alt Hacker NewsI would rather see an exchange that requires buyers to hold their shares for at least x days or weeks, and slow everything way down so that people are actually forced to make decisions based on fundamentals rather than trading based on jitters in market movement. Then the datacenter location is almost irrelevant.
Replies
News happens and things change quickly. Also there is arbitrage between similar assets, and investors benefit when that arbitrage is reduced by frequent trading.
The vanguard marketing runs deep.
If that's what you want, then just hold. The beauty of capitalism is that nobody's forcing you to buy or sell.
Be a Warren Buffet and buy for keeps, and obviously you can do very well for yourself if you choose wisely.
You can construct a synthetic long or short position with options [0], so those would need to be removed as well. Options are much too useful for market participants (market makers in particular), so your idea is dead in the water.
[0] For US equity options, if you sell a put and simultaneously buy a call at the same strike price, you have a synthetic long that acts like owning 100 shares of the underlying asset (no dividends, but that’s already priced in to the options).
Buy a put and simultaneously sell a call at the same strike price and you have a synthetic short that acts like being short 100 shares of the underlying asset.
Who is that a value proposition for? Will they pay for it? How?
This is one of those ideas that actually makes zero sense. It's why the "long term stock exchange" has failed so miserably.