Xthn

or Register to post new content in the forum

29 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Feb 1, 2006 4:29 pm

How interesting that this stock started moving up breaking a strong downward channel BEFORE the presidents speech.  Anybody out there actually believe the stock market isnt a rigged game?  What a joke.  Just another reason I love technicals and pattern recognition.  Look how much it went up the MORNING of the presidents speech.  Just amazing.



Feb 1, 2006 8:05 pm

You are correct.  It's all crap.  From the market makers, to the research, to the people who run the Wall Street firms. "Especially the crooks that run the firms." THe entire market is crooked but if you acknowledge that you can learn to make fantastic money in it using technical research and pattern recoginition.  Of course the slew of 250k producers on this forum have no clue.  It is sad that the vast majority of brokers are dumb as rocks when it comes to managing stocks...It amazes me how crooked this industry is that we work in and how dumb the brokers are who advise people.  They walk around in expensive suits and work in nice offices but they have no idea what our industry is and how to make money for people.


XTHN is an example of what goes on all the time. I hope you arent surprised.   I was just stopped out of a stock today that the market maker dropped artificially down  below a support.  I had my stop set too tight and he screwed me.  Go figure, this time he won.  They'er all crooks.  Keep up the lerning process in technical analysis.  Learning it over eight years ago now has been the best think that ever happened to me in my business.   

Feb 1, 2006 8:11 pm

Us 250k producers learned long ago that the market is crooked. We're smart enough to know not to play with individual stocks with the exception of sma's. Ever heard of Vegas. Why do you think they own the big buildings and you don't?

Feb 1, 2006 8:18 pm

Greenhills, what are you doing on a registered rep forum...other than making insults.  Keep "lerning" about technical analysis.  Looks like the markets had a couple good years and the etrade yahoos are coming back again.

Feb 1, 2006 8:23 pm

God you're dumb.  I can guarantee you, I have far less risk in my equity accounts that I manange than you you little dope.  You see, if you had a clue, you would know that what you just said it stupid and uninformed.  One thing for sure.  If you are lacking in knowledge you are right, picking stocks is like going to Vegas.  You are no better than any schmo off the street who doesnt work in our business.  That is where your knowledge base is.  Thanks for proving my point.  Too dumb to know what you don't know.       

Feb 1, 2006 9:04 pm
ezmoney:

Us 250k producers learned long ago that the market is crooked. We're smart enough to know not to play with individual stocks with the exception of sma's. Ever heard of Vegas. Why do you think they own the big buildings and you don't?


Giving your money to the wrong SMA or mutual fund manager can be JUST as risky as picking individual stocks.....


Say what you want, I side with Greenhills and Malcolm on this one.  Technical analysis and related disciplines saved my book the last 5-7 years.

Feb 1, 2006 11:51 pm
ezmoney:

Us 250k producers learned long ago that the market is crooked. We're smart enough to know not to play with individual stocks with the exception of sma's. Ever heard of Vegas. Why do you think they own the big buildings and you don't?


Wow I just keep re-reading this post and I marvel at your ignorance.


Let me get this straight....using a disciplined methodology to buy and sell individual stocks for your clients is gambling like in Vegas, but hiring an SMA manager to do that for your clients(along with a million other accounts) is not?


Feb 2, 2006 12:15 am
Greenhills:

God you're dumb.  I can guarantee you, I have far less risk in my equity accounts that I manange than you you little dope.  You see, if you had a clue, you would know that what you just said it stupid and uninformed.  One thing for sure.  If you are lacking in knowledge you are right, picking stocks is like going to Vegas.  You are no better than any schmo off the street who doesnt work in our business.  That is where your knowledge base is.  Thanks for proving my point.  Too dumb to know what you don't know.       



I love you, greenhills.

Feb 2, 2006 9:38 am

Another example I am looking at right at this moment.  The market just opened.   " CVS "  This is one on my watch list.  The specialist just opened it higher than the close.  He opened it exactly on top of the 150 day moving average causing more people to come in and buy it.  Amazing that these guys can do any dam thing they want with no regulators breathing down their back.  Nothing like creating your own rally.

Feb 2, 2006 9:51 am
Malcolm:

  The specialist just opened it higher than the close.  He opened it exactly on top of the 150 day moving average causing more people to come in and buy it.  



It's almost as if you're unaware the specilaist has a book in front of him with buyers and bids on one side and sellers and asks on the other.


Nah, he just wakes up, figures what price will make him money (and he'sthe lone MM in the stock, right? ) and opens the market at the price of his choosing.

Feb 2, 2006 9:57 am

Pretty amazing isnt it?  Fun to watch though and when you know what's happening you can use it to make money.

Feb 2, 2006 9:58 am
Malcolm:

How interesting that this stock started moving up breaking a strong downward channel BEFORE the presidents speech.  Anybody out there actually believe the stock market isnt a rigged game?  What a joke.  Just another reason I love technicals and pattern recognition.  Look how much it went up the MORNING of the presidents speech.  Just amazing.





Well, it isn't quite so amazing when you realize this is a cheap (under $5 stock), BB stock ignored by most retail outfits, with a history of low volume that had JUST BEEN THE FEATURED NEWS ITEM THAT VERY DAY   NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 31, 2006--Xethanol Corporation (OTCBB:XTHN - News), a biotechnology driven ethanol production company, is the lead story in the "Innovations" section of FSB (Fortune Small Business) a sister publication to Fortune Magazine.


When you add in the fact that the SOTU address is distributed long before the speech is actually given, well, the mystery disappears.

Feb 2, 2006 10:00 am
Greenhills:

  I was just stopped out of a stock today that the market maker dropped artificially down  below a support.  I had my stop set too tight and he screwed me. 


You mean you tipped your hand as to what you'd sell it at and he found a buyer?

Feb 2, 2006 10:22 am
mikebutler222:
Greenhills:

  I was just stopped out of a stock today that the market maker dropped artificially down  below a support.  I had my stop set too tight and he screwed me. 


You mean you tipped your hand as to what you'd sell it at and he found a buyer?



Good catch, Mike. Greenhills is an idiot.

Feb 2, 2006 10:53 am
Dirk Diggler:
mikebutler222:
Greenhills:

  I was just stopped out of a stock today that the market maker dropped artificially down  below a support.  I had my stop set too tight and he screwed me. 


You mean you tipped your hand as to what you'd sell it at and he found a buyer?



Good catch, Mike. Greenhills is an idiot.



Actually Mike Greenhills might be more correct than you realize on this one.


Depending upon how heavily traded the stock is, and whether or not it is OTC or exchange traded, it could happen.  For example, if the stock is traded on the NYSE, any stop orders or limit orders are recorded in the specialists' 'book'.  So, the specialist is fully aware of these orders in terms of both size and price.  Keep in mind, too, that it is the specialists' job to maintain an orderly market and provide liquidity by being the buyer or seller 'of last resort'.


So, suppose there is some selling pressure on the stock, not many buyers on any particular day.  The stock starts to drop towards a level where there are quite a few stop orders, incluing perhaps Greenies.  At some point the specialist is supposed to step in and start buying the stock to help it find a 'stable' price....those are my words and I'm sure it could be expressed better.  There are plenty of rules but ultimately if nobody else is there to bid for the stock it is the specialists' responsibility to step up and be a buyer.


So....the stock is dropping and it's getting close to these stop loss levels....say the stock is at 34.25 and there's a bunch of stop orders at 33.75 and 34.  If the specialist sees those orders, instead of "stepping up" to buy at 34.25, he can buy none or very little while allowing the stock to drift downwards.  Once the trigger price for the stop orders are hit, all of those orders become MARKET ORDERS to sell, not limit orders at the trigger price.  This can often result in a burst of sell orders that further depress the stock price.  Small price movement for us retail guys maybe, but at this point for the specialist it becomes "all you can eat" as he scoops up as much stock as he wants at temporarily depressed prices.  Once the flurry of new market sell orders are filled(many perhaps by the specialists orders to buy) the stock often recovers(we're generally talking pennies and dimes here guys, not dollars, but when you're trading tens of thousands of shares that can be real money).  So, later in the day as the stock bounces back, the specialist sells the stock back into the market.  He's done his job of maintaining an orderly market and made a couple of bucks too.


I've seen it happen many times, and this game will continue to be played in some variation or another long after I'm gone.  If you don't believe this is happening well no offense but you're just plain naive.



'nuf said.

Feb 2, 2006 11:13 am

A nice review of the mechanics, Joe, but just what is the "game" you claim is being played? The specialist has no obligation to step in and buy just because prices drift lower, unless there becomes a problem of illiquidity. In your example, there's no such event. In fact, to someone on the other side of the trade, what you seem to be chiding the specialist for is not stepping in to prop up the price. His job short of an illiquidity event is to simply link buyers and sellers. People who put in limit orders, and thus show their hand, have no room to gripe when their order become a market order, unless the specialist jumped other, closer orders to execute it.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />


Who’s to say what’s “artificially depressed”? You know a short seller would argue with you about there even being such a thing. Stocks are allowed to gap lower or jump lower without a specialist being required to step in and buy.  Furthermore, who’s to say the stock will “bounce back” thus insuring a gain by the specialist?  

Feb 2, 2006 11:28 am

Defining "an illiquidity event" is like trying to catch smoke in your hands Mike.  Of course so is "artifically depressed".


I am not, in fact, chiding the specialist for not stepping in.  Presuming he operates within the rules-for example not frontrunning large orders-he is merely acting to make money for himself.  That profit motive is what drives the market for all participants.  Your comment, and perhaps Dirk's, implied some skepticism that these things could happen. I may have mis-read it.


It doesn't always 'bounce back'.  That's the speciailists risk to measure.  I've never met a poor specialist, so apparently they must have some idea how to make it work.


Perhaps my choice of the word 'game' was not the best, given that it has implications that something untoward is happening.  It's just a normal part of the market.


I don't think Greenhills was really griping, other than perhaps expressing frustration at making a mistake we've all made one time or another. 

Feb 2, 2006 11:43 am

joedabrkr:

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />


Defining "an illiquidity event" is like trying to catch smoke in your hands Mike.  Of course so is "artifically depressed".



Well, illiquidity can be defined as no trading taking place because the bid/ask gap is too far apart (you get to determine what that amount it). "Artificially depressed" is easier still, it's when a guy who's long thinks he's wiser than the assembled free market and he gets his butt handed to him.  <?:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shape id=x0000t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="[email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600">@0 1 0">@1">@2 1 2">@3 21600 pixelWidth">@3 21600 pixelHeight">@0 0 1">@6 1 2">@7 21600 pixelWidth">@8 21600 0">@7 21600 pixelHeight">@10 21600 0"><v:shape id=x0000i1025 style="WIDTH: 12.75pt; HEIGHT: 12.75pt" ="#x0000t75" alt="">


joedabrkr:

I am not, in fact, chiding the specialist for not stepping in. 



Sure sounded like it, my error.


joedabrkr:

Presuming he operates within the rules-for example not frontrunning large orders-he is merely acting to make money for himself. 



Huh? He's "acting" by not propping up the price because there was (in your example) no reason for him to. I mean it's nice you agree there's no evil in the profit motive, you're assuming that he failed to do something he should have to make that profit. The fact that he did buy when the orders became market orders doesn’t mean he’s cheated anyone, it means he thought there was value at that price.


You have to remember there are two sides to the trade and all your assumptions expressed thus far have been made from the POV of someone long. The shorts have just as much right to assume the specialist won’t jump in to stop a stock from drifting lower just because there’s some CW about the downturn being artificial.


 

joedabrkr:

That profit motive is what drives the market for all participants.  Your comment, and perhaps Dirk's, implied some skepticism that these things could happen. I may have mis-read it.



The only skepticism I wanted to express was the idea that just because the longs were unhappy with the specialist’s actions meant there was something underhanded going on. The complaint at the center of this discussion all centers on an unstated assumption that longs deserve some special treatment, and by failing to provide it, the specialists were proved to be acting on their own self-interest.


joedabrkr:

It doesn't always 'bounce back'.  That's the speciailists risk to measure.  I've never met a poor specialist, so apparently they must have some idea how to make it work.



And your clients have never met a poor broker


joedabrkr:

 


I don't think Greenhills was really griping, other than perhaps expressing frustration at making a mistake we've all made one time or another. 



 


Hmmm, given his complaint that the market’s “fixed” and his example of how he was treated, I read him to be whining and blaming it on having been “cheated”. Perhaps I misread him.


 


 


 


 


Oh, and WOOF, Baby 

Feb 2, 2006 1:34 pm

woof?

Feb 2, 2006 2:17 pm

This is all very interesting stuff, but I'd lke to point something out to you

Einsteins. Four character stock tickers have market makers making the

market, not specialists. Market makers are whores with a license to steal.