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 : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (23708)	3/25/2025 4:39:02 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27087

I believe Fidelity solved that problem by promising best execution for all trades and it often gives me prices better than I listed for both selling and buying. Once that happens, the playing field SHOULD be equal unless the crooks, er hedge funds, place their servers closer to the exchanges so they can get in front quicker than Fidelity and capture that spread. To be honest, I'm not sure a penny transaction tax would prevent that either as the spread can often be larger than a penny. Maybe the "solution" is to have it more like a "real (TM)" auction where they have to say "going once, going twice, sold to ...." before each transaction is completed and that process is long enough to let photons move through fiber to the different destinations and let the decisions be made for the best outcome for the buyers and sellers without a loss to HF traders. To guestimate how much this matters, perhaps calculate total profits by HF traders who do nothing but hijack the spread to steal fractions of pennies from legit transactions... and compare that to the total market cap of the stock trading volume for that year. It could be noise and I'm worried about nothing other than getting upset with Richard Pryor for stealing fractional cents from rounding on telephone bills (old Superman reference.)