Community

politicians see ££££ signs where they can collect an income .... I wrote after the may 6th 2010 debacle that we would have to offer a sacrifice to the regulators ......... i offered a cancellation tax  .

 This would protect the end user as a 1 second rule would be enforced and penalise the guilty fast traders who provide no liquidity and have given market a bad name .

"Not only is it not right, it's not even wrong!"  Sadly exchanges going down this trading route has never been right ; as as more respected companies get caught their punishments appear to be a trickle of their cheating profits .......... perhaps "cheats always prosper !"

I would go further and just charge a FTT tax on their cancelled trades as this would protect the end user .

 Those FFT followers who say it would destroy liquidity ..... well they already have by allowing FFT to operate in exchanges . Added would be a tax on the exchanges who allow them to operate .

regulators and exchange market supervision depts at exchanges were constantly warned of this "spoofing " pratice yet at the time they decided to do absolutely nothing ! Therefore the end user lost monies and market confidence withered yet the algo spoof client profited from illegal trading !

     Hey ho  a few years later the regulators want a pat on the back ! Perhaps if they did their job properly and at source this would never of festered ; now its opened a can of worms as alot of senior companies have been found guilty . Personally I would like to see an exchange fined for not providing  "fair and orderly markets " .

if we want to restore confidence in our markets ; volumes have to increase and by allowing block trades it will only do the opposite ! Perhaps I agree only if the size of the block trade is on the larger side .

the regulators were warned on many occasion about the abuse and manipulation in LIBOR .... yet chose time and time to ignore it ... However 3 years later they pat themselves on the back saying what a awesome service they supplied in fining the guilty parties ...... What is amazing it that IF they listened to the complaints back in 2008 there would not of been a LIBOR scandal and confidence would of been restored along with "fair and orderly markets " . Sadly they are as much to blame as the guilty traders who abused the system they were monitoring .

 the question to ask is why it took so long to find out as some of their tradesmust of rung huge alarm bells within market supervision dept at exchanges and regulators ...........?

   Sadly perhaps market abuse has become a major player in our mkts .

Wow ; despite consatant complaining to FSA that exchanges have no interest on halting market abuse in any form as will halt volume and profit ;this new regulator decides otherwise !

    Perhaps they might take some advice and ask traders in the market place ; not market makers or others favoured by exchanges ; about  washing ;layering ;crossing and flipping ; which now accounts for over 30% of the volume .

 As independent traders we have been asking for regulators to look at current trading screens as abuse is that obvious ; rather than ring up exchanges . Sadly I cannot see any swift action taken  by FCA ; on the grounds that I waited 2 years for a reply on libor abuse by regulators .

Perhaps if FCA inspected the exchanges and saw their market supervision dept watching television rather than the markets might aid our cause !

Perhaps finally a regulator might be attempting to provide "fair and orderly markets ! "  

However  a simpler way would be be allowed to watch the exchanges "lit " markets and watch the daily abuse of layering ;spoofing ; washing and crossing that we have been subjected to for last 6 years !  Even  Mr Wheatleys children would be able to see that ; sadly the exchanges supervision dept cannot or will not !

The regulator should really be aware how "dark pools " operate and by their failure and slowness to react have allowed the "cheetahs " to mve away from HFT and into  these pools .

  I  cannot believe that someone who makes a price may not be filled when their price trades ............ this cannot be legal !

 One would of thought that regulators would have to pass these "pools " or at least give them an  "MOT " before they are allowed to trade ? 

 HFT is a dinosaur compared to the damage "dark pools " will provide to

liquidity and volume .

suspending the company would of been the best punishment as they have managed to bring market down and there create an disorderly mkt .

        Suspension  would of reminded the rest of the members to supervise their orders properly .