4 ms·

There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation. There are costs to everything even feel-good populism that seems like a no-brai

There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation. There are costs to everything even feel-good populism that seems like a no-brainer.

ruined 5y ago
good. trading firms are useless. money should work. california is synonymous with venture
londons_explore 5y ago
Thats because many trading firms have a handful of key algorithms that took a lot of time and money to develop the first time, but that could be re-implemented with not much effort at a new employer. This applies to pretty much any valuable information that fits in one person's head.
sam0x17 5y ago
The trading center of the world is NYC and/or Greenwich, CT if you want to be cheeky about it. If the NYSE was in SF, you'd see a lot more trading firms there. Fintech is largely not in cali, as well.
lostdog 5y ago
> There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation. That doesn't make sense. If that were true, there would be one trading firm in California that only existed to hire traders from other firms and copy results.
- Buge 5y ago
  From other firms located where?
  - marvy 5y ago
    New York presumably
- imajoredinecon 5y ago
  Unfortunately, you can’t get out of a noncompete with an employer in state A that allows noncompetes by taking a job with a competitor in a different state B that doesn’t allow noncompetes.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation." There are also very few plantations, victorian workhouses and open pit coal mines. Some kind of businesses aren't worth having.
- throwaway2037 5y ago
  Oh, and you forgot anything that requires child labour in the 21st century. I love these OP type of comments. They always give me a chuckle. I feel like everything reverts to child labour or tragedy of the commons (pollution, excessive harvesting of natural resources). Seriously, can you imagine what businesses said in Victorian England when the child labour acts were proposed? And how about the environmental laws in 1970s in United States? "Oh, how can we continue our filthy, harmful business under these new laws?" This kind of thinking promotes "race to the bottom" mentality that I reject. You said it best: "Some kind of businesses aren't worth having." On a more positive note: I wish wealthy countries would pass laws to ban ship breaking in countries with weaker environmental laws. It seems like a terrible loop hole today that would not be very expensive to patch. When you look at how chemical plants operate in wealthy (mostly environmentally clean) places, pollution controls are front and center for the whole staff. They well know the fines easily exceed profits, and they don't want to wreck their own communities with pollution.
hristov 5y ago
There are few trading firms in California because (i) most trading in the US is done in New York and surrounding areas during New York hours, and (ii) New York is very far from California. If a trading firm is going to use human traders they would not do it in Cali, because they will have to force their traders to work at uncomfortable hours. If a trading firm is going to use solely computers, they would not do it in California because the time a network signal takes to reach California from New York actually matters in computer based trading.
- imajoredinecon 5y ago
  Pro tip in case you decide to go into quantitative finance: your computers don’t need to be in the same state as your programmers.
  - 99nanos 5y ago
    > your computers don’t need to be in the same state as your programmers. Nah dude, grandparent is talking about smart Robinhood traders
  - xmprt 5y ago
    See point 1. Programmers still need to be on-call during trading hours.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
paxys 5y ago
How many trading firms are anywhere outside of a 30 mile radius from Manhattan? Non-competes have nothing to do with that.
- kolbe 5y ago
  Citadel, Jump, IMC, Optiver, DRW, Susquehanna International are some of the largest trading firms in the world, and the vast majority of their operations are outside NYC
andrewjl 5y ago
PIMCO? (Newport Beach, CA)
throwaway2037 5y ago
I'm confused by this comment. I am assume you are not talking about physical commodity trading firms, but rather securities trading firms. If yes, this comment makes no sense. Anyone worth anything in the securities markets is covered by a non-complete clause, but you are paid for it. For example: If your contract says you cannot move to a competitor for six months after you leave, then your current employer is contractually obligated to keep you as a paid employee for those six months. Yes, these contracts have been reviewed by state's attorneys in New York, where most trading firms are based in the US. The real issue is when firms won't pay workers for this privilege. This should be outlawed. It is harmful to workers and competition ("free movement of labour").
axiomsEnd 5y ago
Are there any trading companies in countries without non-compete clauses? If yes, that would suggest that this isn't cost of lack of non-competes.

There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation. There are costs to everything even feel-good populism that seems like a no-brainer.

ruined 5y ago

good. trading firms are useless. money should work. california is synonymous with venture

londons_explore 5y ago

Thats because many trading firms have a handful of key algorithms that took a lot of time and money to develop the first time, but that could be re-implemented with not much effort at a new employer. This applies to pretty much any valuable information that fits in one person's head.

sam0x17 5y ago

The trading center of the world is NYC and/or Greenwich, CT if you want to be cheeky about it. If the NYSE was in SF, you'd see a lot more trading firms there. Fintech is largely not in cali, as well.

lostdog 5y ago

> There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation. That doesn't make sense. If that were true, there would be one trading firm in California that only existed to hire traders from other firms and copy results.

Buge 5y ago
From other firms located where?
- marvy 5y ago
  New York presumably
imajoredinecon 5y ago
Unfortunately, you can’t get out of a noncompete with an employer in state A that allows noncompetes by taking a job with a competitor in a different state B that doesn’t allow noncompetes.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

"There are few trading firms in california because of the non-compete situation." There are also very few plantations, victorian workhouses and open pit coal mines. Some kind of businesses aren't worth having.

throwaway2037 5y ago
Oh, and you forgot anything that requires child labour in the 21st century. I love these OP type of comments. They always give me a chuckle. I feel like everything reverts to child labour or tragedy of the commons (pollution, excessive harvesting of natural resources). Seriously, can you imagine what businesses said in Victorian England when the child labour acts were proposed? And how about the environmental laws in 1970s in United States? "Oh, how can we continue our filthy, harmful business under these new laws?" This kind of thinking promotes "race to the bottom" mentality that I reject. You said it best: "Some kind of businesses aren't worth having." On a more positive note: I wish wealthy countries would pass laws to ban ship breaking in countries with weaker environmental laws. It seems like a terrible loop hole today that would not be very expensive to patch. When you look at how chemical plants operate in wealthy (mostly environmentally clean) places, pollution controls are front and center for the whole staff. They well know the fines easily exceed profits, and they don't want to wreck their own communities with pollution.

hristov 5y ago

There are few trading firms in California because (i) most trading in the US is done in New York and surrounding areas during New York hours, and (ii) New York is very far from California. If a trading firm is going to use human traders they would not do it in Cali, because they will have to force their traders to work at uncomfortable hours. If a trading firm is going to use solely computers, they would not do it in California because the time a network signal takes to reach California from New York actually matters in computer based trading.

imajoredinecon 5y ago
Pro tip in case you decide to go into quantitative finance: your computers don’t need to be in the same state as your programmers.
- 99nanos 5y ago
  > your computers don’t need to be in the same state as your programmers. Nah dude, grandparent is talking about smart Robinhood traders
- xmprt 5y ago
  See point 1. Programmers still need to be on-call during trading hours.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

paxys 5y ago

How many trading firms are anywhere outside of a 30 mile radius from Manhattan? Non-competes have nothing to do with that.

kolbe 5y ago
Citadel, Jump, IMC, Optiver, DRW, Susquehanna International are some of the largest trading firms in the world, and the vast majority of their operations are outside NYC

andrewjl 5y ago

PIMCO? (Newport Beach, CA)

throwaway2037 5y ago

I'm confused by this comment. I am assume you are not talking about physical commodity trading firms, but rather securities trading firms. If yes, this comment makes no sense. Anyone worth anything in the securities markets is covered by a non-complete clause, but you are paid for it. For example: If your contract says you cannot move to a competitor for six months after you leave, then your current employer is contractually obligated to keep you as a paid employee for those six months. Yes, these contracts have been reviewed by state's attorneys in New York, where most trading firms are based in the US. The real issue is when firms won't pay workers for this privilege. This should be outlawed. It is harmful to workers and competition ("free movement of labour").

axiomsEnd 5y ago

Are there any trading companies in countries without non-compete clauses? If yes, that would suggest that this isn't cost of lack of non-competes.