> > Try again.
>
> How about we just skip this part and get to the part where you say
> what you were thinking of?

Good idea, they are, I am afraid, only la-la regulations against OCO
orders.

Yet, just for the sake of the argument, let us imagine that there were
actual regulations against OCO orders.  I am no fan of regulations;
however, the resolution of a long-standing mathematical problem and its
associated $1M prize held immobilized by red tape?  That would be
unbelievably outrageous and disappointing!

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 7:26 PM Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:24 PM Jose Mario Quintana
> <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, that rules against a dealer canceling a customer's *executed* order
(except
> > under certain circumstances); nowhere there is anything prohibiting
> > "OCO" (contingent)
> > orders.
> >
> > Try again.
>
> How about we just skip this part and get to the part where you say
> what you were thinking of?
>
> > After nearly a decade since the initial publication...  Nada (except in
> > Lala Land).
>
> Lala Land is a fairly succinct description of the mathematical basis
> for the various EMH hypotheses.
>
> That said, for a variety of reasons, it also serves as a rough
> heuristic which can be useful in understanding a variety of decisions
> over the years.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to