Futures options liquidity issues

I'm curious. Why would you want to effectively make a market (without the apparent benefits of being a market-maker)?

Quote from rosy2:

the best way to play it is to send me an email or instant message. I will post a better bid/offer for you to hit. my yahoo chat id is "makebidoffer"
 
Quote from nravo:

I'm curious. Why would you want to effectively make a market (without the apparent benefits of being a market-maker)?

I would buy the bid and sell the offer and then hedge.

what are the apparent benefits of being a market maker in gold options anyway? I dont think there's an algorithm for flow
 
Quote from nravo:

What"s the rationale for the illegality?

does there need to be one? i mean does the pdt has any ?

lmao, as big players can negotiate trades everyone that could should as well, but unfortunately it aint this way...the rich and powerful are always privileged innit.
 
Quote from Bitstream:

does there need to be one? i mean does the pdt has any ?
Of course. Everyone knows the government's primary job is to save the citizenry from their own stupidity. Thank goodness the US banned online gambling! Finally someone was thinking about the children.

It's also illegal to place both a bid and an ask on the same contract at both CBOT and CME. That one bothers me--if the MM can't do better than the huuuge spreads they're offering in some places, why can't I? EUR XT options ocasionally have bid .0003/ask .0015. I'd happily buy at 5 pips and sell at 10, but I can't legally make that market.
 
Quote from nravo:

What"s the rationale for the illegality?
The rule first appeared in the 1930s. It became popular in the '20s to form "investment clubs" which would run up the price of stocks by buying from each other within the club (one member sells short to another member who goes long). Essentially, the transactions were risk free for the club, but shares were removed from circulation causing the price to run up. More often than not, the runup would cause frenzied buying from non-club members. The club would then dump the stock during the frenzy and the shorts would cover in the ensuing panic.

Very low risk, very profitable. As a result, pre-arranged transactions are now banned.

There are many more details of such schemes in A Random Walk Down Wall Street.
 
yeah but in the case of rosy she's just a mm, with no intention of doin' that, what's wrong with it...she eventually profits from the spread and u get a better price: both winners and no losers whatsoever.
Quote from FullyArticulate:

The rule first appeared in the 1930s. It became popular in the '20s to form "investment clubs" which would run up the price of stocks by buying from each other within the club (one member sells short to another member who goes long). Essentially, the transactions were risk free for the club, but shares were removed from circulation causing the price to run up. More often than not, the runup would cause frenzied buying from non-club members. The club would then dump the stock during the frenzy and the shorts would cover in the ensuing panic.

Very low risk, very profitable. As a result, pre-arranged transactions are now banned.

There are many more details of such schemes in A Random Walk Down Wall Street.
 
Quote from Bitstream:

yeah but in the case of rosy she's just a mm, with no intention of doin' that, what's wrong with it...she eventually profits from the spread and u get a better price: both winners and no losers whatsoever.
This arrangement is pretty innocent. At the same time, someone advertising in many public forums many times, "Let's break the law together, IM me for more details" will eventually draw the attention of someone at the CFTC or SEC.

Since trading is about as anonymous as Internet usage, it won't be hard to get caught and fined.

But really, I don't care... Caveat emptor, caveat venditor--that's my only reason for posting.
 
Back
Top