Confused about stop hunting | Page 5 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Stop Hunting 274 replies

Stop Hunting 11 replies

Stop Hunting? 18 replies

Stop Hunting and Demos 1 reply

damn oanda stop hunting my account 1 reply

Confused about stop hunting

  • #81
  • Sep 24, 2011 2:45am Sep 24, 2011 2:45am
Here's plan B; DS and ya'all will lead us to the promised land. I will just follow 'cuz i know ya'all r right.

I recently read that, according to GOV stats, about 30% of FX COMPANIES are profitable.
It's plain to see now that the majority of that 30% are here on FF. I don't know how i could have missed that. All I need to do is follow the ones who say they are great (never mind any real proof) AND SUCCESS IS MINE !!!

Now I have found the truth.

Thank You ALL !!!
  • #82
  • Sep 24, 2011 3:20am Sep 24, 2011 3:20am
Egads I hope you decide to research liquidity and the price impact of orders one day. You'll realize how much of an asshat you sound like.

You're not calling out a guru. People aren't giving you funny looks because they feel the need to defend DS. They are looking at you funny because you've displayed that you lack a basic understanding of how exchanges function on a mechanical level(multiple times).

Let me repeat that so it's clear.

If someone wants to they can choose to study how markets operate on a mechanical level. It's obvious to anyone who has studied structure that you have not given enough study time or enough thought into the subject. You sound like a blonde trying to talk about car engines with a mechanic. She doesn't realize how stupid she sounds. The mechanic sure does though.

I'm not sure if you're ego will let you handle that. I just thought you should know how you're being observed. No one here is defending DS because they worship him. You're telling us 2 + 2 = 5. You deserved to be told it's not 5.
Cautiously optimistic. . .
  • #83
  • Sep 24, 2011 3:28am Sep 24, 2011 3:28am
can someone fix my bullshit math for me....

if each day $4 trillion flows through the market, and each minute there are on average 100 ticks on eur/usd (maybe this is being too generous?), and there are 1440 minutes in a day, then...

roughly on average there are ticks per day of : 100 * 1440
= 144,000

$4,000,000,000,000 spread over a day is : 4,000,000,000,000 / 144,000
~ $28M moving through per tick

but this is only just for eur/usd, and doesn't even take into consideration the other currencies that no-doubt make up this "$4 trillion per day market", and so that figure would then again be divided amongst "the rest of the market".

i'm sure i've stuffed this up completely, so someone please school me.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #84
  • Sep 24, 2011 3:47am Sep 24, 2011 3:47am
Nubcake some things to take into consideration. Eurotrash explained it well earlier in the thread. Egads might have you believe other wise but these are actual facts and relevant to anyone wanting to come to a reasonable conclusion.

Quote

  1. The spot market is about $1.5 trillion a day (BIS 2010).
  2. A largepercentage of that volume is "hot potato trading" by dealers (Lyons). Therefore a given transaction tends to result in a lot more "volume" than its nominal size.
  3. The remaining volume must be divided by all currencies over the whole day. Therefore not quite as massive as you're probably thinking.
  4. There are times during the 24 hour day when liquidity is lower than average and higher than average.

Cautiously optimistic. . .
  • #85
  • Sep 24, 2011 3:54am Sep 24, 2011 3:54am
I have egads, here's something for you to chew on. The first 150 pips only cost the BOJ 6 billion dollars.(reported by dealers after the initial spike) The other 150 pips was the rest of the intervention funds.
Cautiously optimistic. . .
  • #86
  • Sep 24, 2011 4:11am Sep 24, 2011 4:11am
Quoting Tact1cal
I have egads, here's something for you to chew on. The first 150 pips only cost the BOJ 6 billion dollars.(reported by dealers after the initial spike) The other 150 pips was the rest of the intervention funds.
"The other 150 pips was the rest of the intervention funds" NO DOUBT
But WAIT !!! I'm chewing. The first 150 pips "only" cost $6 billion.

But the other 150 pips was cheaper than that ?? Maybe only a couple billion or so.?? Well, if you can get by with just a couple billion on 150 pips you're doing damn good. That's what I always say.
  • #87
  • Sep 24, 2011 4:20am Sep 24, 2011 4:20am
Quoting egadsforex
"The other 150 pips was the rest of the intervention funds" NO DOUBT
But WAIT !!! I'm chewing. The first 150 pips "only" cost $6 billion.

But the other 150 pips was cheaper than that ?? Maybe only a couple billion or so.?? Well, if you can get by with just a couple billion on 150 pips you're doing damn good. That's what I always say.
Yeah because I'm sure they would choose the most liquid time to fight the market . If you were a hedge fund and the BOJ were intervening (just pushed the market 150 pips in minutes) what would you do? What would you do and the rest of the risk adverse multimillion dollar fund managers do to protect their clients/ funds money? And when you've answered taht correctly what would be the effects on liquidity? And when you've answered that correctly, and assuming you're now the BOJ how would you take advantage of that situation to achieve your goal?
Time hides Nothing
  • #88
  • Sep 24, 2011 4:37am Sep 24, 2011 4:37am
The point is that price impact is dependent on how much liquidity is in the market. No one was going to short the first spike on the intervention so it was much cheaper to move price up and people had to cover. You've been ranting this entire thread about how everyone is wrong when you flat out denied that the price impact of a market order is dependent on how much liquidity is being provided. At the beginning of the thread you failed to realize the significance of an extra trillion or two dollars in the market place.

Also using the BOJ intervention is an example how MUCH market movement can cost. the BOJ was being shorted into by corporations looking to get out of the market for a good price and speculators knowing it would get faded. It was very expensive and is an example of massive turnover.

How about an example where price was moved cheaply? Not saying you have to use DS's example. You're just looking at one extreme of the spectrum and saying "THIS IS HOW IT IS".
Cautiously optimistic. . .
  • #89
  • Sep 24, 2011 4:41am Sep 24, 2011 4:41am
If I remember correctly the total cost of the intervention was 60 billion USD. I heard some higher numbers but I believe that was the official number. Those first 150 pips were cheap as fuck relatively speaking. That intervention was extremely expensive.
Cautiously optimistic. . .
  • #90
  • Sep 24, 2011 5:15am Sep 24, 2011 5:15am
Quoting Tact1cal
Nubcake some things to take into consideration. Eurotrash explained it well earlier in the thread. Egads might have you believe other wise but these are actual facts and relevant to anyone wanting to come to a reasonable conclusion.
thanks. that was basically what i was getting at, however, i was basing it purely on this "4 trillion" figure and my own hokey math.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #91
  • Sep 24, 2011 5:26am Sep 24, 2011 5:26am
Quoting egadsforex
"The other 150 pips was the rest of the intervention funds" NO DOUBT
But WAIT !!! I'm chewing. The first 150 pips "only" cost $6 billion.

But the other 150 pips was cheaper than that ?? Maybe only a couple billion or so.?? Well, if you can get by with just a couple billion on 150 pips you're doing damn good. That's what I always say.
if this is US billion (which is a bullshit billion in my eyes... US and their fucking retarded measuring units :S) then that's $6,000,000,000. spread that over the 150 pips = 40,000,000 per pip. was this not during a liquid time of the market day?

40 mil during liquid times to move price one pip.... so how much to move 1 pip when the market is light on limits? a few limits on the book, perhaps a bunch of stops sitting nearby of traders who are asleep with active trades, and someone comes along and puts in an order for a few million. doesn't seem unreasonable to me that it wouldn't take much in the quiet hours for someone with a big bank account to nudge the market a few pips all on their own.

and fuck me... this is all based on figures you and others are providing. it's not doing much to discredit darkstar, and is actually reinforcing what he has said! darkstar should be thanking you for backing-up what he has said.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #92
  • Sep 24, 2011 5:36am Sep 24, 2011 5:36am
Quoting Tact1cal
Egads I hope you decide to research liquidity and the price impact of orders one day. You'll realize how much of an asshat you sound like.

You're not calling out a guru. People aren't giving you funny looks because they feel the need to defend DS. They are looking at you funny because you've displayed that you lack a basic understanding of how exchanges function on a mechanical level(multiple times).

Let me repeat that so it's clear.

If someone wants to they can choose to study how markets operate on a mechanical level. It's obvious...
And if you would care to look around you might find a previously posted article regarding the cost of intervention to the BoJ.

You seem to think that I have a personal vendetta against DS. You're wrong. I happened to disagree with a particular statement. I HAVE that right. It doesn't mean that I have anything against him in particular (or at least not until he posted such lame replies).

In America, we have a "right" to disagree and speak our mind. If we let ourselves be intimidated by the righteous then no one but the righteous has a voice.

I can see that this is still a lesson you're trying to understand. It will come to you.
  • #93
  • Sep 24, 2011 7:06am Sep 24, 2011 7:06am
Quoting egadsforex
I personally did not "get" that number. It was simply a matter of reading an article from Bloomberg.com which stated that it cost the BoJ a little over 8 billion (US) for the most recent (known) intervention (3/17). The "math" would then say that it "took" about $29 million per pip. This is not my "retardedness" IT WAS AN ARTICLE ON BLOOMBERG who does not post "fantastical" articles.

So............ I won't say it.
fair enough. my numbers were purely from the figures mentioned in here.

Quoting egadsforex
All millionaires are engaged in the FX market?? Doesn't matter. They would be on opposite sides anyway. They're gonna duke it out, pip fer pip.

Whatever
what... so you think that someone in an illiquid market pushing a few million consuming bids is going to be countered by someone else pushing a few million consuming asks at exactly the same time? and even so... what difference does it make? they both move the market since the nature of the order book is that the limit buys and limit sells won't be equal anyway and neither will the magically simultaneous millionaires buy versus sell orders... the spread will widen, then the spread will converge as orders on the book get moved around by whoever happens to be paying attention at that time and by algo's and whatnot.

this isn't some bucket shop scenario where orders just get matched to each other resulting in something close to a zero overall position in the bucket shops bullshit books. if you have 2 big fish in an illiquid market magically sending opposing orders at PRECISELY the same moment then not only will their order sizes surely be different to each others (unless the moons have aligned as well as this magic moment occurring) but the limits their market orders will be consuming will no doubt be imbalanced against each other.... so one way or another the bid or the ask would move further than the other, and then the bid and ask would converge as the order book limits shuffle around and fill the resulting void created by the 2 opposing players.

so... no. opposing big fish wouldn't cancel each other out by default causing price to not move. that's nonsense. they'd both chew limits on both sides pushing the spread out and the market would then work itself out as it does every other moment of market hours to find some form of balance and the spread would converge and a new bid/ask quote would result.

i'm watching tv so hopefully that made sense, and if not then oh well.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #94
  • Sep 24, 2011 11:28am Sep 24, 2011 11:28am
Quoting egkid
Most aggressive Trader in all FF , No change!!
Hit your head somewhere?

Quoting nubcake
wow. way to dig up an inactive thread just for the sake of being a complete douche. props for the effort.
Second that.
  • #95
  • Sep 24, 2011 8:32pm Sep 24, 2011 8:32pm
Quoting egadsforex
I haven't read any of your posts yet that did (make sense). You seem to be talking about some point in time when there are only two players in the market. When does that happen exactly?

But no point in beating a dead horse. Since you don't understand, perhaps you could contact the Bloomberg editors for clarification.
of course, because no matter how much volume i could ever potentially push into the market there will ALWAYS be someone filling the book to counter my order and hence my orders will never move the bid or ask, ever. right? right.

therefore, bid and ask prices are magical, and only moving limits around actually changes the bid/ask prices. market orders make no impact on the books according to you and so no one can ever move prices with @market orders.... oh, except of course banks who are also magical and are the only people somehow capable of moving the bid and ask. no one else can, right?

glad we got that cleared up.

you sure have a ways to go. did you get all of your 'education' just from bloomberg, because it sure sounds like it? you no longer entertain me, so have at it. enjoy
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #96
  • Last Post: Sep 24, 2011 9:54pm Sep 24, 2011 9:54pm
hell, i wasn't even looking for this but as happenstance would have it http://www.forexstreet.net/photo/liquidity-in-fx
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
0 traders viewing now