SEC Seeks Ban on Unsupervised Access to Stock Market

Quote from listedguru:

Your kidding right? Most don't have unfiltered access currently (I don't) so all my orders go to my broker first and then on to their destination. This will not change how my orders are routed, etc...

-Guru
More...

that 'unfiltered access' you speak of has more to do with exchange membership.

sure your orders go through with an entity with a clearing relationship with the exchange (broker), but they essentially just risk the parameters of your trade to ensure you are good for the money.

as everyone moves to electronic access, broker clearing firms become order routing networks. their whole business model changes from one that is service orientated to one that is commoditised some what - its harder to differentiate between one access provider and another - except on cost. therefore, margins/profitability fall.

how do they regain profit? introduce new regulation to stop elite-trader know it all from e-trading to one where he has to call the broker and receive some degree of service whether he needs it or not - but has to pay for it.
 
FRedd, did you even read the article??? It has nothing to do with phoning orders through or whatever crap you are on about. Unless you have unsupervised access now (which most of us dont), then your order undergoes an electronic check by your broker before going through. So for those of us who dont have unsupervised access now, wont be affected because as far as we are concerned, nothing changes....
 
Quote from TraDaToR:

Unfiltered access = direct access to the exchange API.

Even if you are automating through a broker platform like TWS or TradeStation, there's no problem. However, I feel for those who took the time and money to collocate their programs.

You should apologize for your sensational erroneous title of the other thread.
More...

This is correct. This has nothing to do with smaller traders.

This provision is actually being pushed by Goldman Sachs to kick out high frequency trading shops that are competing with them in that area. The folks at GS don’t like to share :D
 
Between 11:03 and 11:04 CT today, there were a series of transactions in ESH0 in which a market participant appears to have inadvertently traded approximately 200,000 contracts as both buyer and seller. CME maintains trade practice and risk management rules and procedures respecting such matters. In keeping with standard practices and CME's self-regulatory responsibilities, CME is reviewing the circumstances of this event

:D
 
Quote from maninjapan:

FRedd, did you even read the article??? It has nothing to do with phoning orders through or whatever crap you are on about. Unless you have unsupervised access now (which most of us dont), then your order undergoes an electronic check by your broker before going through. So for those of us who dont have unsupervised access now, wont be affected because as far as we are concerned, nothing changes....
More...

as i said earlier - no i didnt read the full article. i dont see reading half the bs on et as a useful expenditure of time - apart from fun.

besides, no one will have unsupervised access unless they are member firms. please get to 1st base before replying to my posts.

either way, as you say it doesnt affect anyone, is another pointless waste of cyberspace and my time that i will never get back. ever.....

Zzzzzzzzz....
 
This issue would seem to be of great interest to any prop traders out there. If I were trading at a prop firm I would definitely be checking this out with my managers to get their take as to whether their firm would be impacted.

Why is it such a crime to have a level playing field in the markets? It certainly would seem as thought the SEC is "owned" by GS, JPM and the like. Anything thats bad for GS is suddenly bad for the marketplace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top