Inside the Flash Crash Report
by ilene - October 16th, 2010 7:43 pm
Pam Martens points out that in patching up May 6th’s market meltdown by breaking certains trades, “busts” only applied to trades occurring between 2:40 p.m. and 3 p.m. when the stock had moved 60% or more from its 2:40 p.m. price. "The busts that were allowed covered 5.5 million shares and two-thirds of these trades had been executed at less than $1.00… half of the share volume in these bizarre trades came from just two firms and half the time they were exclusively trading with each other." The report – amazingly – never names these firms which had their own bad trades undone by that controversial decision that left average investors with large losses. - Ilene
By PAM MARTENS, originally published at CounterPunch
.jpg)
The breathlessly awaited government report that promised to shore up public confidence by explaining why the stock market briefly plunged 998 points on May 6, with hundreds of stocks momentarily losing 60 per cent or more of their value, was released last Friday, October 1. Its neatly crafted finger-pointing to a small Kansas mutual fund firm which has been around since 1937, was immediately embraced as mystery solved by the stalwarts of the corporate press. This was done with only slightly less zeal than bestowed on the story of Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction spun out of the George W. Bush administration.
The New York Times headlined with “Single Sale Worth $4.1 Billion Led to Flash Crash.” The Washington Post went with “How One Automated Trade Led to Stock Market Flash Crash.” The Wall Street Journal led with “How a Trading Algorithm Went Awry.” Hundreds of similar headlines followed in similarly expensive media real estate. But as with the rush to war on bogus intel, the corporate press may be further damaging its credibility with the American people by ignoring the dangerous market structure that emerges in a closer reading of this report.
The so-called Flash Crash report was the product of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and consists of 104 pages of data that is unintelligible to most Americans, including the media that are so confidently reporting on it. It names no names, including the firm it is fingering as the key culprit in setting off the crash. Earlier media reports say the firm is…
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn 
del.icio.us
DiggWeekend Wipe-Out, the Second Wave!
by Phil - January 29th, 2010 5:57 pm
Another week another 100 points lower.
Yep, that’s all it was, we lost all of 100 points more than last week, when we fell from 10,725 to 10,172 (553 points) and this week we dropped from Friday’s Dow close of 10,172 all the way down to 10,067 yet you would think the world had come to an end to hear the media and the traders freaking out. I’m not going to try to explain it, I can’t. Maybe it’s because going into last week we were very bearish but, starting on the 22nd, we let ourselves finally get a little more bullish AND THE MARKET BETRAYED US!
How could the market not zoom right back up? It always zooms right back up, doesn’t it? As I said a week ago Friday: "Boy, when sentiment shifts – it REALLY shifts!" My closing comment on Friday the 22nd was "Back to cash but leaving disaster hedges, which are looking great now as this is shaping up to be some disaster" and our weekend "Global Chart Review" showed us to be at some very key inflection points, letting us go well prepared into this week:
Manic Monday Market Movement
My Jets lost on Sunday so I was not in the best of moods on Monday. My outlook that morning was: "We still have our disaster hedges in case things get worse but, on the whole, we’re expecting a 1% bounce in the very least off our 5% lines (anything less will be a bad sign)." We were pretty much at the 5% rule on Friday’s close so we focused on the bounce we wanted to achieve in order to get more bullish.
I noted that the levels we were looking for were not exactly 1% retraces (see post for reasons) and our target retraces were: Dow 10,300, S&P 1,105, Nasdaq 2,225, NYSE 7,100 and Russell 625. What were the highs for the week on those indexes? Dow 10,310 (+10), S&P 1,103 (-2), Nasdaq 2,227 (+2), NYSE 7,098 (-2) and Russell 621 (-4). So that’s a net of +4 points out of 21,355 points worth of predictions on the retrace, accuracy to within .019% - not a bad showing for our patented 5% rule.
Please, under NO circumstances subscribe to our daily newsletter, where you would have this kind of information every morning and DO NOT get an Alert Membership where we send out our amazingly accurate watch levels to you every day. Having this sort of advanced information…
Thrill-Ride Thursday, Finally Some Earnings!
by Phil - July 9th, 2009 7:24 am
Wheee, what a day yesterday!
Of course we hit it out of the ballpark with our ICE puts as that stock melted so fast it turned to vapors (or at least the calls did!). Fortunately, we had the puts and the Aug $95 puts I mentioned in the morning post, that we had taken at $6.20 on Tuesday, opened at $8.50 and ran up to $14.35 (up 131%) at the day’s end – all without a significant pullback to stop us out. Since we LOVE to go back to a well that’s paying off, we jumped on the Aug $90 puts for $3 as our first trade of the day at 9:39 and those finished the day at $7.35 (up 145%), not bad for our 3rd play on the same stock in 48 hours!
The best thing about having 100%+ put side winners in a downturn is it gives us free reign to speculate on the upside. Since we had a bottomish view of the downturn yesterday, we were able to use the cushion provided by the gains on ICE (as well as our longer-term DIA and USO short positions) to establish a bunch of speculative upside positions on stocks we thought were bottoming. The key to this strategy is position sizing and virtual portfolio management. If you invest, for example, $2,000 per position and are willing to take 20% losses as a stop-out, then having a 100% winner on ICE (and we had 3!) allows you to take 5 bullish position as the total risk on $10,000 is the $2,000 you gained on the bear side. We don’t just mindlessly flip-flop of course. In fact, it’s been more than a month since we picked up bullish positions for more than a quick trade and we’re not SURE these are going to work but, since we had the winning put plays, it’s a good place to make a stand – dipping our toes in the bullish waters once again.
I mentioned our brand-new $5,000 Virtual Portfolio yesterday and our first play was a net .71 spread on AA where we bought the $7.50 calls for $1.75 and sold the $9 calls for $1.04. On yesterday’s dip, we had the opportunity to take out the $9 calls for .70, which was a .35 profit and left us with the naked $7.50 calls at net $1.40, with a break-even at $8.90. We tried to sell them for…
German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Chinese
Philip R. Davis is a founder Phil's Stock World, a stock and options trading site that teaches the art of options trading to newcomers and devises advanced strategies for expert traders...
Ilene is editor and affiliate program
coordinator for PSW. She manages the Favorites backup site
(