UK 'flash crash trader'
Discussion
NicD said:
Scuffers said:
Driller said:
So there's an artificial and virtual money system where people make more of this virtual money by manipulating things on their computer screens, this guy finds a slightly quicker way of manipulating the digits and they take exception to this and arrest him and put him on trial?
It's a crazy world.
that's actually not far off....It's a crazy world.
The trades were fraudulently submitted (as the Exchange has rules) and that is why he has been charged.
In his defence, it seems others do the same.
NicD said:
Driller said:
Rules eh? You mean he pushed his binary code digit 2nm too much to the left and the umpire gave him a red card?
He created a false market, can you understand that?It is serious st.
The utter hypocracy of having "rules" in a system which serves no useful purpose whatsoever except to manipulate virtual money to make even more virtual money and where each person tries as hard as they can to fk over the guy standing next to them using the most devious, cunning and underhand tactics they can find, not to mention all the other people being fked over by such a system that they have no say in or power over.
And then taking a guy to court because he's been "bad" by breaking these "rules".
Best joke ever
fblm said:
hidetheelephants said:
fblm said:
You've lost me. Are you saying the negatives outweigh the benefits listed.
Yes. The vapid pursuit of this financial castle built on sand sucks capital from things that actually create value, i.e. every other sector of the economy. The tail is wagging the dog in a way that is unbalanced if not positively unhealthy.hidetheelephants said:
fblm said:
hidetheelephants said:
fblm said:
You've lost me. Are you saying the negatives outweigh the benefits listed.
Yes. The vapid pursuit of this financial castle built on sand sucks capital from things that actually create value, i.e. every other sector of the economy. The tail is wagging the dog in a way that is unbalanced if not positively unhealthy.That is different to this particular case which seems to be suggesting market manipulation.
This might be a stupid question, but surely you have to own the stock in the first place before you can actually put it up for sale. If this is the case he must have owned one hell of a lot of stock in order to impact the market to this degree. If this is not the case surely the obvious answer is that you must actually own something before you can actually put it up for sale in the first place.
Chim said:
This might be a stupid question, but surely you have to own the stock in the first place before you can actually put it up for sale. If this is the case he must have owned one hell of a lot of stock in order to impact the market to this degree. If this is not the case surely the obvious answer is that you must actually own something before you can actually put it up for sale in the first place.
You can buy (long) or sell (short) the contracts at your whim.What you can't do is place thousands of orders just out of reach of the current price to create the illusion of lots of sellers (or buyers) and cancel them as the market price gets close to your offer.
Its called fraud (market abuse).
NicD said:
Chim said:
This might be a stupid question, but surely you have to own the stock in the first place before you can actually put it up for sale. If this is the case he must have owned one hell of a lot of stock in order to impact the market to this degree. If this is not the case surely the obvious answer is that you must actually own something before you can actually put it up for sale in the first place.
You can buy (long) or sell (short) the contracts at your whim.What you can't do is place thousands of orders just out of reach of the current price to create the illusion of lots of sellers (or buyers) and cancel them as the market price gets close to your offer.
Its called fraud (market abuse).
Chim said:
So you can actually put on order in to sell stuff you do not actually own. This seems like a kinda stupid system. If they join the rest of us in the real world and are only allowed to sell stock they actually own the the problem goes away
The practise is given some kind of cover by stock owners (or more likely, custodians) loaning it out to the shorters.This is interesting also:
'During the flash crash, Navinder Sarao apparently used Jon Corzine’s now defunct MF Global to place orders and clear trades. Why didn’t MF Global see what he was up to, or at least call him to ask him about it?
There’s now a big business on Wall Street of firms renting out their HFT infrastructure to prop shops.'
http://www.iol.co.za/business/international/brit-f...
Chim said:
So you can actually put on order in to sell stuff you do not actually own. This seems like a kinda stupid system. If they join the rest of us in the real world and are only allowed to sell stock they actually own the the problem goes away
Just punish them by taking their offer.Chim said:
So you can actually put on order in to sell stuff you do not actually own. This seems like a kinda stupid system. If they join the rest of us in the real world and are only allowed to sell stock they actually own the the problem goes away
An awful lot of businesses sell things they don't own, and then place the order. Quite a lot of buinesses sell solutions that don't actually exist at the time the contract is signed.Mr E said:
Chim said:
So you can actually put on order in to sell stuff you do not actually own. This seems like a kinda stupid system. If they join the rest of us in the real world and are only allowed to sell stock they actually own the the problem goes away
An awful lot of businesses sell things they don't own, and then place the order. Quite a lot of buinesses sell solutions that don't actually exist at the time the contract is signed.Take an order to supply something,then source it.
Even though I haven't got a clue where I will be sourcing sometimes...
only worry about this
after I have an order and not before.
hidetheelephants said:
fblm said:
hidetheelephants said:
fblm said:
You've lost me. Are you saying the negatives outweigh the benefits listed.
Yes. The vapid pursuit of this financial castle built on sand sucks capital from things that actually create value, i.e. every other sector of the economy. The tail is wagging the dog in a way that is unbalanced if not positively unhealthy.fblm said:
ReallyReallyGood said:
I would suspect his firm's trading software is running on a server co-located at the exchange, with practically zero network latency, as all HFT firms do. From the UK all he needs to do is tweak some parameters that control the algorithm's behaviour, but the order execution can be done in the US.
You think it would be affordable for a guy reportedly making $10m a year, I thought space on those servers was more expensive and restricted than that? Not my area I admit. If he were running such a simple scam the major HFT's would have been all over it in no time. In any event does a strategy that supposedly enters a big sell order, buys on dip, cancels sell order, sells on uptick really make money on a day the market collapses 1000 points; IMO it gets run over, badly. Something doesn't add up here. IMO either he is far, far more sophisticated than reported or he is being stitched up.I call absolute and total bks. Now way this guy crashed a $20TN market - but the regulators do not have the balls to sniff around GS et al.
The UK government should be stepping in here.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff