5 ms·

I don't really understand halting share trading. Who is the exchange to say who may or may not trade a product you own? It just seems weird. If there's bad news

by mrr54 7y ago

I don't really understand halting share trading. Who is the exchange to say who may or may not trade a product you own? It just seems weird. If there's bad news, the people who pay attention most closely, and get access to that information the fastest should be allowed to use it, surely?

lucb1e 7y ago
Indeed, this is the first time I heard such a thing is even possible. When buying stock I got the impression I would own that part of the company and never read that I may not be able to sell that property if the company in question so wishes. I thought it was a relatively liquid investment but apparently not necessarily so?
- devmunchies 7y ago
  Do people even hold the physical stock titles anymore? There is nothing preventing someone from selling a physical title. Its why I'm weary of a cashless society.
  - gowld 7y ago
    Stocks are not bearer instruments. Anyway, you are going to sell your paper certificates in the few hours trading is halted? To whom? Your next for neighbor? Someone on the sidewalk?
- djannzjkzxn 7y ago
  Shares are often halted for major news. I think it’s meant to protect sellers from situation where many sell with a market order and the price goes near 0. This would result in a wealth transfer from more naive “Main Street” traders to “Wall Street” market makers. Although if the market makers are effective enough, you wouldn’t need the halt at all.
lrajlich 7y ago
It’s to prevent flash crashes. If you don’t like the rules of the exchange you can always trade your securities elsewhere (eg otc)
- dmurray 7y ago
  To be clear, you as the shareowner can't legally do this. The company took the decision to be publicly listed in the US, and one of the consequences of that is that shareholders can only buy and sell their stock in accordance with the rules of the exchanges and the SEC. It's not normally a big downside: trading halts are rare and short.
devmunchies 7y ago
I've realized that everything I own it is because I have permission to own (and someone else, permission to sell). Property rights have not been properly defended so they are fading away. I was reading Stripe and Braintree's restricted businesses (https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses) and saw "unauthorized sale or resale of brand name or designer products or services". If I own something physical there should be nothing telling me I can't sell it.
- generalpass 7y ago
  > I was reading Stripe and Braintree's restricted businesses (https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses) and saw "unauthorized sale or resale of brand name or designer products or services". If I own something physical there should be nothing telling me I can't sell it. Property rights also apply to Stripe, in that the company, as an asset itself, can be restricted by its owners to conduct business in some certain way. And I wouldn't be surprised if Stripe's policies will have more to do with the credit card companies than Stripe. Then, further, the credit card companies act as a cartel by using the government to prevent anyone else from using property to create a competing service by making the ROI on creating a competing service worse than other investment opportunities, or even just blocking it outright under some nebulous "shut down for accounting irregularities" or "insufficient consumer protections" nonsense.
  - devmunchies 7y ago
    > I wouldn't be surprised if Stripe's policies will have more to do with the credit card companies than Stripe That's what i figured, which is why I included braintree to not throw Stripe under the bus alone.
  - gowld 7y ago
    When someone speaks of property rights, they usually mean their own rights, not others'.
    - generalpass 7y ago

by mrr54 7y ago

lucb1e 7y ago

Indeed, this is the first time I heard such a thing is even possible. When buying stock I got the impression I would own that part of the company and never read that I may not be able to sell that property if the company in question so wishes. I thought it was a relatively liquid investment but apparently not necessarily so?

devmunchies 7y ago
Do people even hold the physical stock titles anymore? There is nothing preventing someone from selling a physical title. Its why I'm weary of a cashless society.
- gowld 7y ago
  Stocks are not bearer instruments. Anyway, you are going to sell your paper certificates in the few hours trading is halted? To whom? Your next for neighbor? Someone on the sidewalk?
djannzjkzxn 7y ago
Shares are often halted for major news. I think it’s meant to protect sellers from situation where many sell with a market order and the price goes near 0. This would result in a wealth transfer from more naive “Main Street” traders to “Wall Street” market makers. Although if the market makers are effective enough, you wouldn’t need the halt at all.

lrajlich 7y ago

It’s to prevent flash crashes. If you don’t like the rules of the exchange you can always trade your securities elsewhere (eg otc)

dmurray 7y ago
To be clear, you as the shareowner can't legally do this. The company took the decision to be publicly listed in the US, and one of the consequences of that is that shareholders can only buy and sell their stock in accordance with the rules of the exchanges and the SEC. It's not normally a big downside: trading halts are rare and short.

devmunchies 7y ago

I've realized that everything I own it is because I have permission to own (and someone else, permission to sell). Property rights have not been properly defended so they are fading away. I was reading Stripe and Braintree's restricted businesses (https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses) and saw "unauthorized sale or resale of brand name or designer products or services". If I own something physical there should be nothing telling me I can't sell it.

generalpass 7y ago
> I was reading Stripe and Braintree's restricted businesses (https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses) and saw "unauthorized sale or resale of brand name or designer products or services". If I own something physical there should be nothing telling me I can't sell it. Property rights also apply to Stripe, in that the company, as an asset itself, can be restricted by its owners to conduct business in some certain way. And I wouldn't be surprised if Stripe's policies will have more to do with the credit card companies than Stripe. Then, further, the credit card companies act as a cartel by using the government to prevent anyone else from using property to create a competing service by making the ROI on creating a competing service worse than other investment opportunities, or even just blocking it outright under some nebulous "shut down for accounting irregularities" or "insufficient consumer protections" nonsense.
- devmunchies 7y ago
  > I wouldn't be surprised if Stripe's policies will have more to do with the credit card companies than Stripe That's what i figured, which is why I included braintree to not throw Stripe under the bus alone.
- gowld 7y ago
  When someone speaks of property rights, they usually mean their own rights, not others'.
  - generalpass 7y ago