9 ms·

Whatever money was 'lost' was also 'found'/gained/(won since this is gambling), and the people that make the rules are the ones that won, so...

WarDekar 16y ago
Why am I getting down-voted? Institutional traders cleaned up because of this, the people that got screwed are the ones without the power to effect any changes to the system. The only way there would be (successful) lawsuits is if the situation were reversed.
- lrm242 16y ago
  Because your statement stinks of misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about how the markets function. It's anti-market populism looking for reinforcement. If you have some data or evidence that institutional players reaped great reward because they have undue influence I'd love to see it.
  - WarDekar 16y ago
    Well considering even the people with access to all the data on what happened still don't know exactly what went down, it'd be a little tough for me to prove anything. What we do know is the only people that were able to make trades were the institutional investors with access to the best (and fastest) tools, HFTs are designed to skim fractions of %s off trades and thus since there was a ton of volatility they would've cleaned up, and really- how could anyone have won but the big boys here? The real losers here that got screwed are ones that couldn't adjust their positions and had stop losses, or people that tried to but were ill-equipped, etc. The institutional investors were (most likely) on top of this, and able to reap the benefits- your Average Joe investor was not, and neither was your grandpa's pension fund. I may not be able to provide proof, but that's because no one (to this point, that we know of) can provide any proof either way. I'm not anti-market, I'm pro free-market, and unfortunately what we have is not a free-market. Oh, and I'll get back to you with that data and evidence once the SEC hands it over to me.
    - lrm242 16y ago
      First, You can believe anything you want, but I'm surprised you're making such claims since even you admit you have no data to back them up. Second, All "high frequency traders" are not the same. In fact, using the term doesn't really mean anything apart from some time oriented description of trading. Some will profit from volatility, others won't. In fact, Tradebot has already said they stopped trading for the day because of losses. You're assumptions about "Average Joe Investor" and institutional investors are quaint. That's about it.

WarDekar 16y ago

Why am I getting down-voted? Institutional traders cleaned up because of this, the people that got screwed are the ones without the power to effect any changes to the system. The only way there would be (successful) lawsuits is if the situation were reversed.

lrm242 16y ago
Because your statement stinks of misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about how the markets function. It's anti-market populism looking for reinforcement. If you have some data or evidence that institutional players reaped great reward because they have undue influence I'd love to see it.
- WarDekar 16y ago
  Well considering even the people with access to all the data on what happened still don't know exactly what went down, it'd be a little tough for me to prove anything. What we do know is the only people that were able to make trades were the institutional investors with access to the best (and fastest) tools, HFTs are designed to skim fractions of %s off trades and thus since there was a ton of volatility they would've cleaned up, and really- how could anyone have won but the big boys here? The real losers here that got screwed are ones that couldn't adjust their positions and had stop losses, or people that tried to but were ill-equipped, etc. The institutional investors were (most likely) on top of this, and able to reap the benefits- your Average Joe investor was not, and neither was your grandpa's pension fund. I may not be able to provide proof, but that's because no one (to this point, that we know of) can provide any proof either way. I'm not anti-market, I'm pro free-market, and unfortunately what we have is not a free-market. Oh, and I'll get back to you with that data and evidence once the SEC hands it over to me.
  - lrm242 16y ago
    First, You can believe anything you want, but I'm surprised you're making such claims since even you admit you have no data to back them up. Second, All "high frequency traders" are not the same. In fact, using the term doesn't really mean anything apart from some time oriented description of trading. Some will profit from volatility, others won't. In fact, Tradebot has already said they stopped trading for the day because of losses. You're assumptions about "Average Joe Investor" and institutional investors are quaint. That's about it.