Over 1 million in capital to trade with???

Quote from def:


As for my real estate agent, I'd welcome the additional liquidity. I could care less if she trades against me as long as I know that her offer is at the best available price that I could obtain in the market.
More...

How the phuck would you know if her offer was the best available price that you could obtain in the market? Moron.
 
Quote from Roark:

How the phuck would you know if her offer was the best available price that you could obtain in the market? Moron.
More...

ouch, that really hurts, very mature of you. I've been called worse though. However, because I would consider myself not to be a moron, I would study the market and get additional quotes before selling to anyone.
 
Quote from def:

I would study the market and get additional quotes before selling to anyone.
More...

Translation: You don't know. That's why there are rules, regulations, and laws concerning conflicts of interest that have been developed over thousands of years.
 
Quote from Roark:

Because it's a conflict of interest. It's like saying wtf cares whether your real estate agent trades against you. You have a house for sale. Your agent attempts to convince you to sell it for less so she can buy it lower for her account and sell it to someone else for more.
More...

Did you miss the part where smart routing executes at the best available price, be it TH or anyone else?

OldTrader
 
Quote from Roark:

Translation: You don't know. That's why there are rules, regulations, and laws concerning conflicts of interest that have been developed over thousands of years.
More...

Yes, and I think most at the SEC would agree with you and would like to see all internalization and payment-for-order-flow banned.

Trading against one's own clients certainly represents a potential for conflict of interest, but it even goes beyond that to damaging the health and transparency of the market itself, which in a vicious circle damages the very person who assumes they may get price improvement by using a (perhaps deceptively named) "smart" order.

Rather than internalizing orders or accepting payment for order flow or other troublesome incentives, broker-dealers should abide by their duty of best execution and route orders to the market showing the best price.
More...
 
Quote from Roark:

Because it's a conflict of interest. It's like saying wtf cares whether your real estate agent trades against you. You have a house for sale. Your agent attempts to convince you to sell it for less so she can buy it lower for her account and sell it to someone else for more.
More...

No, it's like saying who cares if your agent out-bids the middle-aged couple bidding for your house. Well - who cares? If a normal buyer bids 300k, and your agent bids 305k, it doesn't matter squat if it's 'conflict of interest', because you are making 5 GRAND MORE. How can it be conflict of interest if your sale price improves?

If the bid is 3.20 on an option, and you are trying to sell at 3.50, and IB put a bit at 3.25, how are you worse off? You can keep working at 3.50, or you can hit 3.25 and save yourself 0.05. It is literally IMPOSSIBLE for trading inside to make you any worse off.
 
Quote from Occam:

Yes, and I think most at the SEC would agree with you and would like to see all internalization and payment-for-order-flow banned.

Trading against one's own clients certainly represents a potential for conflict of interest, but it even goes beyond that to damaging the health and transparency of the market itself, which in a vicious circle damages the very person who assumes they may get price improvement by using a (perhaps deceptively named) "smart" order.
More...

What? Sorry but I want to sell to the best bid, and buy from the best offer. I don't want to pay more money just so I can trade with another counterparty. If the NBBO is 30.00 - 35.00, and a guy on Times Square wants to sell at 30.01, I'm buying from the guy on Times Square. I'm not paying $4.99 extra per share just so I can say I got a 'fair market'. I would rather buy GS from Lloyd Blankfein $1 under the market a day before earnings, than pay the market price the day before earnings.

It is literally impossible for price improvement to be contrary to someone's interests. The buyer *is going to buy anyway*. Even if an insider trader knows the stock is going bankrupt in 2 days, the buyer is better off buying from him on the bid, than having to pay 5 cents more to hit the offer.
 
Quote from moo:


There is no inflation now,
More...

LOL what? Please tell me an important product group that has not been increasing in price. Categories such as real estate in Las Vegas don't exactly count.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top