InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,595.76
(
0.75%
)
US TECH 100
18,940.40
(
1.04%
)
Dow Jones
41,096.77
(
0.58%
)
Brent Oil
72.12
(
0.21%
)
Bitcoin
57,987.08
(
-0.26%
)
Post# of 38585
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

seventeen

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 20
Posts 2470
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/03/2010

seventeen

Re: noquit post# 34137

Friday, 09/30/2011 3:43:42 PM

Friday, September 30, 2011 3:43:42 PM

Post# of 38585
I'll try again...Why would you ask this question when it doesn't apply to LFBG and would not even be considered a viable option? One of the reasons we are facing a RS is liquidity issues. You want the CEO to go to a trade 4 trade system which basically means less liquidity, less volume,and lower stock price because of administrative costs and time it will take to settle each trade. I would think the CEO would have to disagree with this line of thinking.

Trade 4 Trade DOES NOT affect LFBG.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up