21–30 of 238 posts
Remember when Sanders proposed a small fee on every trade on Wall Street to discourage high frequency trading and to recoup some value from the market? Remember how he was widely pronounced deranged for suggesting that there should be a fee associated with trades? How it would destroy the market? Funny, that.
Yale wants to buy and sell large blocks of stock without the price moving away from them.
I want to buy and sell stock at the best possible price with all of the latest information transmitted to the market as fast as possible.
This is why Yale would prefer to trade in "darker" exchanges like IEX and most retail investors should prefer other exchanges.
I think this is well known. The real problem is that the traders are much smarter than the regulators, and their ability to obscure far exceeds the regulators' ability to untangle. Incentivise your regulators better and you might end up attracting some real talent who can unearth the tricks the crafty traders pull every day (I am an ex trader, from a bulge bracket IB, and trust me, what some of these guys do is not a…
Also, there is an argument for more time controlled auctions rather than giving everyone a continuous look at the order book. Much like the start of day auction, you could have something similar every minute, where traders submit prices but matching only occurs at the end of each minute. This would certainly put an end to the annoying high/low ticking that happens all too often.
Hint: if the minute long auction closes at precisely the minute boundary at what time do you want to put your orders in?
Remember when Sanders proposed a small fee on every trade on Wall Street to discourage high frequency trading and to recoup some value from the market? Remember how he was widely pronounced deranged for suggesting that there should be a fee associated with trades? How it would destroy the market? Funny, that.
> Remember how he was widely pronounced deranged for suggesting that there should be a fee associated with trades? How it would destroy the market?
Who said this, specifically? What is your point in bringing it up?
> Remember when Sanders proposed a small fee on every trade on Wall Street to discourage high frequency trading and to recoup some value from the market?
I'm getting the sense that you'd be in favor of this - can you tell me why, in your own words, you believe we should be trying to "recoup value" from the activities of high frequency traders?
I can imagine some potential ways that could be gamed as well...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fees on trading would not meaningfully discourage high frequency trading and would just be passed on to buyers and sellers of stock in the form of larger bid/ask spreads.
Something like a minimum holding time is a more reasonable approach. However, there's not a clear cut answer in any case.
Why do you want to reduce high frequency trading?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, there is an argument for more time controlled auctions rather than giving everyone a continuous look at the order book. Much like the start of day auction, you could have something similar every minute, where traders submit prices but matching only occurs at the end of each minute. This would certainly put an end to the annoying high/low ticking that happens all too often.
There is no good argument for this. The problems you think it might solve...it doesn't solve. Hint: if the minute long auction closes at precisely the minute boundary at what time do you want to put your orders in?
Not only companies, but also countries. While America will always be aaa
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no good argument for this. The problems you think it might solve...it doesn't solve. Hint: if the minute long auction closes at precisely the minute boundary at what time do you want to put your orders in?
Hint: If you can't see the orders during that minute, it doesn't matter when you submit...