Cox should be hanged for X the uptick rule
- Thread starter liulala
- Start date
Volatility also increases when uncertainty increases. Given the laundry list of real economic upheaval over the past 18 months, what is the evidence that it's the elimination of the uptick rule and not greater uncertainty that is the cause of the increased volatility?
market makers don't have to take and hold positions to provide liquidity.
You are correct they do not need to commit capital to provide liquidity, but they do to maintain an orderly market.
Earnings and earnings forecast are what ultimately dictate valuation. More so, big money does not need to apply to this uptick rule. There are many ways of creating a synthetic long, enabling funds to sell on a downtick.
Agreed 100%.
I feel like making the same remark as Judge Glass ( who oversaw OJ's trial and sentencing ) when it comes to talking about how incompetent Christopher Cox has been. You can throw SEC enforcement officer Linda Thomsen into the same jail cell as well.
When Judge Glass sentenced OJ Simpson, she wasn't sure if OJ was "ignorant or arrogant . . . or a little bit of both."
I think that the same remarks also apply to Cox and Thomsen. But then again, I'm sure that Wall Street and the SEC loved the underwriting fees from all those new Ultra Pro Bear leveraged ETF's and the brokerage community enjoyed all of the new commission generation and ability to execute one program trade after another with a push of a button and not having to wait for an "uptick" to get in the way.
Follow the money folks.
im not kidding, i just guess your much smarter then me. you have to be smarter then me, you have 100x more posts then i do. so can you explain to someone dumb like myself the answer to my question below?
"why would the ETF "lobby" care about the uptick rule. ETFs where always exempt from the uptick rule."
I was about to make a detailed post explaining the way the money transfer process from the introduction of an uptick rule into the equity market works. I was going to explain how the short gets an unfair fill (his liquidity taken), then decided not to as the rule may come back and I may have to earn my living that way. My old self would have painted a perfect picture of the setup, but I have grown to learn to protect my edges. The last part of my explanation was going to then go on about how a substantial percentage of the profit made by the daytraders on their short-entry trade (not the size blowup) goes to the broker at an exorbitant rate - $17-$40 per 1000.
I was going to accuse Landis of not understanding this.
I then remembered that Landis is in fact a pitch man for his prop trading group.
Then it all made sense.