“the entire market would have to be relatively dumber not to realize such a method,” I’m trying not to sound rude, but they really are.
That would imply I’m doing something illegal, that’s incorrect. If you ever traded institutionally, you’d understand. Trading is not what it seems.
"Assuming facts not in evidence..." Just a caution, but there's a lot of this going on in this thread. I think a lot of you guys agree much more than the posts would imply. [cue image of "just whistling as I pass by" emoji....]
Yes you can!!! Why are you trying to teach logic to a newbie option trader and talk him out of this?? . Let them chase the rainbow and glaze knuckles over 80% returns in Disney World! Leverage up and go for it! You are on to something new and can blow out this experienced traders with your OTM credit spread thing a mah jingy
The question isnt whether you can make that return, sure you can. The question is whether you can make that return consistently without taking consistently outrageous risks. The answer to that is no.
you should elaborate on your remarks. ¿would you mean institutional trading works a lot like the following? " As in past enforcement orders regarding traders schemes, the CFTC along with the U.S. Attorney’s office and the FBI relied on the mandatory recordings of trader chatter to prove the brazen nature of the schemes. One trader was recorded responding to another trader’s discussion of a bid with, “For anyone. Or a spoof?” to which the other trader admits, “spoof.” In another conversation, one trader admitted in another in a chat that he used spoofing to manipulate the market: “so glad I could help...got that up 2 bucks...that does show u how easy it is to manipulate it so[me]times.” Trader A commented further: “that was alot of clicking...i know how to ‘game’ this stuff.” Trader A then added: “i f..k the m[ar]k[e]t around a lot...not alot of people...had it figgied out...thats [sic] why i love electronic trading.” In another example, one of the same traders identified earlier asked another trader, “can I give you 1k plat[inum] pls ... and 5 k gold.” That trader wrote: “yep,” then asked: “i am selling both ... right?” to which Trader F responded: “yep ... spoofing it up ... ahem ahem.” In another chat, a trader discussed precious metals trading with another trader, telling that trader: “i skewed the quote to the left ... people scared ... we[’]ll spoof it ahahaha.” One UBS trader, for example, while discussing trading activity a trader at another bank, wrote: “hahaah”, and the other trader responded: “u [mu]st have [a]bout gazillions ... and u spoof the sell.” The UBS trader wrote: “we good ain[’]t we”, to which the other trader replied: “not very friendly.” The UBS trader response? “we never are ... u want a fr[ien]d ... get a dog ... ahahahah.” In another example, one UBS trader discussed trading activity with another UBS trader, writing, “u gotta be quick with spoofs cause everyone else knows the trick too ... except for smaller shops ... and a/gos of course.” " https://www.marketwatch.com/story/s...-and-hsbc-relied-on-trader-chatter-2018-01-29
Not exactly, that is illegal. Traders get access to tons of information, and they sometimes share ideas to form companies in which they protect that proprietary information and it is never disclosed in public.
well, destroying the stops of all retail traders, one by one, is indeed legal up to now. i get the impression that this is what causes price movement practically all the time, that and stupid central banks doing their crap. i could bet that the electronic communications of traders working for very large institutions read like the quotes i posted all the time, mocking all the retail traders they routinely destroy. the situation you mention; profiting privately from privileged information must also be rampant, but i'm not aware of very many cases ever making it to the news. ¿do you have any examples to expand on your comments?