7/25/2009
What integrity to protect the small investors?
We want fairness, fair odds to trade in the stock markets, to win and lose fairly. We demand a fair trading system and fair treatment from the regulators. No loaded dice in the stockmarkets. These are the minimum conditions that small investors should expect from the stockmarket trading system. Allowing a trading system to be loaded against the small investors is not only unfair, but CRIMINAL. It is a crime amounting to cheating or collaborating with the cheats to rip off the small investors.
There is a very revealing article in the ST today, of course it must come from the gods in America, in Wall Street, from the New York Times. Our demigods and immortals are blind or ignorant to such revelations. Even if they do, they won’t make a whimper of it. The best they could do is to copy an article, like this article, and innocently push it out to the public. For what? To educate who?
High frequency trading moves in blink of an eye
‘Critics say it offers unfair advantage over traditional trading.’ The big boys, hedge funds, are making millions and billions by the use of sophisticated trading systems and computer programmes to trade against the small investors. And the verdict is simple. They win and the small investors lose. Programme trading has been put in practice for many years with the consent of the regulators who knowing very well that it is unfair to the small traders. They are accomplices to the crime of robbing and cheating the small guys. Period.
Not only that the big funds have technology on their side, the trading rules are also on their side, and aided by a big war chest, the unfair advantage they have over the small investors is unimaginable.
Why were they allowed to participate in an unfair game where integrity, honesty, transparency and fair play are fundamental principles of the whole trading system? They provide volumes, they churn up volumes, giving the fictitious impression that the market is active and trading with high volumes. It was all a big farce. It was all programme trading that contributes to the high volume, buying and selling at the same time. Syndicates manipulating the stockmarkets are frown upon and apprehended for cornering the market, for market manipulation. Is programme trading in the same league?
Where is the integrity to ensure a level playing field for all? Where is the integrity to protect the small guys? Or is it another case of immoral morality, exploiting the innocent small guys with a loaded dice?
Brookes duped? Not so, say ex students
This is the heading of an article in the ST about the case against Brookes Business School for issuing fake degrees from RMIT. The heading is appropriate. It is the school, Brookes, that was duped and in turn duped the students. It is the school that issued fake degrees. No human bean is involved or guilty of it. Brookes should be hanged.
Would this be the natural finding at the end of the case?
7/24/2009
New Singapore city waterfront
Stage for the National Day Parade
Goodbye Mr Chip
I read a copy of Wall Street Journal's article on the departure of Chip Goodyear and the reason given by Temasek is "differences regarding certain strategic issues." Could this bungling be avoided from day one and not happen at all? The assets managed by Temasek and the interests and objectives are bound to straddle across strategic and highly sensitive area. How could these be screened away from a foreigner who is the CEO of the organisation?
Could Goodyear be asking too much and wanting to know too much that the strain becomes unbearable? It is quite ridiculous to engage a foreigner to manage the strategic assets of a nation and believe that nothing sensitive will be divulged.
Now, can we expect a kiss and tell autobiography or movie in the near future? The royalty fees is going to be quite substantial and irresistible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)