|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yes, it is well known within the community of
exchanges that ICE paid at least 4 times what they
should have, even if they would have been in a bidding
war.
But as I said, the CME OWNS the right to keep the
Russell 2000 futures listed as long as the CME wishes.
Period. Neither Russell or ICE have a say in the
matter. It is entirely up to the board of the new CME
Group whether they de-list or whether they do no
de-list. The key is IF the CME allows open interest to
begin to accumulate in a Dec 08 contract.
But the CME Group has the right in perpetuity--as long
as there is open interest--to keep listing and trading
the russell 2000 futures and minis.
Regarding ICE...poor electronics. Some of you may have
had the pleasure of reading Richard Dennis' full page
piece in the Chicago Sun Times. As a long-time large
volume trader that uses literally all the exchanges in
the world for his exposure, his opinion that ICE
wishes they were only 2 years behind the technology
that currently runs Globex. Some IT consultants in the
exchange world feel it would take ICE 3-4 years to
ramp up to anything near Globex's quality and ability
to handle volume of any measure.
The Russell had already been become less liquid--not
as measured by total volume or open interest but by
price spikes [when other US index products were not
even moving]. ICE is not going to be a good thing for
those of you that are stuck on the Russell. A
gentleman lost a war and took a fat wad of cash and
threw a hissy fit. And that, sadly, is what will
probably be written on the tombstone of the russell
futures when we all find a better, deeper broad index
to trade. What's it going to be? I do not know. Wish I
did.
Good trading, all.
Tim
--- Andrew Nopper <nopper@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> According to Russell/ICE, when the current licences
> expire they won't be
> renewed. As for the CME, they'll be delisting the
> Russell 2000 at the expiry
> of the Sept '08 contact. From my point of view, it's
> a mistake because I
> don't think that the ICE platform is as stable as
> Globex and volume may
> never reach current levels. As for the CME, they
> probably made the right
> choice - $50 Million is a lot for something that,
> according to Tim Morge, is
> worth a lot less.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of RB
> Sent: November 20, 2007 6:14 PM
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RT] E-mini Russell 2000
>
>
>
> Sorry.
>
> I was talking about another email. Something about
> a mistake for dropping
> it,
>
> and about they can do what they want.
>
> It was my understanding that they had to drop it by
> a certain date, because
> ICE owns it. So it probably had little to do with
> what they wanted or
> didn't want.
>
> But, I guess they didn't want it, because they
> didn't buy it. That may or
> may not have been a mistake.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Andrew Nopper <mailto:nopper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 8:09 AM
>
> Subject: RE: [RT] E-mini Russell 2000
>
>
>
> No, no mistake, I trade it on the CME each and every
> day. Yes, ICE has had
> its version for a few months now, but volume is
> around 700 contracts per day
> compared to the CME version which averages over
> 200,000 per day.
>
> Andrew
>
> From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of RB
> Sent: November 19, 2007 10:29 PM
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RT] E-mini Russell 2000
>
> You may be mistaken.
>
> I believe ICE got it months ago.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Mark Simms <mailto:marksimms@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:49 PM
>
> Subject: RE: [RT] E-mini Russell 2000
>
> Huge mistake IMHO for the CME dropping this volatile
> derivative.
>
> I don't quite "get it"...and told them so.
>
> But alas, they are now a monopoly and can do what
> they want....and have CFTC
> approval.
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Andrew Nopper
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 1:37 PM
> To: e-mini_traders_anon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; RealTraders
> Subject: [RT] E-mini Russell 2000
>
> The CME will be delisting the ER2 contract at the
> expiry of the Sept '08
> contract and ICE already has its version up and
> running. Volume, of course,
> is pathetic with barely 1000 contracts traded in a
> day, but that should
> change.
>
> My only knowledge of ICE is from the frequent alerts
> from Interactive
> Brokers that the ICE platform is down. I've seen no
> mention on these lists
> of any concerns by traders of the move to ICE,
> whether the volume will be
> the same as it is now, whether the CME will
> introduce a similar index and
> what impact that will have, etc., etc.
>
> Any thoughts anyone?
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/realtraders/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/realtraders/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:realtraders-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:realtraders-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> 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/
|