NASDAQ's proposal

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by qlai, Nov 30, 2019.

  1. qlai


  2. IAS_LLC


    Pr campaign. I don't trust them...they should make their money off of trades....not market data
  3. did qlai even read the proposal. nothing is ever done to help the little guy. add up how much u trade. it could be in millions of stock per month. that would be considered professional. most at home day traders would be professional after this change. 1 second faster data wont change anything period. they want more fees from at home full time traders
  4. qlai


    It's quite simple - I want what's fair. It would be fair for an active day trader to pay professional data fees. These fees would not be killing your trading business. However, for a guy who is trying to make it, these fees add up very quickly. If you are using LLC or Corp, not uncommon in this gig economy, you are automatically considered a professional, but you might have multiple sources of income with trading just a small contributor.
    Another positive is if the compliance for distribution of market data is eased up, it will reduce costs for everyone and possibly create many new micro services.
    Also there's absolutely no reason to have to pay for two SIPs. NASDAQ is hands down better of the two and they have a better chance to be the ones selected.
  5. guru


    So basically they try to widen the definition of “professional trader” to charge more fees and generate more revenues for the now for-profit Nasdaq.
    Call whomever you need to call to expose this scam.
  6. qlai


    I don't see how you got to this conclusion.

    "Albers said that a priority in the exchange’s proposals is making certain that most individuals investing their own money are not paying Professional fees. "
  7. guru


    That’s the way to do this. If you run Nasdaq then how else would you say that you want to widen the definition of pro traders?
    And that’s really how scams and politics work - you promote something opposite to the self-serving agenda.
    And everyone knows that being for-profit NASDAQ is looking for new sources of revenues and doesn’t have a reason to do anything that’d benefit anyone, at cost to Nasdaq.
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2019
  8. guru


    the Securities and Exchange Commission unanimously ruled against the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq Inc. in a 12-year legal dispute over market-data fees.

    The five-member commission shot down a pair of requests to raise fees for certain NYSE and Nasdaq data, saying the exchanges hadn’t justified the price increases.

    So is NASDAQ trying to fight every way they can for higher fees, or did they just became a good-hearted charity organization and want to be nice to retail traders and promote fairness and low fees after losing legal disputes over trying to increase the same fees?
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2019
  9. Specterx


    Fake news. This article practically screams that it was written and "placed" by a corporate PR team.
  10. qlai


    I can't read the full article, but I think it's talking about different (proprietary) data feeds, not the consolidated tape discussed in the proposal.

    I respect your scepticism, but I don't see any other proposals coming out.

    As you might have seen here on ET, people were contacted by brokers claiming they should be charged as pros because of their social media profile. This is simply getting ridiculous.

    I suspect that, while this proposal was officially put forth by NASDAQ, it was encouraged by the SEC prior. The SEC likes when initiative comes from the industry(or so it seems).
    #10     Dec 1, 2019