You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
SEC Votes Unanimously In Favor Of Dark Pool Regulation
Flash down, dark pools regulated... and now the last, and logical, focus - HFT.
In the meantime NITE and other dark pool operators not doing too hot.
»
- 3872 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
The details man, I want the details. They can tell me anything they want but let's see the fine print.
Shapiro's Statement on Dark Pool Regulation Before the Commission Open Meeting
http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2009/spch102109mls.htm
I'm fishing in these dark pools for Answers to my Question's...
Regarding Buying Halt For Health Science Group (HESG.PK) Last Trade .0007
I would like to address these questions to the following two CEO Executives...
Mr. Thomas Gaffney, CEO of Health Science Group,
Mr. Roger O. Riney Chief Executive Officer of Scottrade and currently President of Knight Trading Group. If You Gentlemen would be so kind as to enlighten account and HESG shareholders by answering the following questions.
The Q's Do you believe there to be Moral Hazard or Conflicts of Interest, effecting those HESG shareholders with or without brokerage accounts at Scottrade? What are the discrepancy that have caused a buying Halt for many of Health Science Group Investors.? Most Retail Brokerages have no buying halts on HESG stock, except for Scottrade and TD Ameritrade where buying halt has been placed for HESG.
These are questions directed to Knight Capital Group, who are currently the Largest Market Maker's for HESG equities. "Knight provides trade executions by offering to buy securities from, or sell securities to, institutions and broker dealers". In the current Holding Reports, it states that Knight Capital Group has no direct holdings in HESG equities..... Therefore HESG shares must be borrowed or bought from other brokerages like Scottrade. My question is regarding the HESG shares that are bought and borrowed by NITE, while Scottrade account holders are still faced with a buying halt. Are any of these shares then used for shorting the same shares they have just borrowed from? Mr. Riney not to include yourself; But how do you decide which best interest comes first, the CEO of Scottrade or President KNIGHT TRADING GROUP? Now I'd like to thank you gentlemen, ahead of time from all the HESG Investors for attempting to make these issues more transparent and fair for us all.
May We Find Good Luck, & Peace...
God Bless.
I.C.Stockwell aka † h i n k f i s h
KNIGHT CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
FORM 13F-HR
(Form 13F Holdings Report)
Filed 11/13/09 for the Period Ending 09/30/09
http://idc.api.edgar-online.com/efx_dll/edgarpro.dll?FetchFilingConvPDF1...
Thanks For Your Comments
Huntinvest.com Securities and Investment Forums Respond
I doubt of any officers of Health Science Group (HSEG) or anyone with an IQ
above Chicagos' temperature (18º) follow this crap ($0.0007/sh.) in this
Questions Regarding Buying Halt For HESG/Health Sc... Blash 12-11-2009N/G....
What is this statement supposed to mean <<Do you believe there to be Moral
Hazard or Conflicts of Interest, effecting those HESG shareholders with or
without brokerage accounts at Scottrade?>>
Even if you have a million shares, you're talking about $700.......
Why don't you just sell this dog, take your tax loss, go to Atlantic City
put it the proceeds on the "00" to end your misery........
That may account for Goldman's relative weakness today
FDIC Bair says wants open bank assistance removed from resolution authority billl
FDIC SPEAKERSays:
- Regulators should use economic incentives to limit bank size and complexity.
- Banks could pay fees for risky practices such as proprietary trading and structured finance.
Keep up the pressure.
For those of you who want details, you'll have to wait. The vote today is not "THE" vote. Unfortunately, this has become political, which means the SEC will move carefully.
We will all have to wait 60 days to see what emerges, but one should not assume the Commission will vote 5-0 at that point.
If it's not THE vote, what is it? A vote to see whether they should vote?
I am not sure how many saw this last night.
But before anyone gets to excited about regulation watch this. All of it.
It should be part of Tyler and Marla's course on "financial literacy for those seeking elected office".
And for anyone who believed the myth "change we can believe in".......
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/
That was an great Frontline. It left me with even less respect for Greenspan.
I told my wife who doesn't follow these things "You realize that these guys are still there. They're on Obama's economic team." She had no idea.
Lizzy, sorry I picked a fight with you yesterday. I like Canada very much and visit regularly. But we yanks do read sometimes :)
It takes 2.
Wasn't so much a fight as a duo of dopey (on my part) one liners.
All is good (and for the record i actually like your country very much).
Everyone in the US, who voted for "change" should be forced to watch that eposide. If merit (and protecting U.S taxpayer money) actually mattered the only person who would still be working in government today would be Brooksley Born.
You know what I liked most about that lady, even after all these years, she did not bad mouth any of those "geniasses". When asked about the lunch with Greenspan, she declined to say anything on camera. That's integrity in my book.
And those male egotistical bastards threw her under the bus during all those Congressional hearings. Listen up you Greenspan, Summers and Rubin.... you.....oh, how does it even matter....
Great video!
I am glad that they mentioned the fact that Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's disciples. Greenspan had spawn up a cultish atmosphere around himself which is typical of those who are obsessed with Rand.
Also that he explicitly said he was uncomfortable with enforcing federal law at the time he accepted the Fed chairmanship.
ALSO, that he apparently told Brooksley Born that the government shouldn't police Wall Street fraud, even if they know it's happening. That the market will somehow punish fraudsters itself.
Greenspan is a ideologue d-bag, and one "I may have been wrong" at a Congressional hearing doesn't come close to clearing his name.
Take it for a grain of salt from someone who claims to love Rand, but yet operates the federal printing press/academic capitalism antithesis sledgehammer....
Obviously some degree of laws are necessary to protect the most basic of freedoms, as Rand's theories of moral universality ultimately have no place in the real world... where the markets aren't free to operate in any direction and gains and losses on risk taking sufferable by the same parties... a world Greenspan at most may have sired and at least provided the goal line push...
The concept of fraud discovery must be taken proactively... the "let the market correct it" approach should absolutely work... and is the preferred method... presuming at least some degree of perfect competition. However, where companies are allowed to congregate share and accumulate systemic risk, failure to police fraud results in the inevitable destruction of the system, as meth addicts will not stop cold turkey without an outside intervention... at which time, they've at the very least fucked up their teeth, liver, kidneys, and chances for economic livelihood... and at most, given themselves a death clock waiting for a transplant (from a chinaman who was blackjacked in an alleyway and woke up in an ice filled bathtub).
The only question is how long will poor saps continue walking in the dark alleyway?
Take a stroll through the PBS Frontline video archives (American Experience as well) and you shall find some programs extolling the virtues of Greenspan years ago.
As with all mainstream media, there is an agenda being promoted here. That doesn't mean Frontline or any other MSM isn't capable of speaking the truth.
But it's always interesting to observe what truth is being spoken and when.
Ayn says zero government in the markets is her objective.
Greenie says no such thing as fraud in free markets!
Does the release of this Frontline indicate that a regulatory framework is in the offing that is endorsed by the wall street club? Gadzooks!; what will the new rules be?
Oh ya, the PPT is four guys and a gal....ain't that grand.
40muleteam borax
Watched it last night, quite dissapointing.
dupe
Huge props to Tyler and Zero Hedge for helping to get these issues on the SEC's radar. Whatever you do, KEEP IT UP.
Tyler, no HAL 9000 reference in the title?
After all, the SEC is moving in to cut Pool(e)'s life line...
Contributing in a large way Knight's decline are their eps report delivered this a.m.
I wouldn't get so happy so fast.
The agreement was to meet TO PROPOSE, it wasn't a set of proposals. That's spitting, not swallowing.
October 21, 2009
Good morning. Today we are tackling another item on our agenda to protect The New York Stock Exchange and bring greater transparency to our markets.
________
Fixed Mary's post.
The NYSE has seen a severe market share decline in recent years. Prevailing wisdom has let it be known that this is the result of innovative competitors who trade at lightning fast speed. The simple truth is that the so-called alternative trading venues have prospered because they are unregulated and they are unfair.
Public securities must trade on public markets ! Wake up. protecting the NYSE is a good thing. Public markets are a good thing. Dark interest, HFT, no reporting requirements, client anonymity are bad.
Indeed--this is a coup
Look ....here it is....
Any form of black pool is illegal....simple no private pricing of public securities....period....
Big funds elected to be in there business....nobody forced them to be in their business....and they must operate out in the open like anyone else....
The market does not need a few large players ....
The market needs a lot of small players....
The more the better...
........................................
What the market needs most importantly is a revamped de-fragmented direct access exchange....whereby transfer costs should be minimal....not more than 20 cents per hundred units...
Today....an exchange has just become software....and could be located anywhere....
First come first served....no account minimum or maximum....
Margin should be 4:1 intraday or overnight....
There should be size limits regarding ownership per account....
The exchange once de-fragmented could be easily electronically regulated....
There would be no short sale issues.....Short sells would be electronically tagged not to exceed float....There is no need to locate stock etc....
All asset classes would discover price on the exchange....
The large accounts would just have to be visible ....pay the same rates as a $100 account....no preferences on the exchange....
One would have to know how to best buy and sell on the exchange.....
The idea that there should be any private pricing off the public exchange should be 100% banned...
In order to properly regulate....one needs to properly simplify....
I agree. I hope the regulators look at the negative impacts
of market fragmentation.
Perhaps there are now too many trading venues, but market fragmentation meant that exchanges which used to gouge everyone with high commissions no longer get to do so because of the competition.
It is not just the rise of the internet and web browsers that has created online trading with relatively low commissions (by historical standards), but the competition fostered by the rise of ECNs and ATSs.
Before the technology existed to fragment the markets, the listing exchange had a monopoly on trading its listed securities. Things are now far more complex, but with that complexity has come a remarkable drop in trading costs... to the extent that a retail investor can now trade for 1/2 penny per share all in at places like IB, and even cheaper for slightly less mainstream brokers.
Those are rates people in the 80s would never have believed possible.
Could it be that NITE earnings came below esimates?
0.32 vs 0.395 est
nah, must be SEC.