alt Hacker NewsEach exchange can make its own rules for what it will list and how it will trade (within the broader SEC regulations).
So yes it’s just a way to capture fees from listers who like your exchange better as the primary listing exchange and from market participants that must be in every exchange (latency sensitive HFT).
None of the many exchanges that have started have made a dent in the existing duopoly for real share listings that Nasdaq/nyse have. But some exchanges have made good business off of other products like etfs.
Replies
This sounds like the sort of "norms" thing that a GOP-leaning state would abuse to circumvent SEC regulations by somehow declaring a state-owned exchange as some sort of SEZ to allow unregulated exchange between domestic and (primarily) foreign entities.
Or options products, e.g. cboe
As a concrete example, Nasdaq had a rule requiring boards of directors to have a certain amount of "diversity".
To add on the "make it's own rules" point. This is a real thing, there are stupid rules which have been put in place at various moments and many companies are sick to death of it.
https://chatgpt.com/share/68e6a1a5-e634-8002-ac97-6e2e36052e...
So in other words, healthy competition, and may the best man win. Contrary to many comments this is more than political reaction/posturing.
The state of Texas is the world's 8th largest GDP and a diverse one, with no one sector exceeding 9%. Texas is well-positioned relative to NYC for attention around AI, as it is not geographically constrained and has an energy advantage. There is financial credibility built in as 10% of NYSE listings are already HQ'd in Texas. And Texas has a pro-business regulatory environment.
This isn’t a zero-sum game where Texas grows at New York’s expense. The hope is it creates a larger, more dynamic market.