Explain the mechanism. If I opened on one market maker, how can I now close on another market maker? - page 8

New comment
 
Реter Konow:
Well, well...
You know, when I looked at it, it really blew my mind how different it turns out to be. I guess that's what makes us different.
 
Mihail Marchukajtes:
You're right, I've been in the market longer than you and I've been trading ONLY on a real account since 2007. I have never been able to withdraw from the virtual one, so I thought about it. :-)

I mean, you know you shouldn't trade those funny pictures in real life, don't you?

 
Mihail Marchukajtes:
You know, when I looked it up, I was blown away by how different it turned out to be. I guess that's where we differ.
Our views coincide in our understanding of the role of MM in the market, but the difference is that I consider it a priori superfluous and detrimental to the market as a whole, and the market model with it is abnormal, while you, on the contrary, consider it to be the order of the day.
 
Mihail Marchukajtes:
You know, when I looked at it, I was amazed at how different it was. I guess that's what makes us different.

I would have been stunned if a DC rep had explicitly said in his video that they are a kitchen.

And Finam telling me how they "hedge with futures" - I'm not fuming.

 
Дмитрий:

I mean, you know you shouldn't trade those funny pictures in real life, don't you?

You are crazy, Dimitri, I look in a book and see a figurine :-) I have only been trading real since 2007. Do you understand? You know why, because I have a good method in general. I'm not going to lie for the last three years, but in general I don't fly in the clouds but I soberly assess WHO the market is, who its participants are and what information triggers price movements. And yes yes I look at the market in the context of a cause-effect model. Cause - Effect. Many people just confuse these concepts and try to predict the cause in many cases. And they get a corresponding result. In the market, the main thing is not to deceive your neighbour, but not to deceive yourself!!!!!!
 
Реter Konow:
Our views coincide in our understanding of the role of MM in the market, but differ in that I consider it a priori superfluous and harmful to the market as a whole, and the market model with it is abnormal, while you, on the contrary, consider it to be the order of the day.
Unfortunately, without MM there will be no market. It will be, but it will be very sluggish and one can say that it doesn't even exist. So its role is quite significant. We are talking about liquidity, not that the market maker is supposedly pushing the market. No he doesn't, he only satisfies demand and organises supply. But the supply/demand imbalance pushes the price in one direction or another. There are market-neutral strategies that do not care which way the market goes. The only thing that matters is the direction the market takes. But you don't know about them, do you?
 
Mihail Marchukajtes:

Theoretically, with the normal organisation of a broker and the exchange as a whole, each client trades only with market makers and no one else. If you want to buy, the market will sell to you; if you want to sell at the same time, it will buy from you. And he will do it, not the other participant of the market. That is, the work is done exclusively through the Market Maker, and not directly people make meetings. This is in the classic sense of market organization. A kind of universal market participant who will fulfill your every whim within the confines of the market....

...

Do you understand where this market model is going?

1. It means that ONE has an absolute advantage over all the others, and sees ALL their positions, because he is the PUBLIC counterparty

2. Can move the market in any favorable direction, because it is a liquidity provider and UNIDENTIFIEDLY responsible for the volatility.

3. can "multiply" marketplaces, crushing the number of traders on each and reducing the load on itself.

4. Can lead traders away from the real price space of fractional numbers, where the echo of world events does not reach, and where no one but him may influence the rate.

5. To hold and breed traders like "hamsters in a jar".


How was this model born? - Naturally, with the advent of the digital age, electronic marketplaces and automated trading systems. Before, this was technologically impossible. Now, precisely because of such "technological marvels", the market runs the risk of rapid stagnation. That seems to be the case.

 
Mihail Marchukajtes:
Unfortunately without MM there will be no market. It will be, but it will be very sluggish and you can say that it doesn't even exist. So its role is quite important. We are talking about liquidity, not that the market maker is supposedly pushing the market. No he doesn't, he only satisfies demand and organises supply. But the supply/demand imbalance pushes the price in one direction or another. There are market-neutral strategies that do not care which way the market goes. The only thing that matters is the direction the market takes. But you don't know about them, do you?

1.A sluggish market MUST die, by its own law. Therefore, if the market is sluggish and MM is needed, it is no longer a market, but a perverted form of it.

2. Have you ever wondered how exactly it exists as a common counterparty, and yet, does not interfere with price movements? That's impossible in principle.

 
Реter Konow:

Do you understand where this Market Model is going?

1. That ONE has an absolute advantage over the others and sees ALL their positions because it is the OVERALL counterparty.

2. Can move the market in any favorable direction, because it is a liquidity provider and UNIDENTIFIEDLY responsible for the volatility. 3.

3. he can "multiply" marketplaces, crushing the number of traders on each and reducing the load on himself on each.

4. Lead traders away from the real price space of fractional numbers, where the echo of world events does not reach and where no one but him can influence the rate.

5. To hold and breed traders like "hamsters in a jar".


How was this model born? - Naturally, with the advent of the digital age, electronic marketplaces and automated trading systems. Before, this was technologically impossible. Now, precisely because of such "marvels of technology", the market is at risk of rapid stagnation. It looks like it will.

Peter, I'm sorry, but our discussion has reached a deadlock, because you are somewhat lacking in knowledge about the organization of the exchange and market. Seriously, I do not want to offend you, but first read the works of Tvardovsky, who explains much of what you are wrong, and then let's talk. I've said it all!!!!!

I especially liked "Can move the market in any direction", it's funny :-)

 
Реter Konow:

1.A sluggish market MUST die, by its own law. Therefore, if the market is sluggish and MM is needed, it is no longer a market, but a perverted form of it.

2. Have you ever wondered how exactly it exists as a common counterparty, and yet, does not interfere with price movements? That's impossible in principle.

Fuck, let's do it again. He's trading the calendar spread. What is that? So go and read it first and then tell us in front of the whole class how you memorised the material.
123456789101112
New comment