Alanm, Your assertion is simply not true. NYSE rules specifically state that you are NOT guaranteed a fill at the single priced open or close, where your limit order merely matches the single price. I already posted the exact text and citation of the rule. This rule relieves the specialist of any duty to take the other side to give you a fill in this situation. I'll post it again if you can't find it.
This is correct. At the exact open price, limit orders are not guaranteed a fill. At better-than open price limits and markets of course are.
I have to go with my friend Mr. Rockford on this one. At opening and Closing, there is a finite number of shares to be traded at the single price. Even when the Specialist participates with a few thousand shares, he may not choose to participate with 10,000 shares (for example). He tends to participate more on openings than closings, but the same rules apply to both.....sometimes you'll get a partial fill which exemplifies the point. Don
Don I don't agree with the notion that on openings longs have priority over shorts. I assume we are talking limit order. We have a last sale from the prior date which gives the short and the specialist the ability to use a "tick test" to determine where every order is held. Therfore all limited orders are executed on a strict time priority based on where they are "held" orders. This is not possible on the close because all these orders are being entered not knowing what the sale prior to the close will be so there is no way, nor is it fair, to keep the short MOC in time priority.
I don't understand how an "Adapt or Die" argument can recommend one to learn strategies depending upon specialist system inefficiencies. "Adapt or Die" is an unchallengeable truism. It leaves unresolved the question as to the particular direction in which one should adapt. It seems to me that the specialist system is in its twilight, so that the most fruitful adaptation would be one pointing away from it. The Bright family, based on the links Don posted, apparently sees the NYSE game as just their strategy for now, because of the opportunities it yields now. It seems that when the NYSE frat party is finally broken up once and for all, either because they are raided by the cops, or the beer kegs all run dry, the Brights are prepared to move on to the next opportunity, just as they have moved from one opportunity to the next, decade after decade. I think this approach will continue to work, for the Bright family. I don't think it is workable for the vast majority of newer traders. The vast majority of traders will never enjoy the flexibility, adaptability, sophistication, and resources possessed by the Brights. The vast majority of traders will never become profitable, neither on NYSE, nor anywhere else. Most traders who do learn how to profit, in a way depending on the specialist system, or in any other way, do so at a great cost of time invested and trading capital lost, before they get it right. If they make this enormous investment, and succeed in generating profits, but then quickly find their method no longer works because of dependence upon the arcane and byzantine procedures of a system of parasitic corruption, they may not have sufficient resources to go back to the drawing board and find another profitable method. People like the Brights can afford to take this risk, but not small new unsophisticated traders. Traders seeking their first profitable method need to adapt in a sustainable direction. Dependence upon specialist inefficiencies, for people lacking the flexibility of the Brights, is not sustainable. It is like our society's dependence upon fossil-fuels. It is a scheme which progressively erodes the resources and the environment upon which it depends. It is a scheme which emits foul-smelling, toxic, and greenhouse gases, thereby destabilizing the climate, and steadily increasing the temperature, so that traders find themselves skating on thin ice melting faster than Greenland, and facing inundation from rising sea levels. Scientists believe that the dinosaurs, and most other species on other Earth, abruptly perished in a mass extinction resulting from Earth's collision with a massive asteriod, filling the skies with matter which temporarily blocked the sun's rays and disrupted photosynthesis. The age of dinosaurs gave way to the age of mammals, because mammals adapted to the new climates and climactic instabilities and food supplies and disruptions, but dinosaurs could not. We can now see another asteroid hurtling toward the NYSE. Getting out of the way would seem to be the logical consequence flowing from a slogan like "Adapt or Die", for small new traders lacking the Bright family's timing and ability to jump off the train tracks at the last possible moment.
I think that what you are saying is that the ONLY situation in which longs have priority over shorts is MOC orders. I think we agree that no such priority exists, either at the single-priced open, or intraday.
Sorry if you don't agree, I'm just stating how it works. The reasoning is that short sales have to be "borrowed" and long sales provide a "closing" order....that's how Spear, Leads, and Kellogg (Specialist wing of GS) "re-explained" it to me. All this is such a rare occurance, I wouldn't spend much more time worrying about it. Perhaps 1/1000 of all trades are even considered for this type of execution question. Don
In stating "Adapt or Die" - I was merely pointing out that the "Bright Family" has followed the "edge" wherever we found it over the decades...From blackjack to the PSE options floor, to the PSE equities floor, to the CBOE, to the CME, and back to the NYSE and Nasdaq "off-floor" personal trading via DOT, and finally to growing a nice, solid trading firm - no big deal...when we see a new edge we'll do our best to help our traders make money with it. In all markets, we feel that there are only 2 ways a discretionary trader makes money. 1. Prviding liquidity (as on opens, closes, and enveloping during the day). and 2. Seeking and exploiting disparities (M&A, Pairs, cross market hedges, sector trading, etc.). I enjoy the discussions and Mr. Rockford's eloquent posts, but I think we can put this one to rest for now. I do my best to keep things informative rather than confrontational. Back to the market...will seasonality pull it above 1300 this week? That's a question for debate, LOL. Don
Don, are you talking about priority between orders entrusted to the specialist, or are you talking about priority between bids and offers made by the specialist and the floor brokers in their floor auction?
I hope you took my "Adapt or Die" posting in the spirit of respectful and informative debate, rather than confrontation.