Subject: File No. S7-02-10
From: Suzanne Shatto

April 17, 2013

Copyrighted material redacted. Author cites Holley, Elliot. "Angry TradeTech Delegates Clash over HFT" Banking Technology 16 Apr. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2013. Available at

several good articles on this source. thank you to the tabb forum for printing the news. i weigh in on the side of themis trading. i think HFT is an anomaly caused by the regulators abdicating enforcement. HFT receives several favors from the financial market and i don't think it's permanent. it is a capital outflow from the market, a parasite. the parasites cannot provide a market for the investment side, which is why the buy side is shunning the capital markets. retail investors know the sting of HFT.

as far as the term "liquidity", what is liquidity if they shortsell stock to collect the buy-side profit? they don't "provide" liquidity, but rather charge investors. they don't provide a service that the buy-side wants, so the buy-side stays away. winners and losers? i predict that the market will get very much tougher for HFT because their stale claims do not attract investors. the HFT are shortsellers. they begin the day by selling into the bid, reducing demand, and hope to recover their position throughout the trading day. locating stock to borrow does not borrow stock.

it is the investor that provides "liquidity" by giving shortsellers cash. by taking $ out of the capital markets, they are sequestering cash, transferring out of the stock market to offshore $.

the velocity of $ in market economies are trending lower, reflecting this capital transfer. in other words, any market that allows HFT to exist is leading their citizens to suffer.

should the market subsidize HFT? i don't think so.
stop the exchange rebates, reduce the trading accommodations, and the HFT has to fade away.
the HFT has no "right" to exist and be accommodated.
stop the music and let's see who has chairs.