UAUA (and LCC)

seasideheights · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from flytiger:

All you guys who lost........... you need to complain. Help us help you. These trades are fraudulent. Stand up for yourself.

I'm not complaining. I work within the rules of the markets. The NASDAQ says the trades will stand. So be it. I've done nothing wrong & won't do anything wrong. I never should have traded it. I lost on a couple trades. Oh well. I move on.

I don't need you to help me. I don't need help.

giggollo · Sep 8, 2008

What if the press release had turned out to be true... i guess in that case the people who sold for a loss would be against trade breaks and people who bought in would be wanting trade breaks... maybe thats why they let the trades stand regardless of whether the press release was true or false? Just trying to understand the logic used to make the decision, if any..

trom · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from giggollo:

What if the press release had turned out to be true... i guess in that case the people who sold for a loss would be against trade breaks and people who bought in would be wanting trade breaks... maybe thats why they let the trades stand regardless of whether the press release was true or false? Just trying to understand the logic used to make the decision, if any..

This is what I'm confused about, too. I've gotten screwed by broken trades and been saved by broken trades. I have no problem with trades being reviewed.

I'm just a floored that a system that is supposed to catch "clearly erroneous" transactions can view today's action as anything but "clearly erroneous" in every way.

robbie380 · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from flytiger:

It should be obvious if the head of compliance didn't know the story, but the trades are all standing, someone under him made that decision.

Through the years, I've seen strange decisions from the NASD up to and including letting the Fieros trade from NASD computers, after being fined 1mm. Source, the Elgindy transcripts.

My bet is, they reverse that if enough people raise hell. You know whta you have to do.

dude before they even ruled they said they were treating it as a news based move. yeah I know nasdaq has been very inconsistent with some rulings (especially on erroneous program trades) but this one was pretty clear. they aren't going to break things now.

flytiger · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from robbie380:

dude before they even ruled they said they were treating it as a news based move. yeah I know nasdaq has been very inconsistent with some rulings (especially on erroneous program trades) but this one was pretty clear. they aren't going to break things now.

1. there was NO news You can't have a news based trade w/no news.

2. I used to leave 150 bucks in my cash register so the morning shift had cash. I was robbed. They got 150 bucks. Cops said, "they'll be back. ' Six more times, including one at gunpoint before I sold. We can't let them leave w/the cash. They'll do it again.

3. Watch. They'll be broken. We have a lot of converts.

KeithOmalley · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from flytiger:

1. there was NO news You can't have a news based trade w/no news.

3. Watch. They'll be broken. We have a lot of converts.

so by that logic if there is a bad rumor and a stock moves 50% then what? basically this is the same thing as if someone posted a rumor

robbie380 · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from trom:

This is what I'm confused about, too. I've gotten screwed by broken trades and been saved by broken trades. I have no problem with trades being reviewed.

I'm just a floored that a system that is supposed to catch "clearly erroneous" transactions can view today's action as anything but "clearly erroneous" in every way.

the news story was erroneous. the trades were not. an erroneous trade is something like an order entry error or hitting an ECN more than a point away (or whatever % it is for inet) from the last print if NYS is in slow mode. let's say i am trading premarket and i accidently sell KBH at 19.50 if it was level 1 then i can file to have that trade broken and it would be broken since it was beyond the trade break limits.

an incorrectly reported story is not an erroneous trade. i'm trying to remember the last time they broke trades due to an incorrectly reported story but i can't think of one.

Acumen · Sep 8, 2008

Did trades really post at 0.01? I just checked the TAQ data I recorded and don't see anything under 3.30.

robbie380 · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from flytiger:

1. there was NO news You can't have a news based trade w/no news.

2. I used to leave 150 bucks in my cash register so the morning shift had cash. I was robbed. They got 150 bucks. Cops said, "they'll be back. ' Six more times, including one at gunpoint before I sold. We can't let them leave w/the cash. They'll do it again.

3. Watch. They'll be broken. We have a lot of converts.

1. do you have a bloomberg?

2. whatever

3. no they won't. i can't think of one time they have ever come back and overturned a mass ruling later in the day. i have been fucked by AMEX before but i expect that from them.

robbie380 · Sep 8, 2008

Quote from Acumen:

Did trades really post at 0.01? I just checked the TAQ data I recorded and don't see anything under 3.30.

no it was a CBOE fuck up. they printed .01 and 999.00 but X'ed both out immediately.