30 sec rule for market makers

This is how the market makers doing their money !!!!!

NITE is fucking you when you use online brokers. No buts or ifs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by vhehn
if there are only a few shares traded at .16 and and there is a bunch of buyers at .16 ahead of him that take up all the supply of stock at under his limit before his order turn comes up he wont get a fill.
More...

But his bid was at .18 which would jump him ahead of any bids at .16 due to price/time priority. I think what MBG is saying is that if the bid was down to say .16 at any point-even if the ask was up at .19-the broker should either fill his order OR post it because it would improve the NBBO (inside bid) which they are obligated to do now under current order handling rules.

In the "old days" they would screw with this all the time. Say the market was bid .16 bid and offered .19 and he bids at .18. Would the passive sellers at the .19 offer match with him? No, so his order would go unfilled even though other sellers that were aggressively hitting the bid at .16 would gladly sell to him at .18. The problem was the aggressive sellers did not know about the .18 bid because the MM's would hold the order until they could guarantee making the spread in a riskless trade.

With post 1996 order handling rules, once the bid went below .18, the MM must now either fill his subsequent .18 bid or display it as a new higher bid for other sellers to see. Presumably, if stock was still selling at .16 and .17, this would have resulted in a fill for his bid at .18. I think he has a legitimate issue here if what others said about the tape is true (as I did not look at it).
 
Originally posted by vhehn
"Since the MM is not willing to sell at 27.18, he MUST either post the order to his quote at 27.18, or send the order to some other avenue for execution (an ECN) at 27.18. The fact that NVDA traded down to 27.16 shows the MM did neither, which is a clear violation of the rules. Why he didn't do it is a question for NASD Regulation. The ask price does not have to be 27.18 for execution - the fact that it traded below 27.18 is all you need to know that the MM screwed him"


i think the part you are missing is that the .16 prints may not have been a mm.if that was an isld trade for those few shares the mm may not even have been involved.so i stand by what i said if the broker he was using doesnt hit isld and the only trades under .18 were isld he gets no fill.
another example i have had is this.if there are only a few shares traded at .16 and and there is a bunch of buyers at .16 ahead of him that take up all the supply of stock at under his limit before his order turn comes up he wont get a fill.anybody who traded ipos in the old days experienced this you had to chase them several points at times even tho you bid above the ask.the only way you know none of the above happened is if the ask traded through his bid.if that happened you know he was cheated.
More...

The part that you are missing is that it doesn't matter if the trades were by a market maker, isld, or whoever - it doesn't matter! The fact that he was willing to pay 27.18 for the stock, and the fact that someone else sold it at 27.16 means that the buyer was screwed, and whoever sold at 27.16 was screwed - because there was a willing buyer at 27.18 that NITE decided not to do anything with.
 
mgb, I don't want to sound rude, but all I have to do is hit some ecns below the bid to create the lower prints.

Then some retail can yell and scream how they didnt get thier fill.
 
Originally posted by stock777
mgb, I don't want to sound rude, but all I have to do is hit some ecns below the bid to create the lower prints.

Then some retail can yell and scream how they didnt get thier fill.
More...

I agree - but he said that a lot of shares traded below his price - so thats why I say NITE screwed him.

If a MM or someone wanted a lower print, they would do a few hundred - but probably no more. In any event, its a violation of the order handling rules. Besides, if NITE had an order to buy from a retail customer at 27.18, and saw prints at 27.16, he could easily pocket .02 risk free - so why didn't he even do that?
 
Maybe it was an "in house" deal and your broker bought someone elses shares for 24.10 (what you said your chart ticked down to) rather than yours for 27.18.
 
FWIW I sent an online request for verification of this alleged rule. Would prefer something in writing as opposed to a phone call. Will post the response once (if) I get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top