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 : Picks of the quarter -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (6868)	1/5/2009 10:15:26 PM
From: Sr K	Respond to of 20435

It's in the rules or was in discussion and stated by Taro. Any trade order that is illegal by the rules is void. Your order was Message 25273867 "With the cash I'll put 50% into long/buy ACS and the other 50% into shorting S." You decide if that is one order or two separate orders. Either the whole order is void or just the Sprint part is void. The Rules should be revised to make it clear, and players should be cautioned to prepare and review and place their orders as they want them executed. This is important in case there is any ambiguity or part of a multipart order is illegal. I vote the ACS part is OK and the S short was illegal and that stayed in cash. I am influenced by your negative view about contingent orders, such as what I placed. The way your order was worded is ambiguous because you didn't say "and then" to clearly make it two separate orders. Just saying "and" makes it one compound order even though part 2 was not contingent on part 1. A player or an investor could want diversification or balance and not want the long without the short. So you call it.