Direct Broking

[Beagle]

NZX rules do state you have to ensure an orderly market and cannot place bids offers that are too far removed from market etc. Not set in stone as such but some brokers adhere to these guidelines more strictly than others. Say the bid is 20 cents and offer is 50 cents and last trade was at 22 cents. Most brokers would not execute an order to buy at 50 cents.

Best bid $9.62 but broker won't execute a buy order at $9.68 just 6 cents more suggests to me that the wheels have well and truly come off at so called "Direct" Broking. Just 0.6% higher when the share moved in a 32 cent range the previous day...for goodness sake...what they did was actionable and I would have done exactly that if my order didn't get filled at $9.68 or under.

Not the first time either, the previous day I placed an order for some HLG shares at $4.34 to ensure in the opening match process I got a fill.
They dialed the order back to $4.30 of their own volition and I didn't get a fill. Some barking ensued later that morning and I demanded they give me a fill at the opening match price of $4.31.
Sure there was a jump on the opening bid but they had just issued a trading update !

[bull....]

direct broking, asb just as bad each other. pitiful state of broking and nzx rules in nz. look at the pitiful volumes on such a big news day

[Onion]

They dialed the order back to $4.30 of their own volition and I didn't get a fill. Some barking ensued later that morning and I demanded they give me a fill at the opening match price of $4.31.

Not wise to get between Beagle and a bowl of HLG.

[gbogo]

this is very concerning to me. i have had similarly disquieting experiences as the Beagle hasnhadbwith FNZC. They swear they are using discretion to do the best they can but I don’t feel comfortable with it, because i know i am small fry and i know they will always look after the big guys first.

however, i was told “if you want DMA and instant satisfaction etc, use Direct Broking when we buy them”, which I was considering doing for my active trading, at least. But not if this is how it works.

In addition, IIRC, the NZX is concerned about the growing % of off-market crossings and if DB orders are sucked into the FNZC pool, that % is going to grow even higher.

And be in no doubt, a broker loves it when they get both sides of the trade. fees and info.

[RTM]

This is all very concerning, thanks for sharing, I really had no idea that they could play god like this. When you add the off-market transactions to this picture...well..do we really have a market at all ? Does anyone know how this compares with the ASX ?

[ordop]

The market is changing significantly and the NZX will/should be worried - not that some of their employees seemed concerned last year when I talked to them about it. The FNZ have the breadth of the market now ~ 50% market share (retail, advisory, wealth, insto). FNZ are now a market themselves really. The market that you see displayed by the NZX now is a very opaque looking market. Craigs will hold orders to fill inhouse, For Barrs will do the same as they're both obviously competing with FNZC for flow and so the only broker now showing orders to market in any real fashion is ASB Sec. Also, the NZX looked to install some new broker rules last year around the restriction of crossings. After lobbying from brokers the NZX implemented a watered down version which restricts crossings under $50k in value - this in effect stopped ANZ securities and ASB securities doing crossings as most of their flow is smaller than $50k but FNZC, Craigs and For Barrs just bundle the orders up over time and cross when larger than $50k - hence the slow time to market.

[t.rexjr]

This is all very concerning, thanks for sharing, I really had no idea that they could play god like this. When you add the off-market transactions to this picture...well..do we really have a market at all ? Does anyone know how this compares with the ASX ?

The ASX is the Wild West and about as un-orderly as it gets.

[forest]

The market is changing significantly and the NZX will/should be worried - not that some of their employees seemed concerned last year when I talked to them about it. The FNZ have the breadth of the market now ~ 50% market share (retail, advisory, wealth, insto). FNZ are now a market themselves really. The market that you see displayed by the NZX now is a very opaque looking market. Craigs will hold orders to fill inhouse, For Barrs will do the same as they're both obviously competing with FNZC for flow and so the only broker now showing orders to market in any real fashion is ASB Sec. Also, the NZX looked to install some new broker rules last year around the restriction of crossings. After lobbying from brokers the NZX implemented a watered down version which restricts crossings under $50k in value - this in effect stopped ANZ securities and ASB securities doing crossings as most of their flow is smaller than $50k but FNZC, Craigs and For Barrs just bundle the orders up over time and cross when larger than $50k - hence the slow time to market.

Mm, thanks ordop your post explains the following. I had an order filled with direct broking but no combination in the recent trades column would combine to the number of shares I had purchased. The trade was slow so it is likely it was held up for the reason your outlined.
Is this allowed by the NZX rules?

[Vaygor1]

All my bad experiences have been with ASBSec so far, and I have plenty of examples. Only joined ANZ Sec about Oct last year and cut all ties with ASBSec.

My worst experience was when ASBSec refused outright to carry out my instruction to purchase a $10k share parcel for a price 0.2c/share higher than the previous day's close, but 0.2c/share lower then the previous days intra-day high.... nothing short of pathetic.

Direct Broking and ASBSec are as bad as each other by the looks but Direct Broking hasn't let me down yet.

Just when did these brokering companies stop performing brokerage services to become puppets of the NZX? Rather than looking after their customers, they are now focussed on policing trade activities and seem hell bent on opposing market forces in the interest of 'stability'.

[silu]

Too often, like now, an unexpected error has happened.