Uptick Rule

or Register to post new content in the forum

18 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.
Nov 21, 2008 2:56 pm

Should they get rid of Cox and bring back the uptick rule? It seems to me that would prevent a lot of this short selling to kill companies. If Citi goes, then BAC is next(at $10) followed by WFC and then JPM... Wouldn't bringing back the uptick rule help save some of these companies.  Citi's market cap is now under what the TARP just gave them(this is just stupid now).  Thoughts?

Nov 21, 2008 3:05 pm

I think we will see a flurry of regulations changes.


I don't know that it will have a huge impact, but I would be happy reinstating both the uptick rule AND mark-to-market accounting.
 
I would also be happy with the regulators coming out on April Fool's Day and saying this was one big joke and that they are going to re-price the securites to their peak prices.  It would be one big Punk'd episode on the entire world. 
 
I don't think the April Fool's thing will happen.  But possibly the other two things...hopefully.
Nov 21, 2008 3:09 pm

Banks are flat broke. Feds will own Citi on Monday.

Nov 21, 2008 3:10 pm

I think they would have to get rid of Cox in order to do so.. He doesn't think the uptick rule is a big thing. I wonder how easy it is to remove him?

Nov 21, 2008 3:40 pm
Squash1:

I think they would have to get rid of Cox in order to do so.. He doesn't think the uptick rule is a big thing. I wonder how easy it is to remove him?

 
Has Cox done anything good in his tenure?  It's a serious question.
Nov 21, 2008 4:19 pm

Bring back the uptick rule yes.

 
Citi will be answering to uncle sam by tue. morning.
Nov 21, 2008 5:47 pm

I think they get an injection from some overseas conglomerate(sovereign fund or foreign bank) before they go under.. too many connections

Nov 21, 2008 6:39 pm

In addition to the uptick rule and mark-to-market accounting, what do you guys think about those double and triple ETF's, especially the short ones?

 
Cramer was making a point about the double and triple short ETF's possibly causing some of these late-day sell-offs.  It actually seems like a good point as it's tripling the shorts on one order.  He says the SEC is responsible for allowing these things to exist.  I might be with him on that. 
Nov 21, 2008 7:59 pm

If they would make you actually barrow the shares before you short LIKE WE HAVE TO the uptick would not matter. It's another example of needing simple enforcement of the rules on the books. NOT making more with an agenda to help out their buddies with some added pork on top.

Dec 17, 2008 4:58 pm

They should bring it back.  I don't know why they even took it out.  Cox will have to go given this Madoff fiasco in addition to other omissions on his watch.

Dec 17, 2008 10:31 pm

Mary Shapiro, to be next SEC head... hello uptick rule?

Dec 17, 2008 11:37 pm
chief123:

Mary Shapiro, to be next SEC head... hello uptick rule?

 
Is there something about her past that would suggest she is for bringing this back or is it pure conjecture on your part?
Dec 18, 2008 9:01 am

Pure specultation, but I think with what happened with the Madoff, and the belief that the SEC isn't stopping anything, except Mark Cuban, that there will be a call to reform the whole SEC

Dec 18, 2008 9:30 am
chief123:

Mary Shapiro, to be next SEC head... hello uptick rule?



There ought to be a downtick rule for buying long.

Dec 18, 2008 1:57 pm

Sometimes?

Dec 18, 2008 3:20 pm

I think its great.. especially when people go nuts...

Dec 18, 2008 6:46 pm
chief123:

I think its great.. especially when people go nuts...



That's MY favorite part.

Jan 17, 2009 2:10 pm

Wasn't uptick suspended at the peak of the market?