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.

Non-Tech : Meet Gene, a NASDAQ Market Maker -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spark who wrote (144)	7/27/2000 9:40:07 PM
From: dday	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1426

Spark, Payment for order flow has been common for quite some time. I have asked regulators directly (during an audit) how the NASD and SEC can justify rebates for order flow as it directly contradicts the 'or better' execution mandate. (A limit order is the stated price 'or better'). They had no answer. Maybe this is the start. I have traded through a number of mm's including NITE (current), MASH (owned by Schwab) plus a few others. Almost all rebate for order flow to some degree. I cannot tell you how many customers I have told that the $14.95 commission they pay on 1000 shares really cost them $139.50 because they got beat for an 1/8th on execution. Happens every day. I have found that if I challenge the MM on execution, they almost always adjust my price. Some MM's are definitely better than others. To be quite honest, NITE as been fair and very good at executing orders. They auto ex most liquid stocks that aren't going ballisitc and I generally get fills right at the bid or ask with no manipulation. That said, it would be a relief to most retail professionals if order flow payment could be banned. Gene is welcome to comment and disagree of course. I welcome his insight on this issue from the MM side. I also appreciate his efforts to clear up a lot of issues regarding MM's role. Regards Bob