Can you hit your own bid from your other account?

Quote from TheStudent:

It's painting the tape and it's as old as the hills.

I'm no lawyer so I don't know which law it flouts, but I'll reckon a good guess is that it's illegal under market manipulation.
More...

yeah,the history of the vse is full of these stories from the good ol days.just need to get on the top volume in the paper and magically the stock gets attention.:)
 
I actually did this a few times (before I found out it was illegal). I had an account with IB, and another one with a firm that charged me $20 per trade. Let's say I was long 2000 share of a low volume stock in my per ticket broker. If I tried to sell my position, it might take several fills, costing me a ton of money in commissions. So I would sell my position in that account, to myself in my IB account, then sell my IB position in however many fills it took. I didn't do it that often, and I was always scared there was a hidden order somewhere that would superced my order. I don't think I ever got burned.
 
Quote from forex-forex:

I believe this sort of stuff might happen on the OTC Board with penny stocks. The local paper has a good business writer on scams and he mentions the OTC Board quite a bit.

ET doesn't allow threads on penny stocks probally for this reason.
More...
the reason they don't alow penny stocks is belately they have disocvered that many of its members are novice traders. and probably require protection.

what is the name of this business writer.we could all probably learn from him,
 
Quote from Toonces:

I actually did this a few times (before I found out it was illegal). I had an account with IB, and another one with a firm that charged me $20 per trade. Let's say I was long 2000 share of a low volume stock in my per ticket broker. If I tried to sell my position, it might take several fills, costing me a ton of money in commissions. So I would sell my position in that account, to myself in my IB account, then sell my IB position in however many fills it took. I didn't do it that often, and I was always scared there was a hidden order somewhere that would superced my order. I don't think I ever got burned.
More...

"So I would sell my position in that account, to myself in my IB account, then sell my IB position in however many fills it took" from toonce

if you sold in your IB account you need to buy to close your position.
 
Quote from HolyGrail:

I don't know if it is legal but I bet it is done all of the time especially in low volume stocks.
More...
Why? what profit could you gain? Whatever you win on account A you lose to account B, and you also lose commisions.
 
Quote from eusdaiki:

Why? what profit could you gain? Whatever you win on account A you lose to account B, and you also lose commisions.
More...

This practice is followed from someone having a controlling interest on the stock or an agreement with those who have controlling interest on the stock. The upward movement begins and the momentum plus the trading volume plus the rumors attract small speculators in the stock and the distribution begins. Bottom line transactions cost are the advertising expenses for creating the game.
 
Quote from gbos:

This practice is followed from someone having a controlling interest on the stock or an agreement with those who have controlling interest on the stock. The upward movement begins and the momentum plus the trading volume plus the rumors attract small speculators in the stock and the distribution begins. Bottom line transactions cost are the advertising expenses for creating the game.
More...

Yep, that is the way the game is played. Get those momentum investors interested in the stock and let them take it up.
 
this thread covers the same subject as a previous thread. what is interesting is that this new thread presents in some ways a new perspective on the subject.

the conclusion is however the same. the practice seems to be illegal.
 
Quote from Wayne Gibbous:

May not apply here, but I just noticed this:

Notice Regarding Pre-Arranged Trading On U.S. Futures Exchanges

Pre-arranged trades are trades that are the result of discussions between two market participants prior to execution to ensure that a contra party will take the opposite side of a particular order. U.S. futures exchanges, including CME and CBOT, have regulations prohibiting the execution of pre-arranged trades except in certain limited instances.

Interactive Brokers customers are responsible to know and abide by all exchange restrictions regarding pre-arranged trading.

For your reference, the relevant CME and CBOT rules are set forth below:

CME (GLOBEX) Policy 539

Prearranged, Pre-negotiated and Noncompetitive Trades Prohibited

539.A. General Prohibition

No person shall prearrange or pre-negotiate any purchase or sale or noncompetitively execute any transaction, except in accordance with Sections B and C below. Violation of this rule may be a major offense.

539.B. Exceptions

The foregoing restriction shall not apply in the following circumstances:

Block trades pursuant to Rule 526;
A transfer of spot for futures pursuant to Rule 538; and,
A transfer of cash for futures after termination of a contract pursuant to Rule 719.
539.C. Pre-Execution Discussions Regarding GLOBEX Trades

Parties may engage in pre-execution discussions with regard to transactions executed on the GLOBEX platform where one party (the first party) wishes to be assured that a contra party (the second party) will take the opposite side of the order under the following circumstances:

A party may not engage in pre-execution discussions with other market participants on behalf of another party unless the party for whose benefit the trade is being made has previously consented to permit such discussions.
Parties to pre-execution discussions shall not (i) disclose to a non-party the details of such discussions or (ii) enter an order through the GLOBEX platform to take advantage of information conveyed during such discussions except in accordance with this rule.
A period of 5 seconds shall elapse between entry of the two orders in the case of futures orders or a period of 15 seconds shall elapse between entry of the two orders in the case of option orders.
In any transaction involving pre-execution discussions, the first party’s order must be entered into the GLOBEX platform first and the second party’s order may not be entered into the GLOBEX platform until the time period prescribed in Section 539.C.3. above has elapsed.
Pursuant to Rule 585 (“GLOBEX®Call Market Trading Algorithm”), solicitation of bid(s) and/or offer(s) through private discussion for the purpose of establishing a market or improving the market for an eligible contract or an eligible combination of contracts for options on Eurodollar futures shall be preceded by issuing a Request For Quote (“RFQ”) through an eligible terminal. Subsequent to such RFQ, a trade intended for execution pursuant to Rule 585 for which there has been a pre-execution discussion shall be initiated with a Request for Cross Trade (“Cross Request”) for the specific contract or combination of contracts, with explicit reference to the anticipated order quantity. The order from the initiator of the Cross Request for the contract or combination of contracts must be entered within three (3) minutes of the entry of the Cross Request. The opposing order may not be entered until the requisite period of time as stipulated in Section C.3. above has elapsed. Failure to enter the initiating order within three (3) minutes of the entry of the Cross Request shall be considered an abandonment of that pre-execution discussion. Any subsequent pre-execution discussion concerning the transaction must be preceded by the entry of a new RFQ and, thereafter, a new Cross Request must be entered before proceeding with the order entries.
More...

i remember seeing this set of er2 trades on globex in may of last year.

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=743764&highlight=market+wild#post743764

several >400 lots popped off in rapid succession on a holiday friday afternoon right before close. were these prearranged? they seemed to be since there was almost noone else trading and it's not like they sat on the spread or anything

maybe it involves an offshore entity in order to spoof or cross own trades with the appearance of being unrelated accts? wouldn't surprise me if that's prevalent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top