High frequency trader fined more than $3m by regulators

BBC 22 July 2013-07-23

Financial regulators in the UK and US have fined a high frequency trader and his firm more than $3m (£1.95m) for manipulating commodities markets.

The UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) fined Michael Coscia $903,176, while two US regulators levied the rest on him and his company, Panther Energy….

It is the first time the FCA has taken action against a high frequency trader.

Between 6 September 2011 and 18 October 2011, US-based Mr Coscia used algorithmic programs that he developed to create false orders for oil and gas on trading exchanges in the US and UK.

He made about $1.4m during the period using a computer program which placed and quickly cancelled trades to manipulate the price of commodities, an illegal process known as "layering" and "spoofing".

Tracey McDermott, the FCA's director of enforcement and financial crime, said: "Mr Coscia was cheating the market and other participants.

"High frequency trading and the use of algorithms are an important and commonplace part of the markets nowadays but in this case these techniques were deliberately designed to abuse the market, undermining its integrity.

"This is unacceptable, which is why we have taken tough action to punish Coscia and deprive him of any benefit he acquired."…

High frequency trading is coming under increasing scrutiny by regulators. Automated trading was blamed for exacerbating the "flash crash" on Wall Street in May 2010, when blue chips went briefly into freefall, and then recovered almost as quickly.

There have been many reports and complaints about this fraudulent trading methods and how dangerous it is other than cheating other innocent investors. The only reason that they are allowed to practise in stock markets in US and UK is because the lawmakers and regulators have been bought and paid to shut up.

Would HFT be allowed in the Singapore Stock Exchange? Are the Singapore Govt and the regulators fully briefed and understand that this kind of trading is basically cheating the ignorant and innocent investors and would not only cause them to lose their pants, it would eventually destroy the confidence of the stock market for fair play and providing a level playing field.

Would the authority and regulators approve this unfair system that could cause more damage than the Lehman Bonds and toxic notes? The risks and dangers of this trading method are all there to see. Anyone who chooses to ignore them must ultimately be responsible for the damages and fallout when big damages are inflicted on the investors and the stock market. The people who authorise and approve HFT cannot plead ignorance and must be fully held accountable and responsible for full consequences of this decision. The Govt would have to share a big part of the blame.

Everyone has been warned and there is all the time to stop HFT from entering the trading system. Would there be anyone responsible enough to pull the plug and put a stop to this self inflicted impending carnage?

Prudence man!

Sinkies are now advised to be prudent and not to buy too many over priced properties. Would anyone want to advise Sinkies not to be warded in expensive hospital wards that they cannot afford to pay or would empty their little savings in their Medisave accounts? Would anyone want to tell Sinkies to buy flats that are within their means or even smaller so that they have more money left? Cannot? Why cannot? Oh, because the law says you must buy big flats if you have more money or stay in more expensive wards. But I want to be prudent can or not?

This is the kind of logic is like head I win tail you lose. Who is best in using such logic to con the daft Sinkies of their money by forcing them to spend more than they should and then cry, be prudent, be prudent?

Colin Tan, the property expert from Chesterton, said that this call for prudence is a few years too late when the prices are already so high and many Sinkies have already invested.

I think all the calls for prudence is unnecessary. The property prices will continue to go up and all the Sinkies and foreign investors will stand to make a lot of profit before 2030. They will be more foreigners coming here and need to buy a place to stay. And they will be a lot of hot money to be parked here in this absolutely safe financial centre and low tax haven.

And if not enough is coming in, just relax the immigration laws and they will all be flooding in. No need to be prudent. Go, grab whatever properties available out there. The population is going to 6.9m and you know how many more properties are needed. The present available properties will simply be not enough.

Makan dalam toilet!

Who in his right mind would make children eat their lunch inside a toilet? This is a clear sign of primitive traits and the kinds of hellish things such people are capable of doing if in authority. And whoever decided that children should eat in the toilet should be punished as well.

And there was a case in Dubai, I think, of an European woman who was raped by the locals. She made a police report of the rape. You know what? Instead of going after the rapists, the police arrested and jailed her for having illegal sex.

How can you respect this kind of law and people?

The lesser I said of such vile acts the better. Thank God we don’t do this to our minorities.

Champerty is now legal and acceptable (Correction, my mistake)

The latest ruling in the High Courts by the Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Andrew Phang on Champerty is most welcomed by the people and the legal fraternity. The practice of allowing lawyers to be paid only on winning a case was illegal in the past but due to the overriding circumstances of extremely forbidding legal fees this has to change. Otherwise many people who cannot afford the high legal fees will be robbed of justice in our world class legal system. It then would be like only the rich can buy justice and the poor will be robbed of justice, punished by injustice.

There are other issues for making this practice illegal in the past such as lawyers demanding excessive payouts and leading to conflicts of interest, or frivolous litigation. The latter, frivolous litigation, is now the hobby of the rich, knowing that they can threaten the poor with Sue and the poor would have to say sorry even if not guilty, no money to pay for legal fees. Such concerns can always be taken care of in modernity when the clients can seek redress should they think they have been cheated. The legal system, the legal profession, must make provisions for unhappy clients to have an avenue for mediation and conciliation when there is a dispute with the mighty legal professionals on legal fees. There must be transparency, honesty and integrity in the legal profession if this change is to work.

The change will now make justice available to all, including those who cannot afford the legal fees. Maybe the fees can be worked into a case on a contractual basis and open to scrutiny and investigation by the legal profession and the courts. This may make things more transparent and equitable and not be subject to abuse and discriminatory practices of foul lawyers.

This is definitely a good thing and the rich and powerful are less likely to take advantage of the poor and weak now.

PS. My apologies. I thought I read the paper yesterday saying that this was a big change in our legal system. I re read and see this statement, '

“We wish to emphasize that until and unless there is a change in the law, lawyers who enter into champertous agreements can expect to face at least a substantial period of suspension,” Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon wrote in the court’s 45-page decision, “and depending on the factual matrix this period could well exceed the present imposition of six months.”



Read more: http://www.law.com/jsp/law/international/LawArticleIntl.jsp?id=1202611925480&Singapores_Top_Court_Suspends_Lawyer_for_Champerty#ixzz2ZvN189oV

Hong Kong Brokers Drive Cabs as Competition Forces Locals Out

By Eleni Himaras and Stephanie Tong

July 22 (Bloomberg) -- Hong Kong, Asia’s second-biggest stock market, may see 25 percent of its local brokerages close as trading and fees plunge, and competition from banks intensifies, a securities association said.

The number of local broking firms may decline to 300 from about 400 in the next five years, Mofiz Chan, a spokesman of the Hong Kong Securities & Futures Professionals Association, said in a telephone interview.

“There are many people taking part-time jobs or completely moving out of the industry,” Chan said. “Many of our members have needed to shift into other jobs such as security, taxi drivers or tutors for primary school students.”

Fees have dropped since bourse operator Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing Ltd. in 2003 removed a brokerage commission floor of 0.25 percent of the value of transactions, squeezing profits for brokers as mainland Chinese rivals expand operations. The competition has claimed foreign equity traders, with South Korea’s Mirae Asset Securities Co. and Japan’s Daiwa Securities Group Inc., among brokerages that have cut jobs.

Eleven brokerages have ceased trading this year, according to filings posted on the website of the Hong Kong stock exchange. King Fook Securities Co., established in 1971, said it will close at the end of this month.
“King Fook Securities was one of the founding members of the stock exchange before it became listed,” parent King Fook Holdings Ltd. said in an e-mailed reply to questions. “We’ve been seeking to keep operating despite booking losses. High rentals and labour costs, together with the fact that banks are offering zero commission have made it difficult for us to survive.”...

The above is part of a Bloomberg article on the pathetic state of the stockbroking industry. And the Hongkong Govt is not thinking that this is bad and is not doing anything about it. The crippled stockbroking industry is already limping and now the unfair competition by the banks, using their strategic advantage to offer no commission for trading is allowed to go on. Where is the anti unfair competition authority in Hongkong to stop such hideous and unfair practices? For the benefits of a few big funds, and the bottomline of the Exchange, the authorities and regulators are willing to allow them to dictate how the stockbroking system should operate and leading to its eventual collapse.

None of these jokers bothers to look ahead and ask what would happen if the stockbroking industry goes kaput? A dead or critically ill stockbroking industry will severely affect the whole banking and finance industry and other related industries and many jobs.

The Singapore stockbroking industry is having a mirror image of its counterpart in Hongkong. And it is likely and highly probable that the Singapore industry will turn turtle ahead of Hongkong. Singapore is much smaller and there are fewer broking houses and fewer remisiers in the industry. And many are barely making enough for their pocket money.

Maybe it is already a known fact that the stockbroking industry is dying and there is nothing worth saving this industry. Let it be, let it die. Can Hongkong and Singapore still be financial centres with sick or non existence stock markets? Is the stock market a vital pillar to the whole financial set up or unnecessary and as long as the banks prosper, there is no need for stock markets?