I hope that if I am wrong, somebody more knowledgeable, like alanm or Don Bright, will correct me. I believe that Hamlet is incorrect to say that long sales generally have priority over short sales. I believe that this is neither a NYSE rule nor a United States rule. I believe that NYSE rules are opposite to Hamlet's assertion. I believe that the uptick rule can bar some short sell orders from execution, when the uptick rule's price test is not met, but that during those times that a short sale order is not barred by the uptick rule, the short sale order suffers no detriment to its priority based on the fact that it is short. NYSE rules sometimes give priority to a larger size order, over a smaller size order at the same price, even though the smaller size order arrived first. I suspect this is what happened to Dan (dwl603).
Dan, I forgot to mention that NYSE rules also sometimes place a larger size order "on parity" as to its priority, relative to a smaller size order, even though the smaller size order arrived first in time. If competing orders are on parity, then a random choice or "match" is made, to determine which order will receive the next available print. If you win a "match", but receive only a partial execution, then the unexecuted balance of your order may continue to be on parity with the same other competing orders, or, as a result of its smaller size, or the arrival of new competing orders, the remaining balance of your order can actually be reduced in priority.
All you do is talk out of your ass. More disinformation. You also ignore the fact that it was already demonstrated that you are a charlatan. Just here to add to the evidence?
NYSE Rule 72, at http://rules.nyse.com/nysetools/Exc...e=chp_1_3&manual=/nyse/nyse_rules/nyse-rules/, disproves Hamlet's assertions as follows:
Why did you type asterisks to replace paragraph 'I(a)' ??? That is the paragraph that shows you are wrong, that's why.
The paragraph to which you refer does not show that I am wrong. I presented only those paragraphs which show that you are wrong. I used asterisks to denote paragraphs not relevant to proving that you are wrong. I hope that this will motivate people to take a look at the NYSE website, where they can see the much longer and much more complex entirety of NYSE Rule 72, and study it, and understand it, and improve their trading, and make informed decisions about whether or not to continue trading on NYSE. Anyone who takes the time to study NYSE Rule 72, including the paragraph you mentioned, will recognize that you are wrong. I previously traded with specialists, learned from my experiences, and decided to stop trading with specialists. You lied when you said that I am blaming specialists for my trading problems, which is impossible since I stopped trading with them. You lied when you said I was dishonest about this fact.
Wrong again, Hamlet. Here is proof. Your favorite paragraph says: The paragraph you mention, from NYSE Rule 72, identifies situations in which orders compete on a time priority basis. The following paragraphs, which I have already posted, identify other situations in which orders compete on a size priority basis, even though this sometimes gives a larger order priority over a smaller order which arrived first. The following paragraphs also identify situations in which orders arriving at different times are given equal priority (called "parity"). This proves that I was correct in my earlier postings, when I said that sometimes, NYSE rules prioritize earlier orders equally to or worse than newer orders of equal or larger size. Anyone who takes the time to study NYSE Rule 72 can verify that you are wrong and that I am right. The task of understanding this rule is probably a very difficult one for the average trader. If I can do it, why can't you do it? Doesn't this situation contradict your claim to have superior knowledge of the rules?
I wonder if you are new to the English language? Please read the section again, and after some time, I suspect, that you will conclude that you are making a fool of yourself. Lets also see if you are honorable enough to apologize.
No, because whenever the specialist takes any real position in a stock like that, he ALWAYS makes a great trade. It's very hard not to, he knows more order flow than any other market participant. In that particular situation, a lot of institutions were pissed and pushed for a full scale investigation because even before IBM opened, there was some question as to why it was opening up so low. A lot panicked as the opening indication kept going lower and ended going market instead of limit to ensure execution. Don't forget, price improvement is actually one of NYSE specialists tools of manipulation, opening prints grab market orders and just push the price through to whatever level the specialist sees fit. Now if he prints 83, just because you had a bid at 83 1/8, does not mean you get anything. This occurs on a daily basis and always has. The print was overexaggerated but at the same time, it was an NYSE stock and all those investors & traders sending in block orders market are giving the specialist their orders to do whatever he pleases. That's why to traders not familiar with NYSE it seems completely absurd that the Big Board is run like that. It's an obvious conflict of interest, with its structure, situations like that simply shout out to the specialist "Please take my money". Ideally, the opening print should have been within a reasonable range from where the price ended up settling 30 min after trading action started. That was the argument of the institutions & investors, since that what NYSE tries to promote as the value of the specialist, a fair and orderly market as opposed to the Nazcrack. It's a very interesting article, you can easily find it. There were some other ones I found before, where a small fund caught a specialist blatantly pennying their offer so that he can make a quick few grand and leave the institution out to dry when their order should have been filled. This is regular stuff to daytraders, but when the funds got pissed, NYSE listened. BTW, the Hybrid is actually a delay tactic before going fully electronic. Vast majority of the financial community would turn NYSE into Nasdaq overnight, especially the top tier trading firms.