<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The market moved but is it news?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/</link>
	<description>Prediction Markets, etc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:13:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ruspini</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16589</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ruspini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:41:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16589</guid>
		<description>Whatever the data from the less liquid market shows, my &quot;hypothesis&quot; also explains the volume surge on August 21st-22nd, one week after margin rates for long-term nomination contracts officially tripled.  In terms of high-volume days over the history of the Obama nomination market, those days rank #1 &amp; 2 and saw more volume than the preceding 74 days combined.   

Although Obama had been sliding since the Castro comment in late July - what looks like a pretty clear catalyst in retrospect -  it was this last burst of volume that sent the contract down into the mid-teens and prompted Dylan Ratigan on CNBC to say, explicitly referring to an Intrade chart, &quot;So basically Obama is down the toilet.. poof.. see ya&quot;, on the August 22nd &quot;Fast Money&quot;.

Clinton and most other nomination contracts also saw large spikes in volume that week.  Giuliani&#039;s contract didn&#039;t have a volume spike - but margin changes might also explain the unusual volume patterns that I talked about in March.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whatever the data from the less liquid market shows, my &#8220;hypothesis&#8221; also explains the volume surge on August 21st-22nd, one week after margin rates for long-term nomination contracts officially tripled.  In terms of high-volume days over the history of the Obama nomination market, those days rank #1 &amp; 2 and saw more volume than the preceding 74 days combined.   </p>
<p>Although Obama had been sliding since the Castro comment in late July &#8211; what looks like a pretty clear catalyst in retrospect &#8211;  it was this last burst of volume that sent the contract down into the mid-teens and prompted Dylan Ratigan on CNBC to say, explicitly referring to an Intrade chart, &#8220;So basically Obama is down the toilet.. poof.. see ya&#8221;, on the August 22nd &#8220;Fast Money&#8221;.</p>
<p>Clinton and most other nomination contracts also saw large spikes in volume that week.  Giuliani&#8217;s contract didn&#8217;t have a volume spike &#8211; but margin changes might also explain the unusual volume patterns that I talked about in March.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris. F. Masse</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16583</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris. F. Masse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:11:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16583</guid>
		<description>The way to infirm or confirm Jason Ruspini&#039;s hypothesis is to compare InTrade historical prices with BetFair ones. In the coming weeks, I will publish a bit about that issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way to infirm or confirm Jason Ruspini&#8217;s hypothesis is to compare InTrade historical prices with BetFair ones. In the coming weeks, I will publish a bit about that issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Ruspini</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16582</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ruspini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:36:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/12/20/the-market-moved-but-is-it-news/#comment-16582</guid>
		<description>In this case it was #2. A margin change at Intrade forced some leveraged long Obama traders out of their positions. These markets are still illiquid enough that if I were willing to maintain an interest-earning Intrade account, this would not have played out the same in August and the whole situation is regrettable. 

So it&#039;s more that there was something in the price that wasn&#039;t information (according to your assumed interpretation of the price) than information being missing from the price.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In this case it was #2. A margin change at Intrade forced some leveraged long Obama traders out of their positions. These markets are still illiquid enough that if I were willing to maintain an interest-earning Intrade account, this would not have played out the same in August and the whole situation is regrettable. </p>
<p>So it&#8217;s more that there was something in the price that wasn&#8217;t information (according to your assumed interpretation of the price) than information being missing from the price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

