UAUA (and LCC)

Discussion in 'Stocks' started by m22au, Sep 8, 2008.

  1. I'm not complaining. I work within the rules of the markets. The NASDAQ says the trades will stand. So be it. I've done nothing wrong & won't do anything wrong. I never should have traded it. I lost on a couple trades. Oh well. I move on.

    I don't need you to help me. I don't need help.
     
    #41     Sep 8, 2008
  2. What if the press release had turned out to be true... i guess in that case the people who sold for a loss would be against trade breaks and people who bought in would be wanting trade breaks... maybe thats why they let the trades stand regardless of whether the press release was true or false? Just trying to understand the logic used to make the decision, if any..
     
    #42     Sep 8, 2008
  3. trom

    trom

    This is what I'm confused about, too. I've gotten screwed by broken trades and been saved by broken trades. I have no problem with trades being reviewed.

    I'm just a floored that a system that is supposed to catch "clearly erroneous" transactions can view today's action as anything but "clearly erroneous" in every way.
     
    #43     Sep 8, 2008
  4. dude before they even ruled they said they were treating it as a news based move. yeah I know nasdaq has been very inconsistent with some rulings (especially on erroneous program trades) but this one was pretty clear. they aren't going to break things now.
     
    #44     Sep 8, 2008
  5. 1. there was NO news You can't have a news based trade w/no news.

    2. I used to leave 150 bucks in my cash register so the morning shift had cash. I was robbed. They got 150 bucks. Cops said, "they'll be back. ' Six more times, including one at gunpoint before I sold. We can't let them leave w/the cash. They'll do it again.

    3. Watch. They'll be broken. We have a lot of converts.
     
    #45     Sep 8, 2008
  6. so by that logic if there is a bad rumor and a stock moves 50% then what? basically this is the same thing as if someone posted a rumor
     
    #46     Sep 8, 2008
  7. the news story was erroneous. the trades were not. an erroneous trade is something like an order entry error or hitting an ECN more than a point away (or whatever % it is for inet) from the last print if NYS is in slow mode. let's say i am trading premarket and i accidently sell KBH at 19.50 if it was level 1 then i can file to have that trade broken and it would be broken since it was beyond the trade break limits.

    an incorrectly reported story is not an erroneous trade. i'm trying to remember the last time they broke trades due to an incorrectly reported story but i can't think of one.
     
    #47     Sep 8, 2008
  8. Acumen

    Acumen

    Did trades really post at 0.01? I just checked the TAQ data I recorded and don't see anything under 3.30.
     
    #48     Sep 8, 2008
  9. 1. do you have a bloomberg?

    2. whatever

    3. no they won't. i can't think of one time they have ever come back and overturned a mass ruling later in the day. i have been fucked by AMEX before but i expect that from them.
     
    #49     Sep 8, 2008
  10. no it was a CBOE fuck up. they printed .01 and 999.00 but X'ed both out immediately.
     
    #50     Sep 8, 2008