Does anyone have the official explanation for them allowing it to stand down 10%? This seems inconsistent with prior rulings, and the stated policy (fudge factors notwithstanding). Save the conspiracy theories - I'm wondering if someone has something from the horse's mouth.
I would say based on the news that came out. Normally, Nasdaq doesn't bust if the move was in conjunction with news unless the deviation was extreme (which was the case here). I had a few k shares. Its always too dangerous to get out of those trades. Imagine if I sold in the 350 range? This is a common error. I remember back in 1999-2000 nailing Jnpr 20 bucks out (on the ECN's that existed). They didn't have set rules to deal with these issues yet. I sat on 35k in profit for three weeks and then finally got a call. It must have happened to me in one form or another 400 times that year. The best ones are when they don't call....ever..........
Three weeks? That must be a record. I would consider a trade like this done and done after settlement day (T+3).
exchange can do pretty much what they want. forget about the rules,settelment stuff. they can go against their own rules. happends all the time. i remember few months ago there is error on nasdaq around 9:45am . they keep busting trades weeks after it happends,even their policy says 30 minutes frame to report,deadline on ruling-till open of next trading day.
Clearly erroneous backgrounder: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader/tradingservices/marketwatch/clearlyerroneous.stm GOOG decision: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader/News/2006/headtraderalerts/hta2006-110.stm
typically, for bust and adjust type situations like this, a "marketable order" is considered within 10% of last print for liquid stocks over $5. doesnt island and arca have public erroneous-order policys?