[hasker]

Read the article. He is complaining about how the casino operated, not how he bet. One of the most crucial piecing of information in professional trading is knowing your exact risk position. NASDAQ apparently was unable to confirm whether trades were "done" or not. Having a uncertain $100mm exposure to something really scares a trader, since he cannot hedge it. This is the kind of situation where telephone hand pieces get snapped in half, and holes get punches through LCD screens. The flash crash a few years ago created a similar situation where the exchanges decided to cancel certain trades at their own discretion.

NASDAQ really botched the IPO. Trading was supposed to open at 11am, and it appeared to me it took until 11:20am to actually start. Problems persisted even after FB opened. They won the listing over the NYSE on the promise this sort of thing would not happen. Mega IPOs always seem to have a lot of drama. GOOG had a lot of stupidity with some interview Larry or Sergey did with Playboy, and I think a few other issues. Finally FB got to the end of the long road to going public.

[lotharbot]

> "He is complaining about how the casino operated, not how he bet."

This is exactly right.

I have no sympathy for a gambler who gets beat because he made the wrong read or the wrong play. I have no sympathy for a trader who loses money because he was wrong about the market.

But when a gambler gets beat because the casino kept misdealing the cards, or a trader loses big money because the exchange botched the trade, he has every right to complain. The system is supposed to operate according to certain rules, which failed in this case and cost some people a lot of money. Maybe they would've lost the money anyway, but that's something that should be determined by the market, not by a NASDAQ glitch.

[DigitalSea]

As the article points out, technical glitches are covered in the rules. When you invest you accept these rules, if the hedge fund manager has a problem with the rules then he should not be investing. Therefore no rules were broken as the article points out, it's a stock exchange they aren't dumb they know how to cover their bases (they're bankers after all). He isn't the only one affected by this situation.

The bottom line is he would have lost money regardless of NASDAQ's handling of the situation, Facebook stock flopped. This guy needs to cut his losses and take it like a man, he isn't the only one who invested in Facebook stock and lost out, I wouldn't rule out others losing larger sums of money too ashamed to even anonymously come forward.

It might sound spiteful, but it's life. Unexpected things happen like these and there's nothing that can be done. I'm sure the SEC will be investigating everything shortly anyway, so we'll see what happens (if any action is taken, which is possible).

[Locke1689]

If NASDAQ knew there were problems but continued anyway that may actually not be covered in the rules.

[DigitalSea]

Well if that is the case (and at present everything is speculation) then the SEC will find out one way or another I hope, because if NASDAQ knowingly knew shiz was about to go down and didn't give a warning to investors, then the SEC will hopefully be all over NASDAQ like prisoners on a new inmate in San Quentin State Prison.

[tedunangst]

Even gamblers are subject to operational risk. If an earthquake knocks over your stack of chips, poopers...

To think fb would have popped to 70 had it not been for a glitch is manufactured lunacy.