The Opening Orders Thread

What the heck does this mean then? It's from the nyse memo:

Specialists are advised that the requirements of NYSE Rule 123D (other than those aspects of the rule relating to ITS) will continue to apply, and specialists should be disseminating indications before opening or reopening a stock as required under NYSE Rule 123D.1
 
Quote from bestfriend:

Anyone who thinks this isn't a big deal is dead wrong. Stocks often open well away from their ARCA or ISLD trading. So, anyone who responds by saying that we already have indications based on ECN's hasn't been making money from the indications.

This is one more thing to "...F**k the DOT's !" as a specialist is quoted as saying in a recorded conversation.

I guess some people have a business interest to perpetuate and will always spin bad as good.

you are right.

I'm looking into it - but it doesn't look good. A few years ago I heard about a product that the NYSE was considering but it didn't seem to make it.

Consider this: Rule 123D - simply has larger parameters for indicators (called Price Indicators) - CME example someone referred too - but these are meaningless. They could tighten these up so they resemble the ITS indicators - but based on the memos I read - it ain't gonna happen. What it really means is "less info" for Joe Public and more money for NYSE specialists.


I suggest you write to the SEC - I will if I'm not saitisfied with the NYSE's response.
 
Quote from bestfriend:

Anyone who thinks this isn't a big deal is dead wrong. Stocks often open well away from their ARCA or ISLD trading. So, anyone who responds by saying that we already have indications based on ECN's hasn't been making money from the indications.

This is one more thing to "...F**k the DOT's !" as a specialist is quoted as saying in a recorded conversation.

I guess some people have a business interest to perpetuate and will always spin bad as good.

One last thing - just got off the phone with my NYSE contact and apparently the NYSE has gotten many calls about this.

Keep in mind that the ITS indicators were part of the old set of ITS rules governing the marketplace. They were replaced with NMS. There simply isn't any corresponding price indicators required under the new rules.
 
I used those indications to anticipate how many fills I would get on my OPG orders: if there were no indications, then most likely no fills, etc. Now it will be a surprise as to how many fills I get.
Also, if they were all indicating in a certain direction, along with the S&P futures, it just gave you more of a feel for how the open might be.
I wonder if elimination of the daily MOC closing imbalances will be next ???
 
This is a strike for specialist profitability at the expense of everyone else and I personally feel it screws public shareholders of NYX in the long run.

I haven't decided what to do other than to write to SEC.
 
I doubt that they will stop the MOC imbalances since they are distributed "asking for help" in providing shares.

Regarding the opening indications...I've taught that when we see an indication far up or down, to simply adjust the affected order to be in the top half of the indication (for short), or bottom half of indication for long....with the idea that you probably don't want to buy a stock up 1.50 in the bottom half of the indication, of course.

Those of you playing the opens based primarily on opening indications are obviously affected by this change....I/we don't seem to be too concerned since I don't play that particular aspect.

Anyway, small today 2 fills +$300.

(T and HPQ), both long.

Don
 
speaking of NYSE trading....

has anyone else noticed some monkey business going on with T/S? been noticing alot of stuff (big and small) going off between nbbo without quotes
 
Quote from Don Bright:

I doubt that they will stop the MOC imbalances since they are distributed "asking for help" in providing shares.

Regarding the opening indications...I've taught that when we see an indication far up or down, to simply adjust the affected order to be in the top half of the indication (for short), or bottom half of indication for long....with the idea that you probably don't want to buy a stock up 1.50 in the bottom half of the indication, of course.

Those of you playing the opens based primarily on opening indications are obviously affected by this change....I/we don't seem to be too concerned since I don't play that particular aspect.

Anyway, small today 2 fills +$300.

(T and HPQ), both long.

Don

Do they not ever need help in providing liquidity on the open?

What is the reason for no more opening indications?
 
Quote from Hooked2000:

Do they not ever need help in providing liquidity on the open?

What is the reason for no more opening indications?

Sure, when stocks open at or near their previous close, and the buys and sells are "close" in size, the Specialist just accomodates the extra shares himself.

The indications were a remnant from the days when the NYSE was required to notify the regional exchanges if a stock was to potentially open 50 cents higher or so (this is when I started engaging in this strategy, circa 1980 or so)....and they used the ITS (Inter-market trading system) to "ask for help" - no more ITS, no more indications I guess.

Don
 
Quote from Don Bright:

Sure, when stocks open at or near their previous close, and the buys and sells are "close" in size, the Specialist just accomodates the extra shares himself.

The indications were a remnant from the days when the NYSE was required to notify the regional exchanges if a stock was to potentially open 50 cents higher or so (this is when I started engaging in this strategy, circa 1980 or so)....and they used the ITS (Inter-market trading system) to "ask for help" - no more ITS, no more indications I guess.

Don


Im so confused on this issue and I read the press release from the NYSE.

So no more ITS linkages...thats fine...So will the specialist be able to tell someone where a stock is likely to open...or will it be a secret to only him and his buddies on the floor?
 
Back
Top