[mjevans]

Imagine a stock market where shares _had_ to be held for at least a week. Possibly even one where each day it was a dutch auction match of buyers and sellers during the overnight accounting.

I think this would be a healthier form of investing in the ownership of companies.

[SilverBirch]

I'm not sure what this has to do with this particularly question. However, what do you plan to do to tackle the massively increased spread due to lack of liquidity? Let's say I'm a market maker today. I can be a counter party to your trade safe in knowledge I can unload it in the next for microseconds. Under the new scheme I have to hold for atleast a day, this is a massive risk so I'll ask for an equally large premium on the price. Do you worry this head-wind on liquidity would damage the market?

I mean I can see the argument about the nature of nanosecond scale arbitrage, but hold times of a day would be quite wild.

[imtringued]

Pretty much, liquidity preference doesn't go away just because you ban it. Christianity tried to ban interest and it didn't work.

[spiralx]

The LSE has an auction after the market closes IIRC. And these guys built an slow stock exchange, although their definition of "slow" is quite a bit quicker than yours:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/iex-app...

There's also the LTSE which is an exchange focussed on long-term investment:

https://longtermstockexchange.com/