NYSE Resolves Dispute Over Real-Time Quotes

from the coming-to-you-in-real-time dept

Back in November we mentioned the story of various online finance sites complaining to the SEC about the high prices that stock exchanges were charging for access to real time-quotes. It clearly seemed like the exchanges were missing the big picture, by trying to make as much money as possible upfront by selling the quotes, as opposed to seeing the long-term value of giving out more useful data to the public. It appears now that the impasse has been resolved, with the NYSE coming to terms with Google and Yahoo on a price for real-time quotes. For $100,000 per month, these sites will be able to redistribute the real-time data to their users free of charge. That still seems like a lot of money, and indeed the Wall Street Journal and MarketWatch (both owned by Dow Jones) don't think the price is worth it. It is possible that the Journal and MarketWatch just don't think there's much need for it, since presumably a high percentage of their readers have access to the data through an online brokerage account. Even with the new agreement, it still seems like the exchanges are shortsighted to nickel and dime the online finance sites over this data.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Dylan Bennett, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 9:24am

    A different approach

    For $100,000 a month, you could hire an army of workers to each watch a set of stocks, reporting their live changes instantly. Sort of the "analog hole" approach to this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    ~, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 10:05am

    doesn't matter

    i would say it isn't worth it because people using yahoo and google don't need real-time quotes. If you needed real time quotes you would have a specialized / dedicated application to do it.

    Joe Q. Public can surely cope with a 15minute delay

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    misanthropic humanist, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 10:52am

    stock schmocks

    Financial trading nonsense baffles me. It's just one area of life where I look, scratch my head, dribble, and don't even have the words to form a sensible question nevermind comprehend an answer.

    Isn't the whole point of a stock exchange that the companies that join it are publicly traded? Therefore their share price is public knowledge which everyone has a right to know. Moreover, the exchange has a duty to publish it. Or am I not even on the right planet?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    SPR, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 11:04am

    Re: stock schmocks

    You are right on target. Since this is public info the exchanges are being typically pretentious. It IS our data, and thay want to make us pay to get it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Frank Mucklo, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 11:27am

    Stock exchange monopolies

    The NYSE and NASDAQ are defacto monopolies and for that privilege should have to disclose the real time quotes to the public for free. The are acting like the phone companies charging for caller id. Making the public wait 20 minutes after a trade to see the price is an anti competitive practice. The big boys want a break before the news is public. Why do they only publish short sale numbers once a month when they know at each trade if it was long or short. I think that some of those Wall Street bonuses are a result of keeping the public in the dark. The markert maker and specialist systems on these exchanges do not want us to see what is really going on or wish to compete in a real open public market.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    william, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 12:43pm

    only traders need real time quotes

    Most investors don't look at their stocks for weeks at a time. The only people who need real time quotes are day traders and they have always been willing to pay for the privilege of having them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Lee Furnival, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 1:13pm

    Reality Check

    Ok, a few thoughts here...

    With regard to the first reply, the thought that you could, for only $100,000, hire people to watch and report live trades is absolutely ridiculous! Consider the following:

    Assume you pay an entry-level data entry rate of $3,000 per month, and assume a 15% employee burden for taxes and very minimal benefits. For $100,000 you would be able to hire at most 29 employees, not counting any other expenses whatsoever.

    The reality is that 29 employees would not even be able to keep up with a single stock such as AAPL, let alone the thousands of security instruments on the US exchanges. For example, AAPL yesterday (1/11/2007) had 228,387 trades reported during market hours only. This is approximately 10 trades per second. At this rate, not even 10 employees could keep up with this trade volume.

    I agree with the 2nd poster - if you need real-time quotes you will have different tools to use already and thus any delayed quoting on Google or Yahoo is irrelevant.

    Posts 3, 4 and 5 - you guys are forgetting that the fact that it is not cheap, or free, to maintain all of the systems to provide the data. It's not like they can just open up a few ports on a firewall somewhere and let everyone get the data the want! The thought that simply because the exchanges facilitate the trades they can automatically deliver data on those trades to anybody who wants it in real-time for free, or at negligible costs, is extremely naive. Furthermore, the implication that since the companies are publicly traded the exchanges should deliver data at no charge is ludicrous. This is like saying that since you own your car, you would expect a tow truck driver to tow your car for free, after all it's your car, right? That is crazy. Obviously the tow truck driver needs to be compensated for the work that he/she does even though you own the car, just as the exchanges have every right to be compensated for work they do, which includes designing, building, and maintaining the data systems that allow the public market to even exist.

    I do however agree with the comment about short sale information, that is bogus and they should report that as trades happen.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    misanthropic humanist, Jan 12th, 2007 @ 2:50pm

    please explain yourself

    Posts 3, 4 and 5 - you guys are forgetting that the fact that it is not cheap, or free, to maintain all of the systems to provide the data. It's not like they can just open up a few ports on a firewall somewhere and let everyone get the data the want!

    Absolute nonsense. Why not? Are you suggesting that the NYSE, arguably the single greatest point of capital exchange on the entire planet, is unable to provide a view of the data which comprises its singular raison d'etre, while a private business like Google is able to provide satellite imagary of that entire planet for free to all and sundry? That argument is laughable.

    The thought that simply because the exchanges facilitate the trades they can automatically deliver data on those trades to anybody who wants it in real-time for free, or at negligible costs, is extremely naive.

    Don't just say that it is naive. Give one credible reason why. Just one.

    Furthermore, the implication that since the companies are publicly traded the exchanges should deliver data at no charge is ludicrous.

    You just restated the same unsubstantiated opinion again without providing a jot of support to it. That's not an implication, it's a well founded assertion. A public entity has a duty to operate in public or cease to call itsellf a public exchange.

    This is like saying that since you own your car, you would expect a tow truck driver to tow your car for free, after all it's your car, right? That is crazy.

    Now you offer an empty analogy. An analogy so poor I cant even see what you're getting at.

    You are entirely avoiding the critical issue. The stock exchange is nothing more than a data exchange, one in which the data packets represent stocks, bonds and financial instruments. It's sole mandate is to allow dynamic valuation of the companies that trade upon it by dissemination of the values of those companies. What did you think the purpose of the stock exchange is? Without that data what possible value would an exchange have against over the counter trading? The valuations are an unavoidable byproduct of that process and can be replicated at zero cost.

    Obviously the tow truck driver needs to be compensated for the work that he/she does even though you own the car

    This the usual straw man wheeled out to support every argument of this class. Someone somewhere needs to be compensated. No they don't. There is no additional cost worth speaking of to providing data that already exists.

    work they do, which includes designing, building, and maintaining the data systems that allow the public market to even exist.

    You just shot yourself in the foot. What does the stock exchange do? It's a data system. Now share the fucking data with the rest of us who have every right to see what is being traded in public or we may elect to remove your right to enjoy the oversight of public scrutiny and you can return to stabbing each others backs in smoke filled rooms.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Jo Mamma, Jan 13th, 2007 @ 10:24pm

    Good story

    Thanks for the story. Interesting...

    Also, I think everyone is taking the term "public" way too literally. Just because it's a public exchange, this does not mean that the info disseminated in it is public domain.

    The information contained in the exchanges belongs to those who built it.

    When governments begin acting as though they own personal property, nothing gets built... history is littered with examples of this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 15th, 2007 @ 7:29am

    Re: please explain yourself

    The fact that Google chooses to collect a bunch of satellite photos and display them for free is irrelevant to this discussion.

    Nowhere do I suggest that the exchanges are unable to provide the data. And I agree with you completely that the data is simply a byproduct of the exchange’s business.

    Perhaps I should clarify my position. I do agree that the exchanges should provide its data to the public. What I do not agree with however, is the expectation that the exchange provide the data in REAL-TIME at no charge, versus on a delayed basis.

    I am not quite sure why you had to get so emotional at the end of your post. You can still get the data you’re so upset about now at no charge, just a little delayed…

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    stumbled across this looking for real time quotes, Jan 24th, 2007 @ 8:16am

    daytraders, fees and of no consequence?

    Perhaps daytraders who have a very well established income flow are willing to pay for the tools needed to get real time quotes, but what about those of us who are just getting started and do have some money to risk, but not huge amounts?

    I do not have the kind of money to invest with the big boys, instead I'm using places like Sharebuilder and recently the new site SogoInvest. For someone who can't trade thousands of shares at a time, SogoInvest has a very agreeable real time trade rate. Oddly, and perhaps due to the fact that it costs so much to purchase the service , SogoInvest does not offer streaming real time quotes. Which in turn puts a bit of a damper on the whole day trading idea for me.

    In short I suppose this is a response to those who have made the statement that it "doesn't matter" due to the fact that people who need this service already have the "expensive" tools they need to do this. I wonder how many other people are out there that would be a whole lot more involved in day trading if this service was offered. I am waiting for Google to activate the service and appreciate the fact that they are doing this.

    Also, I'm kinda wondering about your attitudes towards money in the first place. Why would you say this is not important that Google would offer this service for free? I looked around a bit and a lot of the real time streaming quote services charge you a per month fee. There was some dude who wasn't a president but nonetheless got his picture on our currency that once said "a penny saved is a penny earned". Even if I was the type of daytrader that could afford to buy the proper tools, why would I now that Google plans to offer the service for free?

    I don't blame anyone for the way things are set up, I just try to find work arounds that will allow me to do what I want and/or need to do. After all, using SogoInvest and streaming real time quotes threatens the jobs or at least a portion of income for more traditional stockbrokers. You can't blame an entrenched system for trying to ensure it's survival, but you can look for the golden nuggets that slip through the fingers of the foolish. So, for those of you who have said "this is of no use", thank you for letting the golden nugget slip through your fingers. I intend to take it and run with it.

    Signed,
    John Q. Public

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    JERRY LAWRENCE, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 6:47pm

    REAL TIME QOTES ARE VALUABLE PROPERTY

    YOUR CONCLUSION IS REDICULOUS BECAUSE IT SAYS ONLY YAHOO ET A L SHOULD USE QUOTES FOR WHICH THEY PAY NO FEE TO SELL ADVERTISING AND EARN THEIR BILLIONS.

    THE NYSE SHOUD GIVE QUOTES AWAY ON ITS OWN SITE FREE TO ONE AND ALL AND THEY SHOULD SELL ADVERTISING THEMSELVES AND WHEN THE GET A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILLION VIEWERS THEY INSTEAD OF YAHOO GOOGLE ET AL CAN TAKE IN THE BILLIONS

    THE NYSE IS NOT SHORTSIGHTED IT IS YOUR CONCLUSION THAT IS. FORCING THE EXCHANGES TO GIVE OTHERS REAL TIME QUOTES FREE OF CHARGE IS CONTRARY TO THE "TAKINGS" LAWS

    THAT ONLY YAHOO ET AL SHOULD SHOULD BE PRIVILEGED TOI USE REAL TIME QUOTES SO THEY CAN SELL ADVERTISING IS AN UTTERLY INSANE VIEWPOINT.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    JERRY LAWRENCE, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 6:57pm

    Re: stock schmocks

    YOUR CONCLUSION IS REDICULOUS BECAUSE IT SAYS ONLY YAHOO ET A L SHOULD USE QUOTES FOR WHICH THEY PAY NO FEE TO SELL ADVERTISING AND EARN THEIR BILLIONS.

    THE NYSE SHOUD GIVE QUOTES AWAY ON ITS OWN SITE FREE TO ONE AND ALL AND THEY SHOULD SELL ADVERTISING THEMSELVES AND WHEN THE GET A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILLION VIEWERS THEY INSTEAD OF YAHOO GOOGLE ET AL CAN TAKE IN THE BILLIONS

    THE NYSE IS NOT SHORTSIGHTED IT IS YOUR CONCLUSION THAT IS. FORCING THE EXCHANGES TO GIVE OTHERS REAL TIME QUOTES FREE OF CHARGE IS CONTRARY TO THE "TAKINGS" LAWS

    THAT ONLY YAHOO ET AL SHOULD SHOULD BE PRIVILEGED TOI USE REAL TIME QUOTES SO THEY CAN SELL ADVERTISING IS AN UTTERLY INSANE VIEWPOINT.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    JERRY LAWRENCE, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 6:57pm

    Re: Re: stock schmocks

    YOUR CONCLUSION IS REDICULOUS BECAUSE IT SAYS ONLY YAHOO ET A L SHOULD USE QUOTES FOR WHICH THEY PAY NO FEE TO SELL ADVERTISING AND EARN THEIR BILLIONS.

    THE NYSE SHOUD GIVE QUOTES AWAY ON ITS OWN SITE FREE TO ONE AND ALL AND THEY SHOULD SELL ADVERTISING THEMSELVES AND WHEN THE GET A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILLION VIEWERS THEY INSTEAD OF YAHOO GOOGLE ET AL CAN TAKE IN THE BILLIONS

    THE NYSE IS NOT SHORTSIGHTED IT IS YOUR CONCLUSION THAT IS. FORCING THE EXCHANGES TO GIVE OTHERS REAL TIME QUOTES FREE OF CHARGE IS CONTRARY TO THE "TAKINGS" LAWS

    THAT ONLY YAHOO ET AL SHOULD SHOULD BE PRIVILEGED TOI USE REAL TIME QUOTES SO THEY CAN SELL ADVERTISING IS AN UTTERLY INSANE VIEWPOINT.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This