|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Our volume has a greater percentage of institutional trades, because we have
a block function. We also do more market maker business from other
exchanges than the other exchanges do. So more of our business is arb.
related than directional than the other exchanges.
So overall there is more noise in our p/c than there would be elsewhere.
However there is so much noise in p/c overall that I'm not certain it is any
worse than the other four exchanges. We are now number three of five after
a little more than a year.
-----Original Message-----
From: BobR [mailto:bobrabcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 3:39 PM
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: SingleStockFutures further delay
Alex, attached is a snapshot of the ISE options trading summary for 10/16.
Do you have any comments about its usefulness for measuring market sentiment
in terms of a P/C ratio?
thanks,
bobr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacobson, Alex" <AJacobson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 12:19 PM
Subject: RE: [RT] Re: SingleStockFutures further delay
> Yes and no. No market has really established themselves as being a
serious
> contender in this product. My view is the reason the industry isn't
rushing
> is the lack of success -- so far -- in the markets where they trade. The
> other issue is can a market really establish good price discovery when the
> primary market is not available.
>
> The current delay relates to have to bear the cost of the price reporting
> systems. A new system has to be built and funded. The way it works is
that
> if one exchange will trade them .. they pay the whole development cost.
> When exchange two comes in it pays exchange 1 back 50% of the cost and so
> on. No exchange has yet raised their hand as exchange one .. ready to
go..
> and fund the project.
>
> They are a money loser for the exchanges that trade them now.
>
> Candidly I think the exchange decision makers have always had a wait and
see
> attitude about them and any delay is "somewhat" welcome. It has nothing
to
> do with any regulatory roadblocks .. the regulation stuff is pretty
much
> done .... it's just time to pull the trigger and write some big checks
...
> which will eventually get written.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rmac@xxxxxxxx [mailto:rmac@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 3:11 PM
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [RT] Re: SingleStockFutures further delay
>
>
> Doesn't that put us further behind Europe. I would think that we
> would be giving up a considable amount of this business to them
> because of the delay?
>
> Ron
>
>
> --- In realtraders@xxxx, "Jacobson, Alex" <AJacobson@xxxx> wrote:
> > SSF's have been put back until at least the end of March 2002. If a
> > securities exchange doesn't start the tech work ASAP ... and none
> have yet
> > raised their hand to start .... they will be put back till probably
> June at
> > the earliest.
> >
> > Alex Jacobson
> > Vice President Business Development
> > I S E
> > 212 897 8125
> > 212 425 4926 (FAX)
> > 877 7209918 (SKYPAGE)
> > ajacobson@xxxx
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|