Day trading brokerage a must

For a steady & sustainable growth of the Market I suggest that the Brokerage should be applied on both ways on day trading too.

People who buy at low trying to cash it out even on a small profit which pave the way for throat cutting..even when the particular stock moves up and the buying pressure is building on it, the day traders obstruct the upward movement by placing their sell orders at 0.10 below each other which will become a reason for an upward movement possible stocks to refrain from further growth and reverse the trend...

I witnessed this situation is specially griming the fundamentally strong liquid counters but unfortunately when it comes to illiquid this throat cutting is not visible and each other places their bids/ask on upper ends

So if the regulators implement the brokerages++ on day tradig too then I guess this throat cutting will end as every one has to wait for a reasonable amount upward to cover the cost...

Whats the idea of MODERATORS...?

CSE Today wrote:For a steady & sustainable growth of the Market I suggest that the Brokerage should be applied on both ways on day trading too.

People who buy at low trying to cash it out even on a small profit which pave the way for throat cutting..even when the particular stock moves up and the buying pressure is building on it, the day traders obstruct the upward movement by placing their sell orders at 0.10 below each other which will become a reason for an upward movement possible stocks to refrain from further growth and reverse the trend...

I witnessed this situation is specially griming the fundamentally strong liquid counters but unfortunately when it comes to illiquid this throat cutting is not visible and each other places their bids/ask on upper ends

So if the regulators implement the brokerages++ on day tradig too then I guess this throat cutting will end as every one has to wait for a reasonable amount upward to cover the cost...

Whats the idea of MODERATORS...?

Day traders face risk more than other traders & investors...So their reward for the high risk is small brokerage fee...And DAY TRADING is not a bad thing but hard to practice...

CSE Today wrote:For a steady & sustainable growth of the Market I suggest that the Brokerage should be applied on both ways on day trading too.

People who buy at low trying to cash it out even on a small profit which pave the way for throat cutting..even when the particular stock moves up and the buying pressure is building on it, the day traders obstruct the upward movement by placing their sell orders at 0.10 below each other which will become a reason for an upward movement possible stocks to refrain from further growth and reverse the trend...

I witnessed this situation is specially griming the fundamentally strong liquid counters but unfortunately when it comes to illiquid this throat cutting is not visible and each other places their bids/ask on upper ends

So if the regulators implement the brokerages++ on day tradig too then I guess this throat cutting will end as every one has to wait for a reasonable amount upward to cover the cost...

Whats the idea of MODERATORS...?

Rediculous. Day traders are an import component of markets they provide essential liquidity. Their role is more important in markets such as ours where liquidity providers or market makers do not exist.

Daytraders do not hinder price movements they make profit from it. If a price can't rise beyond the day trading sell order that means there isn't sufficient momentum. Day traders don't play illiquid shares because there's no return in it.

First of all I am not a moderator

According to me, your idea is partly correct.
The long term investors are responsible for the stability of the market while the short term investors are keeping the liquidity of the market. So both of them are very important for a live & active market.

If the day traders are exceeding the limit the regulators need to control them.There is nothing to argue about that.

Anyway I do not think they have exceeded the limit yet. Normally we can’t expect a continuous green market; it will be having some red periods.
So I do not think the current downturn is due to the uncontrolled day traders.
According to my understanding the power of day traders are very less when compared with investors.

manike100 wrote:First of all I am not a moderator

According to me, your idea is partly correct.
The long term investors are responsible for the stability of the market while the short term investors are keeping the liquidity of the market. So both of them are very important for a live & active market.

If the day traders are exceeding the limit the regulators need to control them.There is nothing to argue about that.

Anyway I do not think they have exceeded the limit yet. Normally we can’t expect a continuous green market; it will be having some red periods.
So I do not think the current down tern is due to the uncontrolled day traders.
According to my understanding the power of day traders are very less when compared with investors.

Anyone can reply to any topic in this forum my friend....

Day traders are life blood in CSE .there is no day traders in market should red every day. They have gain within day also big loss within day price fall.that called Dalipihiyen Kiri Kema

OK GUYS...........
there is traders and investors.....
*traders buy and sell.investors buy and hold for sometime and sell.......
*do you guys really think that the price driven by investors?......NO
*is investors highly contribute the profits and survival of brokers,CSE,SEC,....NO
*but sometimes investors will become traders,and traders will become investors.

so my idea is this- both parties are very useful for healthy market,
traders for short term existence and investors for long term existence......
but i prefer chances should be given favor on traders,and SEC should closely monitor the manipulative actions carry on by some traders.........

*so can't agree on your point cse.........but you don't deserve minus rep for point this out,have no rep left to make it plus

note-just a thought of me...........

mark wrote:

so my idea is this- both parties are very useful for healthy market,
traders for short term existence and investors for long term existence......
but i prefer chances should be given favor on traders,and SEC should closely monitor the manipulative actions carry on by some traders.........

Above covers my idea too. But as noted by Mark , Does SEC checks and monitor the manipulators ? . That’s the help everyone expects from them.

milanka wrote:

mark wrote:

so my idea is this- both parties are very useful for healthy market,
traders for short term existence and investors for long term existence......
but i prefer chances should be given favor on traders,and SEC should closely monitor the manipulative actions carry on by some traders.........

Above covers my idea too. But as noted by Mark , Does SEC checks and monitor the manipulators ? . That’s the help everyone expects from them.

actually what is cse doing all the time ?

CSE Today wrote:For a steady & sustainable growth of the Market I suggest that the Brokerage should be applied on both ways on day trading too.

People who buy at low trying to cash it out even on a small profit which pave the way for throat cutting..even when the particular stock moves up and the buying pressure is building on it, the day traders obstruct the upward movement by placing their sell orders at 0.10 below each other which will become a reason for an upward movement possible stocks to refrain from further growth and reverse the trend...

I witnessed this situation is specially griming the fundamentally strong liquid counters but unfortunately when it comes to illiquid this throat cutting is not visible and each other places their bids/ask on upper ends

So if the regulators implement the brokerages++ on day tradig too then I guess this throat cutting will end as every one has to wait for a reasonable amount upward to cover the cost...

Whats the idea of MODERATORS...?

it all depend on your Knowledge and profit target.
there is no right or wrong.
it is a psychological game.

its not a good idea to take brokerage from day trading.
we need every type of market players.
day traders,long term investors, speculators etc.

and also SEC should not intervene with stupid regulations which only cause problems to the market.

What is really needed is a volume discount like you find in other countries. I am not a day trader but I am a short term trader. That means in some months my broker makes more money than I do because I need to pay brokerage twice.

Currently the SEC allows negotiated brokerages for large transactions. What the SEC needs to do is to provide for volume rebates. ie, someone who trades 50 million rupees a month should have the same benefits that an invest who does one transaction for 50 million in a month but does not buy or sell anything else has. The turnover for both the 50 million rupee investor and the 50 million rupee trader is the same, but the investor pays a small commision while the trader pays a high commision.

Day trading is part and parcel of this game. I do not think there should be increased levy being imposed for day traders. In a way it affects the small retial day traders and on the other hand we can see some controversial rulings already imposed on trading of shares which has affected the free flow of trading in the market. The performance of the market mainly depend on the trading patterns of large investors as well as external factors which affect the market. I do not think small retailers who do day trading can make big impact on price levels of various stocks. This is only a personal view based on my little knowledge but like to read other comments as well just to get better understanding of the market.

tubal wrote:What is really needed is a volume discount like you find in other countries. I am not a day trader but I am a short term trader. That means in some months my broker makes more money than I do because I need to pay brokerage twice.

Currently the SEC allows negotiated brokerages for large transactions. What the SEC needs to do is to provide for volume rebates. ie, someone who trades 50 million rupees a month should have the same benefits that an invest who does one transaction for 50 million in a month but does not buy or sell anything else has. The turnover for both the 50 million rupee investor and the 50 million rupee trader is the same, but the investor pays a small commision while the trader pays a high commision.

This would be a really good idea. It's fairer for people who trade large amounts per month and it would increase market liquidity because a lower transaction fee would mean that the extra money could be reinvested into the market rather than 'disappearing' and lowers the break-even point, alleviating some of the risk involved in trading, encouraging people to trade more.