229 karma · joined September 10, 2013
Mechanically, the negative share position is achieved by borrowing shares to sell. This carries an obligation to give 'back' the borrowed shares, which is satisfied when you buy in the market.
Just spitballing which systems I would realistically want access to passwords on, at a minimum, includes: personal desktop, personal laptop, tablet(s), cellphone(s), family (parent, sibling, in-laws, etc) computers, office desktop, office laptop.
In my case (many cases?), the latter two prevent software installation, so I would need to manually type from a manager synced on my cell. Which really is no different to what is required for 2FA - just a longer character string. Overall, a some setup and synch related inconveniences but not to a damaging degree, which is why I think this is more a matter of perception - once you think through where you're typing passwords it appears less of an obstacle.
I have no idea what this means, which is - I suppose - the point?
IMO the network effect is the biggest thing to break and that would need to begin with the buy-side. If Pension Manager XYZ with $N trillion AUM uses Bloomberg then you can be damn sure so does anyone wanting to do business with them.
Related, I renewed a print subscription to The Economist after spending the last ~5 years as a digital-only subscriber. I read so much more of the content when it's a physical item than by picking the articles with 'interesting' headlines.
[1] http://www.newsweek.com/assange-google-not-what-it-seems-279...
There are so many strategies (even down to use of derivatives, leverage, shorts, etc) employed by HF managers to achieve this that defining the HF industry by strategy doesn't seem viable.
As in it's easier to earn $1.5bn within 2013's financial industry than it would have been (inflation adjusted) in 1913.
But this whole article seems to be written for retail investors. And as much as HFTs may sound scary for retail traders they make their money off institutional trading. So the larger impact to retail flow is from the response Institutional desks are forced to take to ensure they are not disadvantaged by HFTs, which then affects how institutional and retail flows are able to interact.
Ultimately a 1000 APPL.US order will get filled and who pays the $0.01 spread is largely academic as it is an inconsequentially small part of the total settlement $ paid.
1. They Provide liquidity, false. Or at least works on a definition of liquidity that is not what would generally be used by other market participants (institutional or retail) - specifically see pinging or using orders to determine interest [2]
2. Tighten spreads, false. Attributable in the largest part to reg NMS not directly to HFT. Spread volatility has increased.
3. Lower costs, false. Cheap trading available via discount brokers before HFTs and additional costs to other market participants operating in HFT innundated environments are ignored.
4. Studies showing positive of HFT cherry pick and are of inconsequential detail, no conclusions should be drawn without deeper analysis of the data
5. Nannex guys just have an axe to grind repudiation
Plus ignores any other negative side effects of super-high speed trading such as stock specific flash crashes, data overload, and locked / crossed markets. Appreciate some of those can also be attributed to the proliferation of protected markets post Reg NMS.
[1] http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/4594.html [2] http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/4592.html (appearing to violate SEA 9.a.1.A)
A potentially adequate solution for Tesla that offers no change or threat to the status quo to assist future industry challengers? If my reading is correct I am disappointed.
However homoeopathy is not presented as a placebo-based treatment. The site assesses homoeopathy on its merits as presented by practitioners and supporters of homoeopathic treatments having incremental medicinal benefits. Of which there have been no appropriately controlled and reviewed studies with reproducible results. Placebo here is the 'base case'.
I submit that the question was treated with an entirely appropriate degree of respect.
"Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is resistance of a microorganism to an antimicrobial medicine to which it was originally sensitive....The misuse of antimicrobial medicines accelerates this natural phenomenon."[1]