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: Dan Duchardt who wrote (8052)	3/18/2000 3:24:00 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12617

"I can see an ongoing need for MMs and specialists in less liquid issues, and if they are upholding their obligation to provide an orderly market they deserve to be compensated for that by taking a fair spread. But in view of the access to market information and execution systems now available to every investor/trader who wants it, do we really need third party intervention between buyers and sellers on liquid issues? I don't think so. Of course the MMs and specialists have a right to participate in the market just like everyone else, but if they are no longer providing a necessary function, and are really nothing more than traders, let them do it on an equal footing with everyone else. Many of them I imagine are very good at it, and will thrive." I could not have said it better, and I agree wholeheartedly - in fact, I posted a message to this effect on Tony's thread last night. I'm always happy to see that kind of balanced message, as opposed to the 'WWF' approach to individuals "vs." market makers. Excuse me, "EVIL!" market makers (best written in some dripping green horror movie font). LPS5