[dllthomas]

"(a) business leaders aren't stupid and (b) if the equities market was really significantly rigged or inefficient, these people would refuse to raise capital using equities."

Wouldn't that depend on who the market is stacked for/against, by how much, and what their alternatives are?

[lutusp]

But the most basic premise of a fair market is that it's not "stacked" at all -- that everyone has an equal chance to react to market moves and price changes.

For example, a business cannot possibly get one cent more than the purchasers of their stock offer in the marketplace, and because of transaction fees, somewhat less. And an investor has the same experience -- he can't possibly get more than the market value of his shares on the day of sale.

Brokerage houses are in competition to offer the lowest transaction costs and the most reliable environment for trading. That competition reduces transaction prices for everyone.

Conclusion? Not stacked in general. Insider trading is a crime, betting against your own customers is a crime, and these things happen, but they're prosecuted.

[krisgee]

>that everyone has an equal chance to react to market moves and price changes.

A rich person or big trading house can buy rack space close to New York or whatever city their market is based on, a regular person cannot. This ability gives a significant advantage to rich people/business owners, therefore the market is not fair at all.

[dllthomas]

I'm not sure just how much I can say, in the context of my employment, so I'm going to drop out here.