Say No To Thin E-mini Spread

Discussion in 'Index Futures' started by estrader, Dec 12, 2002.

  1. qdz

    qdz

    You are probably right on whether there is market makers and specialist in future market. I really have not too much ideas about futures. And my point is to let the market decide. Market makers and specialists will come and go if the market let them. I cannot vote for this poll about if I favor a thinner spread on E-mini or not.

    By the way, did I argue liquidity in this thread?

    :p


     
    #21     Dec 12, 2002
  2. JESUS Why do they always have to be f*cking with everything all the time??

    I say let it as it is.

    IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON"T FIX IT!!

    :mad:
     
    #22     Dec 12, 2002
  3. You've only looked at one side of the equation: the cases where the cost of buying a contract would be lower, representing more profit to you.

    What about the other side of the coin, where you are selling your contract, getting a lower price and reducing your profit?

    The spread in electronic futures is not a pure cost, like a brokerage commission. On one hand, it can represent a higher hurdle, but on the other hand it also represents the minumum profit. It works boths ways.
     
    #23     Dec 12, 2002
  4. qdz

    qdz

    Yeah, let it be may not a bad idea. However, there is always someone cannot be less greedy but just goes after outsider investors and traders whenever they have a chance.

    Saying JESUS doesn't help. To me it is same as saying Allah or some other Lords.

    :p
    Do not go off-topic.


     
    #24     Dec 12, 2002
  5. Minime

    Minime

    If .10 works for the pit traded contract, why not the electronic? I think the answer is obvious to that one. Those guys with greasy hair need as many profit centers as possible. People have to accept technology and get rid of the horse and buggy mentality and go with the Model-T or accept being run over. You can pass laws limiting the speed of automobiles, and charge extra for gas, but eventually intelligence will arise from the perceived moronic masses and buggy's will become road kill.
     
    #25     Dec 12, 2002
  6. If you dont like ES e-mini spread, you could always trade NQ e-mini. It has .10 spread, of course it has less volume because of that too. Build up a product, and then we will come in and mess with it. Also if you like an even thinner spread (0.000001) you could trade SPY,QQQ, DIA. There are so many to chose from.
     
    #26     Dec 12, 2002
  7. Myself, I do not want the e-mini charts to look ugly like QQQ and
    SPY charts do. That is what would happen wouldn't it? There
    would be trades all over the place and the charts would look like
    crap... All we need is a bunch of tails all over the place...

    I VOTE NO!
     
    #27     Dec 12, 2002
  8. Minime

    Minime

    I believe it has less volume because the index it follows only has 100 stocks vs. 500 stocks for the S&P--and likewise the dow only has 30 so it will probably always lag the other two in volume significantly.
     
    #28     Dec 12, 2002

  9. I believe you are mistaken . QQQ has a lot more volume than SPY. So number of stocks in an index has nothing to do with volume.
     
    #29     Dec 12, 2002
  10. The answer is...

    The tick in the big contract is worth $25. With the emini it is now $12.50.

    You are proposing that the tick be changed to $5. With CME non-member clearing house fees something like $2.80 plus broker commissions, only member traders could trade that spread profitably. You are proposing a 'CME floor trader full employment act.' You are really for the big guy all the while pretending to be for the little trader.

    Secondly you are also arguing for less liquid markets with your lower tick size. How would that be better?
     
    #30     Dec 12, 2002