eries

Yes, I hope so. I think if and when that happens, it'll be pretty big news. I don't think you'll miss it.

(But I guess you could subscribe to our newsletter in the meantime... https://ltse.com at the bottom of the page)

I hadn't thought of parsing the sentence that way. We mean our first hire dedicated entirely to IT (as opposed to other forms of software engineering)

Just the opposite, we adopted a set of rules that we call the Very Simple Market (tm) (yes really). We have reduced the types of orders and removed all hidden liquidity. This isn't the best trading venue for all kinds of traders, but we do believe it is superior for certain investors who have a long-term orientation.

No, what you are describing is not currently legal in the US. We have to allow the stocks listed on LTSE to trade freely across the entire "National Market System" which includes dark pools and incumbent legacy exchanges.

So in order to solve this problem we have to start with corporate governance. Remember, though, that shares of stock are not actually commodities. They are contracts and the rights and responsibilities of stockholding emanate from the corporate charter. So as we are able to encode protections and requirements there, they will follow the stock wherever it trades.

Through this mechanism, much reform is possible both today and in the future.

It is my hope that we will be able to reverse this trend by making the experience of being a public company dramatically better. It will take time to see this play out, just as it has taken time for us to get into this mess.

But in the long run, it's important that the broad public be allowed to participate in growth investments, and I think the public markets could once again be the best place to enable that to happen. Frankly, I think it's immoral that at a time in history when we are pushing more and more of the responsibility for people's retirement onto individual savers, we have also made it illegal for them to make most growth investments. If we don't correct this imbalance, I fear the backlash to tech will only worse and intensify.

Tech didn't cause this problem but we will bear the brunt of the backlash if people feel left behind.

Curious to learn more about how this might work

Leaving aside some of your odd claims, I’m happy to answer the question. Our definitions and standards are laid out in excruciating detail in our hundreds of pages of legal filings. Here’s a good place to start if you are interested: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ltse/2019/34-86327.pdf

Also this may be of some interest:

https://longtermstockexchange.com/static/principals_for_lt_s...

We wanted to make it explicit that these issues must be addressed in the stakeholder policy. Mostly we did this to create clarity for the regulators as to where such disclosures will live. This language mirrors other SEC-approved rules, but with stronger disclosure requirements here

It’s not meant to be an exhaustive list

We are a RegNMS complaint exchange which means we don’t restrict trading or liquidity. We have found ways to make our reforms effective without having to go there

We have raised on the order of $90M so far. It cost us almost $20M to get to the initial regulatory approval

I’ve answered about MVPs elsewhere in this thread but a big part of what made this possible is our superior cost structure due to being a software-native company

Validation I’ll have to answer a little later, once we make a little more progress

No, that’s currently not legal in the US

We focus instead on finding ways to differentiate the experiences of the “tourist” speculators from the “citizen” long-term investors

Yes. I don’t think any other platform is better suited to such companies

You’re looking at it. MVP doesn’t mean “fast” in some absolute sense. It just means fast compared to the underlying cycle time of the relevant industry. I think we did pretty well with this one.

That said, there were many many many MVPs that you don’t see that informed the direction we are at now.

In some way our private company tools are also an MVP of sorts: https://ltse.com/tools/

Thanks

Thank you! I don’t mind being misunderstood for long periods of time, that kind of goes with the territory. But still, it’s nice to get a shot in the arm every once in a while

I don’t think multiples are the issue. The question is: are companies set up to support a philology of long-term decision making? Talk to almost any middle manager in any public company in America if you are confused about whether this is the common case today

No one? At least a few people are clamoring for it, surely?

There are some investors and companies that tune out the noise and try to make lasting change, making a dent in the universe, that kind of thing. I think they could use financial infrastructure to support their ambitions. Seems pretty simple to me

What makes you think I ever did the latter ;)

In all seriousness, there’s no comparison. A regulated national securities exchange is one of the harder kinds of startups you can attempt.

I’m pretty sure that over the long run equity prices are a mirror of the fundamental value creation that companies do by serving customers. The problem is that this can become distorted “longer than you can stay liquid” as the old saying goes

Not yet

Not yet

Yes, compensation reforms are a key part of making this work. All sides need to come together for mutual gain, if we want to build better companies

Yes, we have the power to delist companies, although I hope it never comes to that.

Shareholders would have their ownership protected in that scenario (as they still own common shares), same as any other company who was delisted from an exchange

I’m not quite sure how to answer your question. Clearly there are long-term investors and companies in today’s markets. I think there would be more of them if they had a platform conducive to their philosophy.

Yes, all of our standards are enforceable, that’s part of the responsibility of being an SRO. When a company makes promises as part of listing on LTSE, the public can believe them

Thanks for the kind words

Yes we do, but there’s not really a good way to summarize our plans here. Suffice to say we are keenly aware of the need to reduce the aspect of volatility that is driven by speculators

- What support will there be for high frequency trading? LTSE's market is designed to create a level playing field for all market participants. We provide equal support across all of our members.

- What is required for Direct Market Access? A relationship with a member of LTSE who offers DMA.

- Will the realtime data feed be public? Yes, LTSE's market data can be accessed via the SIP's (Securities Information Processor) under the "L" quote.

- What is the fee schedule? Free/Free (Add/Remove)

I think buybacks have occasional legitimate uses, but there’s a reason that they were considered basically illegal not that long ago

I think if companies are sincere in their desire to use buybacks only for good purposes, they should commit to report “EPS net of buybacks”

And thank you for the kind words. Love the index idea

LTSE should work fine for any company that wants to add a secondary listing to access US capital markets, so long as they otherwise meet the listing standards