.. but the fact is that all such programs are at some level unfair and ultimatly that should undermine the market and investors confidence in it....
Larry how much will it cost me to put a server on NYSE floor. Me and my friends are interested in this neutral advantage you talk about.
one hundred million dollars and your firstborn ...
I don't have one hundred million dollars, but they can have all 3 of my kids! I'll throw the wife in for a couple of shares of C.
rofl
From today's Globe and Mail:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/cibc-surges-ahead-on-e...
Compliments of the scummiest bank in Canada.
Thank you all for the comments. I simply refuse to watch another CNBC video. I don't have cable and I'll be diggy dog danged, if I'm going to watch that pump whore and her mail sidekick kiss ass on this site.
as i posted previously on this topic - the NYSE INVENTED flash orders a long time ago at the trading posts - they just didn't call them flash orders. The specialist always quoted markets verbally before executing them to allow price improvement by those standing in the crowd (ONLY those standing in the crowd - you sitting at home on your DOT machine didn't get the look) before printing trades..
Much better the way it is now?
lol.
As for the captcha question who knew that a "negative times a negative" would stick in my head after all these years . . . thank goodness!
now to my substantive question - is there a way to order the responses to a given topic (like this one) in strict chronological order? It is otherwise confusing to me as I try to follow the logic & responses of the various posters.
liquid...i think the "comment viewing options" will do what you need
dh - tku for coming back on this - I have it set on "date - oldest first" - but when I scroll upand look at the comments I have (taking some out of my entire thread)
by Anonymous
on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 17:16
#16181
one hundred million dollars and your firstborn ...
by deadhead
on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 17:22
#16185
I don't have one hundred million dollars, but they can have all 3 of my kids! I'll throw the wife in for a couple of shares of C.
by casey
on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 17:20
#16184
I have tried resetting the settings - will try it again but was hoping someone could tell me what I might be doing wrong. Thanks again for response.
How in GOD's GREEN EARTH does Mary the DITZ Shapiro have a JOB in this administration???!!!!
She did absolutely NOTHING of any use in her former role, and now her crony capitalism and abject failure is just rewarded AGAIN!
This is Stomach-Churning and WRONG!!
Agreed. Absolutely REFUSE to watch CNBC anymore. You might as well turn on Sesame Street or General Hospital.
Bubble Gum for the EYES....
with record gold prices many of the large companies have poor earnings growth.
<a href="http://www.jihoy.com/classifieds/Employment/5">jobs</a> |<a href="http://www.jihoy.com/webadvertising">web advertising</a>|<a href="http://www.amerisleep.com">memory foam mattresses</a></p> </div>