Do you want to elaborate on which specific changes listed in the article are, in your opinion, beneficial to institutional investors at the expense of retail investors, and how?
> The U.S. House Committee on Financial Services on Friday called for the SEC, along with other regulators, to do more to protect the markets from similar events. read more
> The impetus for change came from the so-called "Reddit rally" of January 2021, in which GameStop Corp (GME.N) and other "meme stocks" popular on social media surged to extreme highs on buying from investors trading heavily through Robinhood (HOOD.O) and other commission-free retail brokerages.
> The intense volatility led to big losses for hedge funds that had bet against the meme stocks.
They don't like that the general populace was able to damage hedge funds, so they're making changes to stop it. I don't really know the changes technically, but the intent is right there.
That's just color commentary from the author of this piece. If you read the rest of the article, the specific changes proposed by the SEC are outlined.
I don't know where this method of argumentation came from, but it's obnoxious and I'm over it. There are even soyjaks for this. Either you don't know and you're being lazy (I don't think this is the case), or you do know and you've generated an asymmetric work request for op that you could've answered and that left unanswered by him casts doubt on his argument. If you have a case to make, make it, instead of this nonsense DoS attack. This is not a defense of op's position.
Your outrage is unwarranted. The proposed changes are:
1) Limiting PFOF because it creates possible conflicts of interest.
2) Limiting "gamification" of trading via engagement prompts.
3) Adding sub-penny prices to exchanges to harmonize them with market makers. This is to encourage more orders to be sent to exchanges instead of market makers.
How are any of these things capitulating to institutional investors?
Izkata|3 years ago
> The U.S. House Committee on Financial Services on Friday called for the SEC, along with other regulators, to do more to protect the markets from similar events. read more
> The impetus for change came from the so-called "Reddit rally" of January 2021, in which GameStop Corp (GME.N) and other "meme stocks" popular on social media surged to extreme highs on buying from investors trading heavily through Robinhood (HOOD.O) and other commission-free retail brokerages.
> The intense volatility led to big losses for hedge funds that had bet against the meme stocks.
They don't like that the general populace was able to damage hedge funds, so they're making changes to stop it. I don't really know the changes technically, but the intent is right there.
sumy23|3 years ago
kcl|3 years ago
sumy23|3 years ago
1) Limiting PFOF because it creates possible conflicts of interest.
2) Limiting "gamification" of trading via engagement prompts.
3) Adding sub-penny prices to exchanges to harmonize them with market makers. This is to encourage more orders to be sent to exchanges instead of market makers.
How are any of these things capitulating to institutional investors?
Hasu|3 years ago
I'm pretty sure that it came from Socrates.