It appears Bloomberg and others have commented - some are declaring this a victory and that the fees will not be raised.
In stocks. Tradovate charge a monthly fee for unlimited futures trading. https://www.tradovate.com/pricing/
I agree. If an exchange really tried to impose higher fees for data, it will have a negative impact on liquidity (how much of an effect...not sure), but if costs of trading increase, liquidity will go elsewhere and the exchange will eventually die unless they can offer something that the other exchanges cannot. I don't understand this...trading volumes are lower than they were in 2008 / 2008 (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-trading-volume-is-tumbling-explained-in-5-charts-2014-07-07) and technology / storage have continued advancing over that time period. So therefore, the cost of providing data should be less today than a decade ago. I don't understand the justification other than that they think they can get away with it. Maybe retail is such a small part of their business that they think they can squeeze them without much impact.
NYSE are owned by ICE. A year or two ago ICE upped their Futures data fees. I went from paying not much to paying $240 a month ($120 each for Russell 2K and FTSE 100 futures real time data). ICE does not distinguish between retail and professional when selling real time data for futures. Everyone has to pay the pro rate. And they do not offer level 1, you have to buy level 2/market depth as its the only option. I remember some idiot posters on ET, saying 'well if you cant afford a few hundred a month you cant afford to trade'. But I knew the greedy ICE cunts are after as much as they can get. And they will eventually try and get even more, thousands a month if they can get away with it. And this non display attack seems to be an attempt at that. I stopped trading the ICE FTSE 100 futures and moved to the DAX on eurex. And the Russell 2K is moving back to the CME in a few months. Soon the cunts at ICE are going to get $zero a month from me.
I saw that too. I agree with you. Though let's be honest, one who makes a bundle trading certain instruments might be agitated but still swallow those cost you mentioned. But definitely the barriers to entry for retail are raised. I side with you in saying that a data feed for a few exchange traded products is too high when it costs the same than access to an institutional grade Dow Jones news feed which gives me content from hundreds/thousands of journalists and other sources. Just relatively speaking. Heck, many banks are cracking down on WSJ subscriptions by directors and up, who charge it to banks.
"I am writing anonymously because I am afraid of retaliation from the employees and management of NYSE..." https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-ctacq-2017-02/ctacq201702-150288.htm