Sure. I was pointing out that providing a market to anonymously sell illegal information skirts the rules.
That seems misleading. “essentially you’re saying is X” is saying “a collary of what you are saying is X”.
The phrase “illegal information” isn’t very straightforward. A doctor does have legal obligations about not disclosing certain information about their patients but a lot of insider information isn’t subject to legal obligations against revealing it.
It’s illegal to trade stocks based on insider information but it’s not illegal to tell other people a lot of insider information about a company outside of stock trading.
Actually isn’t liquidity a problem?
The liquidity tells you about the value of the given information that you are providing to the market.
That seems misleading. “essentially you’re saying is X” is saying “a collary of what you are saying is X”.
The phrase “illegal information” isn’t very straightforward. A doctor does have legal obligations about not disclosing certain information about their patients but a lot of insider information isn’t subject to legal obligations against revealing it.
It’s illegal to trade stocks based on insider information but it’s not illegal to tell other people a lot of insider information about a company outside of stock trading.
The liquidity tells you about the value of the given information that you are providing to the market.