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 (8345)	7/26/2000 6:17:20 PM
From: Eric P	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12617

It's great if your broker has an auto execution agreement with some MM, but when you don't have that it's a pain. Unfortunately, in your example you can be equally screwed even if your broker does has a autoexecution agreement with a market maker. The autoex agreement will only apply to market orders. They will often take your limit order and post it on BRUT or REDI to meet the limit order display rule. Then they can still fill any in-house market orders on their own books and not be required to execute against your order on the ECN. Essentially, they can exclusively profit from their own order flow and not allow their customer limit orders to interact with their other customer market orders. In the end, you will often be required to lose the spread unless some trader takes the other side of your trade, or a market maker has a big order to fill that will move the market against you. The majority of the order flow through the marketplace will never have a chance to interact with your limit order. Life's a beach. And while there, you must follow the governing rules or play somewhere else. -Eric

To: Dan Duchardt who wrote (8345)	7/26/2000 6:32:48 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 12617

There was talk of time stamping orders when the SEC was hot on the trail of a Central Limit Order book. That pursuit has certainly cooled given the objections of the broker dealers who saw the central limit order book as a threat to their payment for order flow /line butting racquet.

To: Dan Duchardt who wrote (8345)	7/26/2000 6:33:05 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 12617

There was talk of time stamping orders and first come first serve when the SEC was hot on the trail of a Central Limit Order book. That pursuit has certainly cooled given the objections of the broker dealers who saw the central limit order book as a threat to their payment for order flow /line butting racquet. On the Supermontage, I'd be pretty damn surprised if its as fast as they say its going to be with fills and confirmations as fast as the ECNs and no opportunities for market makers to see where the ball drops before backing away or filling an order. Can't believe the broker/dealers are in favor of such a system.