Trading Govt considers increasing trading competition

Discussion in 'Share Investing Strategies, Theories & Education' started by Simon Hampel, 12th Sep, 2008.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
  1. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    3rd Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    12,414
    Location:
    Sydney
    Lateline Business - 11/09/2008: Govt considers increasing trading competition

    Lateline Business - 12-Sep-2008
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 17th Sep, 2016
    Simon Hampel, 12th Sep, 2008
    #1
  2. AsxBroker

    AsxBroker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    1,075
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    Most insto's do off-market crossings so it won't affect the market.
    It sounds like they are trying to get into Reuters space of insto trades away from the market.

    They are still going to have to settle via CHESS...

    We'll see how they go :)
     
    AsxBroker, 12th Sep, 2008
    #2
  3. Tropo

    Tropo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    2,303
    Location:
    NSW
    Estimating market share is full of grey areas. For instance, some brokers like GSJBW don’t differentiate between their institutional and retail business and lump all their trades together. Macquarie, UBS and Citigroup, along with many others, have separate codes for their retail and institutional business, although they tend to combine them when estimating their own market share.

    Another piece of obfuscation has been introduced with the removal last November of brokers’ identity from the SEATS trading on the ASX.

    Now you can only find out who has made the trades after the market has closed – and even then, the daily report purchased from the ASX will only show the total market share of each broker for the day.

    More: insto - Australian finance and capital markets - Broking - Red Hot Brokers
     
    Tropo, 12th Sep, 2008
    #3
  4. AsxBroker

    AsxBroker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    1,075
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    Hi Tropo,

    I totally agree, though with Participant IDs (PID) it is more a thing about owning a few. GSJBW trades under 3613, if they really wanted to they could do the same as Macquarie which use their retail 2442 and insto 1572 (I think, I know it's 15--, I left in Dec 2001 and they started using the BT PID after buying the business from the US mob that bought them). Remembering that GSJBW own GS Australia so they could use their old PID to trade if they wanted to. UBS is quite small in the retail space and Citibank bought Salomon Smith Barney.

    Reality is that PIDs cost money so they might do it for that reason, who knows? :) Also sending a CHESS message from two PIDs increases your costs when you are crossing trades from one PID to another PID whereas if you just move stock from one HIN to another HIN in the same PID you only send one CHESS message.

    I definitely agree with the obfuscation...isn't it fair that everyone can see what is happen? The market expects companies that are traded on the exchange to be clear and transparent though it's ok for the ASX not to be???

    Interesting that Credit Suisse came up on the report as they have an eensy weensy retail business so it must be mainly insto trades.

    Cheers,

    Dan
     
    AsxBroker, 12th Sep, 2008
    #4