Quote from TrendSailor:
Don't you think that traders deserve to get a realistic price that bears some continuity to the prior day's close or resembles the direction and magnitude of SPX at 9:30 EST?.
I'd prefer that it happened that way. But it doesn't. And every player knows the rules. And how about this point: After 9/11 (or any other world-shattering event) are the markets not supposed to gap lower (or higher) just to provide somone like you with continuity?
As for me I think that traders should have an expectation of an opening price that resembles the real market(s) open(s) at 9:30 EST (or prior day's close at 4:30 EST if a west coast market) and have confidence that: 1) No market maker or hedge fund or well capitalized entity is manipulating the thinly traded pre-market(s) trading; or 2) is maximizing the MM trading book profit by counting the final number of open contract positions and moving SET unnaturally to offset book imbalances to result in no specialist net losses. Admittedly this internal area of the market is fuzzy to me though.
You have no perception of reality.
First, the pre-market prices have ZERO to do with the real opening. If the order imbalance that resulted in a pre-market move disappears, so does the price movement.
If someone is pushing prices higher in an attempt to boost SET, a normal-sized seller would kill that attempt at manipulation. The NY specialist is not going to take down stock at an elevated price just because some joker tried to run it up pre-opening.
How in the world can you say that there is a 'realistic' 'real market' at 9:30 AM, when many of the stocks that comprise an index have not yet opened for trading? I remember once that PFE had very bad news on SET morning and opened many hours later. Are you suggesting that SET should not have taken the PFE price plunge into consideration and just established SET by using the prior day's closing price? That would be unrealistic. That would provide a SET price that did not even come close to resembling the real market.
And here a good question for you. Do you have any idea how much buying power it takes to move markets? Do you think someone 'counts' 'the market maker trading book' and then buys millions of shares in many different companies just to get a good SET price? There is no MM trading book. There are bunches of competing MMs (in reality, a bunch of competing firms) that don't always have the same positions. And if they did, and if they conspired to move the morning markets, how much of a loss do you suppose they would take by turning around and trying to unload all the stock they just bought in an attempt to move the markets.
Uniformed people see conspiracies everywhere.
Who knows what is going on "in committee" and what the real market driven bid/ask prices are at the open? It seems to me SPX should be handled like OIX and it should be defined as the final closing Wall Street bell price with a PM settlement on the Friday before expiration.
Do you know why SPX settles this way? The real question I have is why have a synthetic open at all if it can open the system up to being gamed?
Sure, I'd like that also, but for some reason (unknown to me) that is not the way it was established. And you knows the rules, so you are not forced to 'gamble'.
Who says the system can be gamed? Where is proof that it has ever been gamed? I hate the SET process, but I either cover my posiitons, or live with it. My choice. You have the same choice.
Bottom line: I guess you can tell I don't trust the legitimacy of SET formation free of manipulation since the gap up/downs are often 180 degrees out of phase with the SPX open at 9:30 EST.
TS
The sudden change of direction does make it look like the longs are buying. But if they are long index calls and are trying to boost the market, what are they goijg to do with all the stock they just bought to manipulate the markets?
If you don't like the rules, just cover Thursday afternoon. What's so wrong with that idea? And don't tell me you don't want to pay the residual premium in the options. That premium is there for a very good reason.
Mark