what is spoofing and what is not.

J

Javier

Ok, one guy has been finned for spoofin.
The point is... when I enter in the market I can see the 70% of market cancelled. That is staticacally proof. Lets say I want to sell my order to someone that want buy it. Then the buyer dissapear. Is not that spoofing? He is not trying to buy then, is a fake order. So, can anyone trust is what you are looking at the doom?
If not, shouldn`t all of that people that cancel orders sistematically being fined?
 
Javier said:
Ok, one guy has been finned for spoofin.
The point is... when I enter in the market I can see the 70% of market cancelled. That is staticacally proof. Lets say I want to sell my order to someone that want buy it. Then the buyer dissapear. Is not that spoofing? He is not trying to buy then, is a fake order. So, can anyone trust is what you are looking at the doom?
If not, shouldn`t all of that people that cancel orders sistematically being fined?
More...

Yes, I agree. HFT creators should be subjected to jail time just like other spoofers, based on their cancel rates.
 
It's not illegal to cancel, HFT don't really create any issues, they just buy at 1 price and instantly pass it onto to a guaranteed buyers at 1c higher for a quick buck, totally victimless crime, IMHO.

Don't believe all of the negative hype over HFT, leave them to it I say.
 
Javier said:
Ok, one guy has been finned for spoofin.
The point is... when I enter in the market I can see the 70% of market cancelled. That is staticacally proof. Lets say I want to sell my order to someone that want buy it. Then the buyer dissapear. Is not that spoofing? He is not trying to buy then, is a fake order. So, can anyone trust is what you are looking at the doom?
If not, shouldn`t all of that people that cancel orders sistematically being fined?
More...

Not just one guy has been caught.

Many individuals have been caught and many firms have been caught. All have been fined and several face jail terms because it caused a bigger problem in the market.

I think it was Bloomberg via commentary by the SEC that gave definitions of "spoofing". I'm too lazy to use Google to look up the SEC definition of such and it has a lot more to do with just canceling orders. :D
 
Javier said:
OK so not is only massive quoting and cancelling, also implies steal an ID? lol
More...

In computer hacking terms atleast then yes, like where you setup a site ie Barclays but with a miss spell, but looks identical to get you to enter your account details.
 
spoofing is with 'intent' to manipulate price or no intention of buying or selling. cancelling is not spoofing. market makers can remove bid or sell at anytime. these are market makers on the bid and ask.

The exchange has no rules on 'cancelling' 'removing' bids or ask unlike a real auction. all bids are binding...the exchanges have an open market. and bids are not binding. same with offers. it's the rules the exchange have, you are not obligated to buy or sell in the 'open market' complain to the SEC or exchange. the rules are made by the exchange board members not the SEC.

The complainers are mostly the market makers who lose money from retail or hedge fund or HFT who don't pay exchange seats or pay professional data fees. and losing money. if you lose money, they have no complaints.
 
those are the rules of the exchange, bids and ask are not binding. you can cancel the bid or ask anytime. Only designated market makers are required to put an ask or bid, min. is 5000 shares displayed quote and no min. monetary value.

And for being a designated market maker, only the designated market maker can short unlimited shares of a stock.

There is only one "designated market maker".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top