Market Manipulation

Thanks for finally giving a clear answer.
Very lulzy as well that you think a small retail sector of the
UK market influences global market prices I must say...

I guess I stand corrected.
All those New Jersey algo outfits, pension funds,
corporate FX hedging desks, hedge funds and so on all base their decisions
on UK bucket shop price feeds and net exposure hedge trades...

Lulz.

Those Algos in NJ and all that use them can do only a few things to 'make' money,

1/. They can take from each other in the relatively tiny liquidity they have, valueless, hopeless and actually fruitless.

2/. They can gain from contribution, pension funds etc but these will be jealously guarded by each entity and in this instance are never in any substantial way part of the free liquidity in this elite little group.

So how do they grow so well and feed the salaries of the tens of thousands that administer the whole shebang?

The growth is down to generated froth, we create that froth, all those pounds/dollars etc collectively may seem like chump change, but the movement between these little islands of money (taking the major amount each time) is real new income and a disproportionately important addition now to the financial markets around the world because it is a new resource.

I know you are the self-appointed 'watchdog' around here... fine, maybe they'll make you a mod one day... bravo... happy days eh!
 
Nicely edited 9 mins after posting to back pedal on your earlier comments.
Your original inference was that SB cos. directly collude with
and request spikes from larger participants:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/first-steps/179056-why-do-traders-fail-12.html#post2192278

You initially answered "yes" to this quesion:
Simple yes or no answer will do to the following question:
Do UK SB cos. EVER influence the underlying market.


Now you say its just SB net exposure hedging that influences the underlying.
Even UK SB net exposure hedging is a drop in the ocean.
Its pretty clear you don't have a clue.

No back pedalling, I saw that you had read it, then added to the answer for additional clarity...

You got exactly what you asked for... a one word answer... then you had further clarity given you... spoiled brat syndrome... you simply don't appreciate what you're getting.:LOL:
 
Those Algos in NJ and all that use them can do only a few things to 'make' money,

1/. They can take from each other in the relatively tiny liquidity they have, valueless, hopeless and actually fruitless.

2/. They can gain from contribution, pension funds etc but these will be jealously guarded by each entity and in this instance are never in any substantial way part of the free liquidity in this elite little group.

So how do they grow so well and feed the salaries of the tens of thousands that administer the whole shebang?

The growth is down to generated froth, we create that froth, all those pounds/dollars etc collectively may seem like chump change, but the movement between these little islands of money (taking the major amount each time) is real new income and a disproportionately important addition now to the financial markets around the world because it is a new resource.

I know you are the self-appointed 'watchdog' around here... fine, maybe they'll make you a mod one day... bravo... happy days eh!

More bollox, and no not interested in being a mod.
I just like challenging BS posts.
Global institutional players reliant on UK SB hedging for income,
heard it all now...
 
No back pedalling, I saw that you had read it, then added to the answer for additional clarity...

You got exactly what you asked for... a one word answer... then you had further clarity given you... spoiled brat syndrome... you simply don't appreciate what you're getting.:LOL:

More like clueless drivel :)
 
More bollox, and no not interested in being a mod.
I just like challenging BS posts.
Institutional players reliant on UK SB hedging for income,
heard it all now...

No I've sussed you.

You haven't a real clue at all, you place your own emphasis on my words to suit your self-important guardian image and that's fine by me ol' mate, whatever floats your boat, but you don't fool me.

If you can muster sufficient intellect to both ask and reply to my answers without:-
a: conflating issues...

b: placing your own emphasis on my words, distorting them for the sake of your own inflated ego...

c: cease the incessant childish 'lulz' '****s-for-giggles' etc etc...

We can carry on...
 
No I've sussed you.

You haven't a real clue at all, you place your own emphasis on my words to suit your self-important guardian image and that's fine by me ol' mate, whatever floats your boat, but you don't fool me.

If you can muster sufficient intellect to both ask and reply to my answers without:-
a: conflating issues...

b: placing your own emphasis on my words, distorting them for the sake of your own inflated ego...

c: cease the incessant childish 'lulz' '****s-for-giggles' etc etc...

We can carry on...

No its quite simple.
You are talking garbage because you don't have a clue.
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/first-steps/179056-why-do-traders-fail-12.html#post2192278
Ranting will unfortunately not change that I'm afraid :LOL:
 
What part was beyond your comprehension?

You got a single word reply... I saw you had read it... I then added to the post to ensure that you had a fuller answer too... and that to you is 'clueless' right?

Keep digging the hole mate...
OK as you either seem completely stubborn or dumb,
or have other motives, lets word it differently then.

Explain the first 2 quotes:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/first-steps/179056-why-do-traders-fail-12.html#post2192278

You quite clearly say SB cos. request and pay for spikes.
You quite clearly say the underlying markets collude with UK SB cos.


Those are the two bo11ox comments you have continually
dodged explaining, or back pedaled on.
 
No its quite simple.
You are talking garbage because you don't have a clue.
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/first-steps/179056-why-do-traders-fail-12.html#post2192278
Ranting will unfortunately not change that I'm afraid :LOL:

So, you want an answer, you get a single word answer, a straight forward but fuller answer, having previous had three varying ways to illuminate an intricate sculpture and you are still in the dark... and "I'm" the chap without a clue... autism has a new vanguard.

I don't rant, I'm sat here with a smirk on my face, you are quite fascinating.

Now... as we are not likely to ever 'get on' in the conventional manner of people rubbing along together, perhaps rather than me making it abundantly clear that I consider you a bit of a twit, we could put these antithetical viewpoints to good use by discussion.

Subject, of course, you remaining within the tenets of good debate and I eschew the temptation to decry your (lack of ) intellect.

I'm cool with that... are you?
 
You quite clearly say SB cos. request and pay for spikes.
You quite clearly say the underlying markets collude with UK SB cos.
1/. The Boards join the Algo interface at inception nowadays, the level of interface is paid for, so basic is cheap... comprehensive is not, I explained this quite a few posts ago, you missed it I suppose.

2/. Symbiosis is, in the absence of an actual 'biotic' i.e. living organism, in this instance interaction, collusion, mutual assistance and all its variations.

Again both clearly stated much earlier in this thread by me and (I thought) easily understood...
 
Last edited:
So you think UK SB net exposure size is enough to influence global markets.
You also think Global markets even care about UK SB net exposure.

You do realise how ludicrous that sounds don't you.
They don't need to pay for spikes.
Most UK SB customers are perfectly capable of losing their money all by themselves.
Tweaking the spread and feed in the ultra short term is enough of a rake on top.

If they did "pay for spikes" they would be ambushed with a front run.
They execute their own net exposure trades on their own desks.

Provide some evidence of your ridiculous claims whenever you want.
 
Let's examine that closely...

Fact... These boards and their ilk around the world are de facto the largest new money contributor on the planet, you do realise that don't you?

So to even conceive the notion they have no influence is about as 'wrong thinking' as you can get, new blood... Dracula... get the picture?

Indeed they are able to go down the pan all by themselves, but that is not what matters, outside live times the boards can do what they please and simply behave in as contrarian a manner as they wish, but during the real trading day they can't and the market often throws obvious pointers of where she is about to go and these are expensive for the boards and the option is there.

It works thus (explained earlier but perhaps you missed it also) if our Board bought in the minimum package of interface then a gold or red box will come up saying that (depending on the Algo provider) either:-

"Hey, you bought the cheapskate package and that £30000 you just lost would and could have been avoided if you'd gone for the Full Fat package and the Full fat package was less than $30,000 more than you cheapskate deal... wanna buy in?"

or...

"Hey, your licence is coming up soon and just to show how extensive our customer care is we just saved you enough to buy the Full Fat product this time all courtesy of The Acme Algo Chiselling Co, NJ"

It is more subtle and sophisticated than that and there are those who know about these things (apparently) who claim that the occasional 'clip' (proper term for a sharp unwarranted jolt in pricing) is performed to prompt buying the Full Fat Product, but the people who say this probably have issues with the Acme Chisellers collective...

I have no idea how you could front a price clip that is almost instant in attack and decay but prolonged enough to ensure tickets are endorsed.

If you can do that you'd be richer than Croesus.
 
Retail money may well be the biggest source of new money.
That misses the point.

What proportion of Global trade does the UK SB collective net exposure hedge represent?
You are way off beam if you think its the greatest proportion.
It certainly isn't enough for that net exposure hedging to move markets.

A recent Tabb group report puts retail activity in U.S. stocks at 10%
An Aite report into global forex volume puts retail volume at 7.9 %.

http://www.aitegroup.com/Reports/ReportDetail.aspx?recordItemID=772
That figure is contested as too high here:
http://forexmagnates.com/aite-group-2010-volume-report-makes-no-sense-at-all/

Now narrow that down to UK retail volume.
Then narrow it down to the top 6 UK SB cos.


See where I'm going - its a drop in the ocean.
Almost insignificant.
UK SB cos. do not move markets, or pay for them to be moved.
 
Last edited:
I think the thread has run its course actually... last post from me at least.

The reason the boards have such a sway is in their utilisation by the algorithms to attain a goal.

Moving from 15000 to 16000 or 6000 to 7000 would be a straight rise only moderated by the news and we all get that at roughly the same time these days.

So the playing field would be so level that everyone would be a winner and no-one would actually make a penny, we'd have simply inflation, the continuous rising of prices.

A barely literate moron could run any Bank (stop being sniggering at the back! :) ) in those circumstances.

World events actually barely move the markets, we are fed a diet of "He said this, she said that" or "They did this or they did that" and people in the 'vox vulgaris' comment pages on the Big6 trading sites struggle daily to find 'reason' for the startling dichotomy in performance in say the Nasdaq and the same days trading on the DJI, if you don't read them and nearly spit your coffee/tea across the keyboard and screen when they trot out some half-ahsed reason for it.

The 'classic' this week has been the 'reason' found for the stupifyingly faked up drop since the Bernanke 'no tapering' statement... the y came up with some mentalistic clap-trap about one of the panel saying it was close, WTF else would it be???

There has not been complete agreement for the last 6 months, but the underlying market needed funds (ever hungry) and so the money put in to take the market up was culled, cold-blooded removal of new money and a damned lot of older money too!

But instead of the stark truth being made plain, the copy writers trot out the laughable and present it in all seriousness, and people lap it up and, it seems, believe every word.

The erratic nature is at least 75% as a result of the small and medium trader, the rest is the old moderators and the real money remains entirely masked in a plethora of ultra-fast ultra-small deals that turn direction faster than you can blink.

They move like that to feed, their food is your money and doubling back to take a bite is nothing to them.

Your cards are laid face up and they 'snack' where the pickings are best.

The result is an erratic and almost entirely masked market, entirely masked that is if you fall for the deception, if you don't at least you stand a 1 or 2% better chance of holding onto your hard-earned.

So I will tell you yet again and for the last time, the degree of influence of our collective action on what you call bucketshops is vastly out of proportion to what is generally thought.

You can disagree all you like, it is your choice... been there... know different.

The funds don't give a damn which way the market goes day to day, they are so fast and accurate that changing direction is almost cost free now as the change is made in time delayed franchised markets, it's virtually costless now and often a profit making exercise as the Algos integrate with markets adopting the 'Algo Way' of trading growth.

But without way points and term points there is just total chaos, if you want to 'big yourselves up' it is that all those little bets stops the inevitable descent into chaos and entropy.

Are you getting this picture yet matey?

World events are sudden and often huge movers of figures but not even vaguely frequent enough to keep the Algos from eating themselves and destroying the market itself.

More are coming and faster and potentially more dangerous... with every incremental reduction of latency and expansion of operating base the risk to you and I go up.

Hedge funds are the most acquiescent of all the bodies using Algos, they move hither and thither in a swarm of magnificent size and will go anywhere they have no effect on prices, that is anti-thetical to breaking the fund into $2500 little fishes (Piranhas? :) ) and sending them off to make money.

No hedge fund, no matter how big it is, if it is in the hands of Algos, will ever change or dictate a single price, they'd be netted if you could catch them that way!

You and I do that and a majority will fall in the line of duty giving this direction... the many on here point in the right direction, the 'correct' direction and are promptly shot in the back and robbed as the swarm buggers off in exactly the opposite direction, taking with them the smallest number that pointed the 'wrong' way, any of whom will be shot in back at the next way point if they 'get it right'.

So the boards do have influence far beyond the blinkered horizon you set yourself.

Now in the 'industry' this is known, understood and (occasionally) appreciated and the symbiosis is the result, the boards have the option in the armoury but don't want to use it for good reasons.

I used an analogy about the term point being a nearby Church and the way points being various place along the way, the church is the destination and all along every route to it there are voices offering food and drink and the Algos job is to take in as many of these way points it can.

The term point is not in our domain of influence (mentioned in my 1st or 2nd post I think) that is for the Central banks to determine roughly and then the Algos modified to do exactly that.

Another feature of Algos is the ability to now communicate changes or modifications in objective.

All Algos in that building in NJ are formed from a single root calculation and formula, but each is then individualised and this diversity is the cause of them being both capable of not attacking each other if busy but attacking each other if they are not.

By attacking each other I mean that one influences the other to change tack and instead of going off together in the new direction the repeatedly force the other to change direction.

If you want to see this, go on to your board set the candles to about 10 seconds and look for the candle with a tiny bar and short wicks each side usually this is the best place to take a position... always go against your first instincts though.

Remember the larger collective body is the one that is culled! (it costs more to fund the resultant gains!)

I've said enough on this really.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend!
 
Mycroft, I understand if you're unwilling, but I think it would be beneficial if we examined the FTSE situation that you mentioned from 10:00 to 10:16am and what occurred there. Or what you believe occurrred there, and why you are so confident that something strange has happened, algo driven, or driven by dark forces, or manipulation or whatever you want to call it.

We had a crazy person on here a month or two back, who believed the oil markets were controlled by some Masonic order but that he had the secret, yet of course there was absolutely no evidence. It would be nice if you could explain what the issue was with the FTSE there, rather than carry on as you have been, because your argument has changed several times. First it was the market as a whole, then it was the top 6 spreadbet companies, now it is the top 6 trading boards. It's all very muddled.
 
The market manipulations do happen, and this is the need that there is requirement for sound knowledge regarding the price action for better management of the trades so that you are not carried away with fake signals.
 
I was laughing so hard I couldn't make it to page 2. Someone please summarize for me...am I going long or short my $1 trade?

Peter

This is the summary:

Any profit by an individual made is almost entirely coincidental and accidental.

I guess for some it hurts their ego to be told this, but it is as true as the Pope being Catholic.

Some call the profit made by an individual entirely "coincidental and accidental".

I call it skill.

I will concede that some people get lucky some of the time, but in this business luck cannot be sustained for very long.

The odds of being profitable by coincidence and accident, month after month, year after year, are so infinitesimally small that even the most ardent proponent of Algo's would have to concede that the individual has more than just pure luck on their side.

Finally, I'm in this game for the money, not to boost my ego.
 
Top