Why does the price move? The answer is here!!! - page 24

New comment
 
Avals:

They have to. Liquidity providers quote their clients, as do DIs for example. And even a normal brokerage company is always obliged to give quotes and execute orders - it is only a question of conditions.

The brokerage company is obliged to give quotes and execute orders... The brokerage company is not obliged to do its own as well as the client of the brokerage company.
 
KimIV:
How come? I send a Buy order and what? They can't sell me? They can't...
It was about obliging you or someone else to make a new buy/sell order. And existing bids of course have to be executed, but they too were made on their own accord, not on obligation.
 
Andrei01:
The point was to oblige you or someone else to make a new buy/sell order. Existing bids should of course be honoured, but they were also made on your own volition, not on obligation.
No, I was talking about the other party's obligation. I remember what I was talking about. You've turned it upside down!
 
Andrei01:
The brokerage company is obliged to give quotations and execute other people's orders... It is not obliged to do its own, neither is the client of the brokerage company.

By executing someone else's order, the brokerage company or liquidity provider opens an opposite transaction, as it is a counterparty. Thus, it executes the transaction irrespective of its own will, but on the client's will.
 
KimIV:
No, I was talking about the other side's obligations. I remember what I was talking about. You are the one who reversed it!
Didn't you say that if MM made a buy order for example, he would then be obliged to make the opposite order?
 
Avals:
That is, he makes the trade regardless of his own wishes, but based on the client's wishes.

This is not what we are discussing now, but the hypothesis that the MM is supposedly obliged to make some new bid based on his previous bid.

 
Andrei01:
Didn't you say that if the MM made a buy order, for example, he would then be obliged to make the opposite order?
No, I didn't... MM sells because they buy, not the other way around. And is obliged to buy because he gets a hint - take it back!
 
KimIV:
No, I don't... MM sells because they buy, not the other way round. And he is obliged to buy because he gets it - take it back!
Who is the MM according to your model? Can you give me an example?
 
Andrei01:

This is not what we are discussing now, but the hypothesis that MM is supposedly obliged to make some new application based on his previous one.

In fact, we are discussing the reasons for price movement here. I argue that the price is driven by MM where it is profitable for him. By agreement with other MMs, with governments of countries, MM can temporarily take losses, i.e. move the price against himself, but will surely win it back later, to his advantage.
 
KimIV:
No, I don't... MM sells because they buy, not the other way round. And is obliged to buy because he's being sucked in - take it back!
Buying and selling in forex happens through voluntary bids. Are you saying that some market participant is obliged to make a trade on an order he did not submit?
1...171819202122232425262728293031...36
New comment