• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Waddell & Reed Says It Didn’t Mean to Disrupt Markets

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Waddell & Reed Says It Didn’t Mean to Disrupt Markets

    May 14 (Bloomberg) -- Waddell & Reed Financial Inc., the mutual-fund manager started in 1937, said it didn’t intend to disrupt markets on May 6 when the plunge in stocks temporarily erased more than $1 trillion of value.

    Waddell & Reed traded index futures contracts as “part of the normal operation” of its funds, according to a statement today from the Overland Park, Kansas-based firm. The firm said it believes it was among more than 250 firms that traded “e- mini” contracts during the time the market sold off.

    The U.S. stock market, fueled by computer-driven trading, last week had its biggest intraday decline since the crash of October 1987. During the market drop, Waddell & Reed sold 75,000 e-mini contracts, which are tied the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, Reuters reported today.

    Gary Gensler, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, had said previously that one sale was responsible for about 9 percent of the day’s volume in e-minis.

    Comments by the CFTC and other regulators “indicate that we are a ‘bona fide hedger’ and not someone intending to disrupt the markets,” according to Waddell & Reed’s statement. “Like many market participants, Waddell & Reed was affected negatively by the market activity of May 6.”

    Source: Waddell & Reed Says It Didn

    --------

    Ok, let's assume here they are telling the truth and they did not intend to disrupt the markets. It turns out then that some company that I never heard of before ever managed to disrupt the market so massively so quickly without even trying, clearly something is very wrong in the system if that happens?

    This derivative bull tulip that allows firms to get massive leverage should have been banned long time ago - it simply should not be possible to buy or sell things that you either don't have cash to pay for or don't actually own outright by buying it from someone else before.

    Now think what the guys who actually meant to influence market can do

    #2
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Wibble
    Oh, do shut it.
    How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

    Follow me on Twitter - LinkedIn Profile - The HAB blog - New Blog: Mad Cameron
    Xeno points: +5 - Asperger rating: 36 - Paranoid Schizophrenic rating: 44%

    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office" - Aesop

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by AtW View Post
      May 14 (Bloomberg) -- Waddell & Reed Financial Inc., the mutual-fund manager started in 1937, said it didn’t intend to disrupt markets on May 6 when the plunge in stocks temporarily erased more than $1 trillion of value.

      Waddell & Reed traded index futures contracts as “part of the normal operation” of its funds, according to a statement today from the Overland Park, Kansas-based firm. The firm said it believes it was among more than 250 firms that traded “e- mini” contracts during the time the market sold off.

      The U.S. stock market, fueled by computer-driven trading, last week had its biggest intraday decline since the crash of October 1987. During the market drop, Waddell & Reed sold 75,000 e-mini contracts, which are tied the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, Reuters reported today.

      Gary Gensler, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, had said previously that one sale was responsible for about 9 percent of the day’s volume in e-minis.

      Comments by the CFTC and other regulators “indicate that we are a ‘bona fide hedger’ and not someone intending to disrupt the markets,” according to Waddell & Reed’s statement. “Like many market participants, Waddell & Reed was affected negatively by the market activity of May 6.”

      Source: Waddell & Reed Says It Didn

      --------

      Ok, let's assume here they are telling the truth and they did not intend to disrupt the markets. It turns out then that some company that I never heard of before ever managed to disrupt the market so massively so quickly without even trying, clearly something is very wrong in the system if that happens?

      This derivative bull tulip that allows firms to get massive leverage should have been banned long time ago - it simply should not be possible to buy or sell things that you either don't have cash to pay for or don't actually own outright by buying it from someone else before.

      Now think what the guys who actually meant to influence market can do
      Allegedly it was triggered deliberately by Goldmans. HTH
      Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.

      Comment

      Working...
      X