No more bullets per sec
- Thread starter Turlo
- Start date
yup, I'm glad you guys also recognize this for what it is.
The sec should be ashamed. They are doing everything humanly possible to make it hard for the little traders.
This really sucks. Many firms will suffer due to this.
Can we all complain together and have this rule overturned?Somehow i highly doubt this will happen. They slap us around and bend us over and we just take it and say thank you i needed that.
This really sucks. Many firms will suffer due to this.
Can we all complain together and have this rule overturned?Somehow i highly doubt this will happen. They slap us around and bend us over and we just take it and say thank you i needed that.
Not really a bullet thing but saw this a few days ago.
WALL STREET NEWS
Price-Fixing Scholar Urges Nickel Tick
Traders Magazine News Services (Nov. 18, 2003)--- The influential academic whose research led to the order handling rule says it's now time to reform the U.S. equity markets again -- with a nickel minimum price increment. About ten years after Professor William Christie's research with Paul Shultz produced evidence of price collusion on Nasdaq, Christie now says the changes brought about by decimalization are not working. The penny tick, he says "has destroyed the critical roles played by price priority and limit orders." His latest campaign, he told Traders Magazine, is not about price fixing, "Our previous research was intended to restore price competition," Christie says. "The current debate concerns the costs and benefits of two tick sizes that didn't even exist in 1994."
At a time when regulators seem preoccupied with other reforms, Christie, professor of management at Vanderbilt University, nevertheless says he wants to be part of the decimal debate. He contends that a nickel minimum increment would likely "make it far more costly to step in front of existing limit orders, potentially increasing the frequency of limit-order submission and associated depths. Trading costs for largest institutions could well decrease as their search for liquidity becomes is now easier." Christie adds: "My concern is that the pendulum has swung too far towards the smallest of investors. Moving the tick size back to $0.05 seems a reasonable tradeoff that I hope the markets and regulators will seriously discuss." Christie expands on his latest opinions in the November Issue of Traders Magazine.
WALL STREET NEWS
Price-Fixing Scholar Urges Nickel Tick
Traders Magazine News Services (Nov. 18, 2003)--- The influential academic whose research led to the order handling rule says it's now time to reform the U.S. equity markets again -- with a nickel minimum price increment. About ten years after Professor William Christie's research with Paul Shultz produced evidence of price collusion on Nasdaq, Christie now says the changes brought about by decimalization are not working. The penny tick, he says "has destroyed the critical roles played by price priority and limit orders." His latest campaign, he told Traders Magazine, is not about price fixing, "Our previous research was intended to restore price competition," Christie says. "The current debate concerns the costs and benefits of two tick sizes that didn't even exist in 1994."
At a time when regulators seem preoccupied with other reforms, Christie, professor of management at Vanderbilt University, nevertheless says he wants to be part of the decimal debate. He contends that a nickel minimum increment would likely "make it far more costly to step in front of existing limit orders, potentially increasing the frequency of limit-order submission and associated depths. Trading costs for largest institutions could well decrease as their search for liquidity becomes is now easier." Christie adds: "My concern is that the pendulum has swung too far towards the smallest of investors. Moving the tick size back to $0.05 seems a reasonable tradeoff that I hope the markets and regulators will seriously discuss." Christie expands on his latest opinions in the November Issue of Traders Magazine.
Are any of the providers of bullets fighting this decision? I remember when NASDAQ took away Super SOES for Montage they delayed it a few months because some of the ECNS had problems with it. There must be some away to appeal or some sort of injunction these providers can bring up in court or arbitration, as a few firms may go out of business