In my humble opinion, I feel that they are posting daily trades with hidden codes in every message. It is easier than posting on the classified ads section on The New York Times. Plus there is the added bonus of time. Anyway, if you factor in "timed out" nothing is zero sum. So you have convexity, elasticity, and, timed out (the reason for my example about buying Nymex contracts to delivery).
You keep talking about convexity. Please explain. I don't see how convexity has anything to do with whether or not the futures market is in fact zero-sum as it is defined. Let's define F(B,S)=total amount of money created through transactions in the futures market as of a given point in time. Where B is buys (longs) and S is sells (shorts). Since we are talking about a point in time, both B and S are constants. Then F(B,S) = B - S = 0 Take the first derivative and you get zero. The second derivative is just the derivative of zero, which again is zero. Thus, no convexity. Edit: Furthermore, elasticity of demand has nothing to do with it either. i.e. supply and demand don't matter in this discussion. If demand is greater than supply the price goes up. Those that are long make money, and those that are short lose (in aggregate) the same amount as was made by the longs. Edit again: As for "timed out," you'll have to enlighten me. I don't know what that term means. A quick google revealed that it is a rule in the game cricket.
Would you please explain what you mean when you keep saying that there is convexity and elasticity? Or, did you just learn some new terms that you thought sounded sexy? If you're talking about the bond market, then yes, the bond pricing function exhibits convexity. When yields fall by a given amount, the price will rise by more than it would fall if yields rose by a that same given amount. However, that is completely priced into the market. When rates are expected to be volatile, bonds that exhibit greater convexity will be relatively more expensive. So, if you buy a bond that exhibits high convexity and rates turn out to be less volatile, you will actually do worse than you would have if you had bought a low convexity bond. If you're talking about options, it's called gamma, and again, completely priced in. But, I don't see what this has to do with whether any market is defined as zero sum. Please do elaborate.
I get this sinking feeling like sliding down the yield curve. May be I should change my name to 7938, no that's silly You Moron.
perhaps there is confusion about the market and trading? They are very different in this discussion. market does equal zero sum trading does not equal zero sum
all i can say is these people who think stocks ARE zero sum and.or futures are NOT zero sum should really pick up a book on game theory it is not that complex, but it is somehwat counterintuitive
Stocks (No to Zero Sum) Futures (Yes to Zero Sum) Simple Equation FGL=futures gains on longs FGS=futures gains on shorts TFG=total futures gains SGL=stock gains on longs SGS=stock gains on shorts TSG=total stock gains FGL+FGS=TFG=0 Since the above equation is always (Yes at all times) equal to zero futures are ZERO SUM SGL+SGS=TSG=X Since this equation is not always (Probably has never even been once) equal to zero stocks are NOT ZERO SUM X does not equal 0 at all times To be a ZERO SUM GAME the equation must equal 0 AT ALL TIMES. Whereas in reality, even if the stock market stops trading or even drops to zero the stock equation will not equal 0.