My "sell to open" option did NOT hit any markets today!!

[TheDawn]

Stocks trade in penny increments. Orders are only accepted in penny increments. I pay zero commissions. with PFOF. Furthermore my orders are executed to 4 decimal places which gives me additional savings. Did you know that fact?
The stocks I trade are liquid and the best NBBO are a penny between bid and ask. Citadel and Virtu etc. are as far I can see are always at the best NBBO.
Forex and options are not nearly as liquid.
I gave you my numbers for actual commissions saved and you reply with some hypothetical cost. which would make my transactions seem to be losers. That is a separation from reality.

From my previous post:If a traditional broker charges me 2.50/ stock transaction. 200 transactions is $500 . That is 100 opening and 100closing actions for day trading. That is 125K/year. Is that difficult to understand?

I don't care what you think but you are trying to impose your thinking on me by banning a practice that I and hundred of thousands of other traders have found to be advantageous.

Publicize your opinion and see if you can motivate investors/traders to move their accounts from zero commission to commission brokers

Now you are just copying and pasting the same shit as before but that's fine. This just brings me back to my question in my previous post: If the MM's who PFOF are ALWAYS at NBBO and even provide price improvement (their loudest argument) and they pay for orderflow AND their spreads are at penny apart and they make simultaneous market not holding any assets long-term, WHERE is their profit??!! You can't burn candles at both ends and still somehow win. How are they making money??!! If they are not making money, then they should be bankrupt by now. How are they still standing? Are they being subsidized by the government?? This does not make sense.

You can't just be looking at your zero commission and say I am winning just because you don't know what you are losing. If they are providing price improvement and letting traders always have better prices, then why would they refuse to be transparent about their business model?

And besides it's not just me who wants it banned. SEC wants to have it banned too.

 

[zdreg]

You can't just be looking at your zero commission and say I am winning just because you don't know what you are losing. I

I am waiting for you to provide the proof that I am losing. I provided real numbers with commissions not paid and you come back with unproven hypotheticals.

 

[zdreg]

And besides it's not just me who wants it banned. SEC wants to have it banned too.

It is open for comment. My guess is there are certain financial industry insiders who feel that zero commission and PFOF hurts their bottom line and are running to the the SEC for relief.

 

[TheDawn]

I am waiting for you to provide the proof that I am losing. I provided real numbers with commissions not paid and you come back with unproven hypotheticals.

I personally use both PFOF brokers and non-PFOF (supposedly) brokers and I can tell you from my personal experience my orders get filled faster and at better prices with non-PFOF (supposedly) brokers.

Like I said, I trade both with PFOF brokers and (supposedly) non-PFOF brokers at the same time. I will tell you I pay about $25 on average on roundtrip commission to my (supposedly) non-PFOF broker but the price that I get from (supposedly) non-PFOF broker is better than the PFOF broker by $250, 10X the savings that I get from the savings in commissions. This is my personal experience. Since the PFOF brokers refuse to be transparent about their business model, we don't know exactly how much we are losing so I can only tell from my own personal experience. Since you worship your PFOF broker so you don't even know how much you lose on your trades. You could be losing more and you don't even know it because you have never traded with non-PFOF brokers at the same time.

And the orders that I send to my non-PFOF broker are almost always executed earlier than the ones that I send to my PFOF broker and they were actually sent at the same time. You can argue about inventory or the movement of the market but there is no way it's that coincidental always.

 

[zdreg]

Like I said, I trade both with PFOF brokers and (supposedly) non-PFOF brokers at the same time. I will tell you I pay about $25 on average on roundtrip commission to my (supposedly) non-PFOF broker but the price that I get from (supposedly) non-PFOF broker is better than the PFOF broker by $250, 10X the savings that I get from the savings in commissions. This is my personal experience. Since the PFOF brokers refuse to be transparent about their business model, we don't know exactly how much we are losing so I can only tell from my own personal experience. Since you worship your PFOF broker so you don't even know how much you lose on your trades. You could be losing more and you don't even know it because you have never traded with non-PFOF brokers at the same time.

And the orders that I send to my non-PFOF broker are almost always executed earlier than the ones that I send to my PFOF broker and they were actually sent at the same time. You can argue about inventory or the movement of the market but there is no way it's that coincidental always.

You provide no proof as usual. I gave hard numbers on commissions saved. Your answer with no proof is anecdotal.

 

[TheDawn]

It is open for comment. My guess is there are certain financial industry insiders who feel that zero commission and PFOF hurts their bottom line and are running to the the SEC for relief.

Yeah because they are providing brokerage services with open and published commission whereas PFOF brokers are providing services with an advertised lower commission but are actually charging higher costs in terms of worse prices that are hidden from naive and gullible traders like you. And since the majority of the traders are gullible like you so they are losing lots of business. Yeah if I am a broker that is non-PFOF but charges commission and loses business to non-transparent and almost fraudulent PFOF brokers yeah I will have a problem. If I am transparent about my business model and the true cost that I charge, it's natural for me to expect my competitors to do the same and if they don't well they shouldn't be allowed to compete with me. Simple. I don't know if that's really why SEC is getting involved but if it is, it's totally legit.

Me as a trader, I would totally want to know how much I am really paying as well. The fact that you don't just prove you are really a PFOF MM disguised as a trader to be here.

 

[TheDawn]

You provide no proof as usual. I gave hard numbers on commissions saved. Your answer with no proof is anecdotal.

And yours is anecdotal as well. That $250 is a real number. Take it what you will. I didn't expect you to be able to read my posts with impartiality anyway considering you are coming from a biased position as a PFOF MM.

 

[rb7]

Now you are just copying and pasting the same shit as before but that's fine. This just brings me back to my question in my previous post: If the MM's who PFOF are ALWAYS at NBBO and even provide price improvement (their loudest argument) and they pay for orderflow AND their spreads are at penny apart and they make simultaneous market not holding any assets long-term, WHERE is their profit??!! You can't burn candles at both ends and still somehow win. How are they making money??!! If they are not making money, then they should be bankrupt by now. How are they still standing? Are they being subsidized by the government?? This does not make sense.

You can't just be looking at your zero commission and say I am winning just because you don't know what you are losing. If they are providing price improvement and letting traders always have better prices, then why would they refuse to be transparent about their business model?

And besides it's not just me who wants it banned. SEC wants to have it banned too.

MM do their profit from buying at the bid and selling at the offer. They can do so because they make the market (in the option world), and they can simultaneously quote on thousands of series at the same time and react to the underlying market very quickly, probably faster than any retail trader, cause they have the technologies.
If the market is 0.55 - 0.65 and they receive a retail order to buy at 0.60, they will most likely fill it and make money out of it (remember they usually buy at the bid, 0.55 in this example).
It's not because a name trade in penny that the spreads are 1 penny wide. In fact, the penny trading program is one of the reason why MM don't make as much money than they used to make. Ask Peterffy about it.

 

[zdreg]

And yours is anecdotal as well. That $250 is a real number. Take it what you will. I didn't expect you to be able to read my posts with impartiality anyway considering you are coming from a biased position as a PFOF MM.[

My numbers are not anecdotal since they are based upon every trade I make. You can not contradict that I save on commissions. You offer no proof for your trading.


.

 

[zdreg]

Now the news from CNBC is that Gessler of the SEC has decided to allow PFOF to continue.
I am awaiting to hear the full report before being completely satisfied.

(Robinhood is up to9%. premarket.)