Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Final Frontier - Online Remote Trading -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TFF who wrote (8021)	3/7/2000 4:40:00 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12617

Without the market makers on the box, it'd be a spasmodic, random series of alternately heavy and non-existent market activity. Individuals and institutions, not required to keep a two-sided market and without inventory, would jump in and out (as they currently do) - but in this scenario, producing huge price gaps. Look at one of the bottom three or four lowest ECN's in liquidity. For all but the NASDAQ 100 - and even them, from time-to-time - in the absence of major news, that's what the market would look like. I won't even call it volatility, because it'd be more like a disjointed series of random quotes, flurrying around one price, then disappearing, then maybe a few prints above or below a new price, then a flurry, etc. It wouldn't be tradeable, that's for sure. Ugly and dangerous. Realize that the entity that would have resulted from an ISLD/INCA merger would still have largely been driven by market making firms' capital. LPS5