15 ms·
I remember reading about dark pools and asking a friend in finance if the sector really is as corrupt as it sounds, his reply? "Oh much more"
by qweiop 2y ago
I remember reading about dark pools and asking a friend in finance if the sector really is as corrupt as it sounds, his reply? "Oh much more"
- Nifty3929 2y agoDid he elaborate on this?
- LatteLazy 2y agoGoldman and others got in trouble for selling access to the supposedly secret orders in their dark pools back in the day. They were fined 800k I think? I believe dark pools started growing post flashboys when people realising what hft meant and wanted an escape (see comment below). But as they got big they became a target in and of themselves (ecology in action I guess). I worked in algo trading at the time (not hft, but anti hft)
- gaadd33 2y agoDark pools started in the 1980s once the SEC permitted securities to be traded off the exchange they are listed on. I think that was well before flashboys.
- LatteLazy 2y agoI had no idea they went that far back? Good knowledge!
- chipsrafferty 2y agoDark Pools were the original "equitable market"; when market makers were trading in 1/8ths and fixing markets, dark pools enabled people to trade in 0.01 increments.
- QuantumGood 2y agoAnd then they found that some of the liquidity in dark pools was by dark HFT.
- ketzo 2y agoMost informed “dark pools” comment
- reverendsteveii 2y agoThe only reaction more adverse than the one you get asking coders about remote voting is the one you get asking finance people about transparency and anticorruption. It's an open secret at this point that any effort that would weed out a significant proportion of the fraud would cripple our finance sector overall just because everyone who runs it would be in prison.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- throwaway199010 2y ago[dead]
- _bin_ 2y agoit's more like because governments have started to try to assign criminal liability to seniormost execs, not just to the people responsible. this is a response to the wink-and-nod cases that do exist but glaringly fails to account for the complexity and scope of large financial institutions and the fact that the guy at the top can't always supervise everything personally. i don't know who you're talking to but no, it's not that criminal. it may be "corrupt" in the sense of rent-seeking or recapture-heavy institutions. it may be "corrupt" in the sense that your average IB analyst knows he's pulling long hours to churn out reams of 80% BS. it may be "corrupt" in that the VP at a PE fund knows that 7 turns of leverage and an inflated multiple for this middle-market shitco isn't actually a good buy. but there are a lot of honest people, enough that you can choose to do business with the same.
- autoexec 2y ago> it's more like because governments have started to try to assign criminal liability to seniormost execs, not just to the people responsible. seniormost execs exist to be the people who are responsible. They get the big bucks because they're supposed to be accountable for everything that goes on under their watch. If they don't want the liability, or can't actually supervise sufficiently to prevent crime, then they shouldn't accept the job. If they want to take the paychecks and golden parachutes, they can also take the prison sentences.
- markus_zhang 2y agoBack in the day when I was day trading in a firm, dark pool was pretty much the only place that I could offload some stocks quicly when they went the other way. It was pricey though so we were told to use it as a last resort.
- zeroq 2y agoI worked for an investment bank and on the inside no one even pretends, it's just a part of the job.
- tedunangst 2y agoFunny, I got the same answer from my neighbor when I asked him how much the NSA satellites can see.
- before_the_law 2y ago[dead]
- rqtwteye 2y agoI used to be friends with some finance guys around 2008 and they told me the same thing. Retail investors are basically suckers to them who can be exploited.