MAS takes civil penalty actions against two for insider trading

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#11
(30-04-2015, 04:52 PM)Yoyo Wrote: Hi opmi

Thanks for your note.

So he can be queuing 300 lots to sell at $4.39, and at the same time queuing to buy at $4.38 and/or below to accumulate. The sell order serves to force other sellers to release at $4.38 or below as there is already a sell queue (unfulfilled) at $4.39, if they are eager to sell, thereby causing a false and misleading appearance (on the real supply). The wording "without any intention to fulfill the order" is irrelevant.

This makes more sense now. But I suspect this may have already been practised by some traders in their normal trading, to facilitate their share accumulation. Does this also qualify as creating false and misleading appearance in the market - false trading?

If someone book his sell order 300 lots at 4.39 , he has to honor his sell order. How to justify no intention to sell ?
“risk comes from not knowing what you’re doing.”
I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars: I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over.
Reply
#12
I wonder if they leak the news in forum etc through a 3rd party IP via internet cafe or something, and immediately place order to buy, would it still be considered as insider trading?
Reply
#13
http://www.wongpartnership.com/index.php...nload/1005

Read this.
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Reply
#14
Guys placing a false and misleading trade is NOT insider trading. It is charged under market manipulation just like month/ quarter end price mark up.

These type of "trick" is common occurance but it's a matter of whether you are big fish enough for regulators to catch. And now with advent of computers they actually computerise this "trick" into a dumb algo called "Cancel if close"

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/20...lash-crash
By Matt Levine
(Bloomberg View) -- Hey look, they caught the guy who
caused the flash crash of 2010! His name is Navinder Singh
Sarao, and he lives in London and in 2009 he asked someone to
help him build a spoofing robot:
On or about June 12, 2009, SARAO sent an email to a
representative of his FCM in which he explained that he
"need[ed] to get in touch with a [] technician [at the company
that provided his trading software ("Trading Software Company
#1")] that will be able to programme for me extra features on
[the software]," namely, "a cancel if close function, so that an
order is canceled if the market gets close."

Sarao was trading E-mini S&P 500 futures contracts, but he
wanted a more convenient way to not trade them, so he e-mailed
his FCM (futures commission merchant, i.e. broker) for help
automating that. The idea is that he would put in a big order to
sell a whole bunch of futures at a price a few ticks higher than
the best offer. So probably he wouldn't sell any futures, since
he wasn't offering the best price. But he had to keep constantly
updating his orders to keep them a few ticks higher than the
best offer, to make sure that he didn't accidentally sell any
futures as the market moved. And that's a bit of a pain, so he
programmed an algorithm to do it for him. Though he also seems
to have done similar things manually, to support the algorithm's
efforts, or to stave off boredom while the algorithm did its
thing.
The point of this -- according to the federal prosecutors,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, who are not happy with Sarao -- is that by
placing all these fake sell orders, Sarao would artificially
drive down the price of the E-mini futures. It's classic
spoofing: He'd place a lot of big orders to sell, everyone else
would say, "Ooh look at all those big sell orders, I'd better
sell too," they'd sell, the market would go down, he'd buy, he'd
turn off his algorithm, everyone else would say, "Oh hey never
mind, things are great again, there are no more big sell
orders," they'd buy, the price would go back up, and Sarao would
sell the futures he'd bought at a lower price a moment ago.
We've talked about spoofing before, and I've always been a
little troubled that it works, but what can I say, it works.
On May 6, 2010, according to the authorities, it worked a
little too well: Sarao did such a good job of driving down the
price of the E-mini future that he caused a flash crash in which
"investors saw nearly $1 trillion of value erased from U.S.
stocks in just minutes."
I'll put some more details downstairs
but honestly they are boring details. Sarao traded a ton of E-
mini futures during the flash crash -- "62,077 E-mini S&P
contracts with a notional value of $3.5 billion" -- and made
"approximately $879,018 in net profits" that day, or a profit of
about 2.5 basis points on the notional amount, which I guess
isn't bad for one day's work. He did this by, basically, putting
in orders to sell thousands of contracts away from the best
offer. Those orders were never executed, or intended to be
executed, but they tricked people into thinking that there was a
lot more selling interest than there actually was. That combined
with a collapse in buying interest -- at one point Sarao's fake
sell orders alone "were almost equal to the entire buyside of
the Order Book" -- to create a collapse in prices. He profited
from those collapsing prices by selling high and buying back
lower. It's a pretty straightforward spoofing story.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two months later, he is said to have told his broker in an email that the CME had again been in touch, and this time he had "told ‘em to kiss my ass”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finan...-2010.html
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply
#15
I was reading the news y'day. Surprisingly there was no head and tail to this insider trading news.

In the first place, they never reveal where on earth did both got price sensitive info...

Anyway, I agree that there was leakages even in Olam and perhaps CMA... are they doing anything to it.

Also I haven't forgotten the infamous rise and collapse of the penny Trio... what on earth are the policemen doing... more than 18 months of silience...
Reply
#16
Thought SGX also agreed on market makers who put up sell and buy orders ?
“risk comes from not knowing what you’re doing.”
I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars: I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over.
Reply
#17
no wonder SPC shot from 3+ to 5+ in that short time in 2009..i rem in the forum back then, there were already speculation in the market that something is leaking...

it either shows keppel corp side or SPC or chinapetrol governance over inside information..
unlikely is chinapetrol as they then small presence in sg
Reply
#18
(30-04-2015, 06:21 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: I was reading the news y'day. Surprisingly there was no head and tail to this insider trading news.

In the first place, they never reveal where on earth did both got price sensitive info...

Anyway, I agree that there was leakages even in Olam and perhaps CMA... are they doing anything to it.

Also I haven't forgotten the infamous rise and collapse of the penny Trio... what on earth are the policemen doing... more than 18 months of silience...

GG , Olam , so many months already , no news on investigation ? Why ???
“risk comes from not knowing what you’re doing.”
I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars: I look around for 1-foot bars that I can step over.
Reply
#19
^^ cause this SPC case took 5 years?
Before you speak, listen. Before you write, think. Before you spend, earn. Before you invest, investigate. Before you criticize, wait. Before you pray, forgive. Before you quit, try. Before you retire, save. Before you die, give. –William A. Ward

Think Asset-Business-Structure (ABS)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)