• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "NYSE head: speed isn't always good"

Collapse

  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Is this chappy trying to say that it's not necessarily a good thing if trades that risk bigger sums of money than some of the parties can survive can be executed before those parties have been able to think about what they're doing?

    If so, I'm inclined to agree with him.

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by MyUserName View Post
    The trading systems I have worked on have all had limits on the transactions (per counter party, per trader, per location etc.).

    This type of problem already has a standard solution. Knights Capital were negligent to not have this safeguard in place and paid the price (literally).

    Am I missing something?
    Yes the fact they missed adding those safeguards to the system as that was extra work.

    Leave a comment:


  • MyUserName
    replied
    The trading systems I have worked on have all had limits on the transactions (per counter party, per trader, per location etc.).

    This type of problem already has a standard solution. Knights Capital were negligent to not have this safeguard in place and paid the price (literally).

    Am I missing something?

    Leave a comment:


  • SupremeSpod
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    because then profit becomes a function of technology.


    the winner of WOW becomes the one with the fastest connection


    the kid best at football is the one wearing the latest man U rooney kit



    If you provide the fastest technology then all will have to buy or be left behind, it's "MAD"

    Spod - In "Making Hay while the sun shines" mode!

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by SupremeSpod View Post
    How so?

    The Atlantic Telegraph Cable was used to great effect in trading in the mid to late 18th Century.
    because then profit becomes a function of technology.


    the winner of WOW becomes the one with the fastest connection


    the kid best at football is the one wearing the latest man U rooney kit



    Leave a comment:


  • SupremeSpod
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    I dont know much about the ice cream market, and I dont know much about HST, but if people are making money BECAUSE of the speed, then I can see that being a big problem



    How so?

    The Atlantic Telegraph Cable was used to great effect in trading in the mid to late 19th Century.
    Last edited by SupremeSpod; 6 August 2012, 08:43. Reason: Got my Centuries mixed up... Ooops.

    Leave a comment:


  • doodab
    replied
    Originally posted by escapeUK View Post
    Nothing, meant to quote ATW's reply re long term share ownership.
    Ah OK.

    Leave a comment:


  • escapeUK
    replied
    Originally posted by doodab View Post
    What has that got to do with eliminating market distortion due to HFT?
    Nothing, meant to quote ATW's reply re long term share ownership.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    I dont know much about the ice cream market, and I dont know much about HST, but if people are making money BECAUSE of the speed, then I can see that being a big problem



    Leave a comment:


  • doodab
    replied
    Originally posted by escapeUK View Post
    But anyone who kept shares long term the last 10 years will have made pretty much nothing. MSFT, CSCO about the same, DELL less today. Banking horrible losses. Obviously there are some stars out there like Google and Apple.
    What has that got to do with eliminating market distortion due to HFT?

    Leave a comment:


  • escapeUK
    replied
    Originally posted by doodab View Post
    I do think something needs to be done, simply because the quest for ultra low execution times and arbitrage over a period of nanoseconds biases the market in favour of the well to do. I would work around this not by imposing a delay but by imposing a jitter on the connections to the exchanges such that any gains to be had from jiggery pokering were statistically insignificant.
    But anyone who kept shares long term the last 10 years will have made pretty much nothing. MSFT, CSCO about the same, DELL less today. Banking horrible losses. Obviously there are some stars out there like Google and Apple.

    Its a complete casino tbh. My gold is doing much better than any shares I ever had, tax free too.

    Leave a comment:


  • doodab
    replied
    I do think something needs to be done, simply because the quest for ultra low execution times and arbitrage over a period of nanoseconds biases the market in favour of the well to do. I would work around this not by imposing a delay but by imposing a jitter on the connections to the exchanges such that any gains to be had from jiggery pokering were statistically insignificant.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by KentPhilip View Post
    I don't think I'd agree with that.
    I would not expect you to agree with that ice cream analogy (because it isn't relevant), however for dangerous things such as gun sales for example it would be reasonable to expect some delay between buy/sell decisions.

    Tax system in US actually encourages long term share ownership with lower CGT on those (15% I think) and it was good here with Taper Relief until cretins Darling/Brown removed it. Then even bigger idiot Osborne puts CGT up to 28%.

    Leave a comment:


  • KentPhilip
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    If nobody put a sell order then you won't be buying.

    A sell order gets 24 hour delay only after that point it can be bought.

    Problem solved, even though it will put some dirty spekulants out of business.

    It's a very heavy loss, but I think the society as a whole can take it.

    OK thanks for clarifying that.
    So what you are proposing, to continue my ice cream analogy, is that if there are ice cream vans on the beach people should be allowed to buy from them, but the council should put limits on whether they are allowed to trade there.

    I don't think I'd agree with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by SupremeSpod View Post
    Sub 5us, and only a prototype...

    I hope you'll repent before it's too late you dirty spekulant!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X