The defense is that this behavior is legally sanctioned front running?<p>How can a wholesaler guarantee the exchange price in the face of disappearing orders?<p>I don&#x27;t think they can. Instead, the wholesaler fabricates an order at the limit of your order, then reports the sale to you.<p>Edit: [rate-limited] Reply to tptacek comment below:<p>&gt; I can&#x27;t even tell if you&#x27;re talking about market or limit orders.<p>Can you view the context of this thread? I am talking about the explicit steps listed in the comment I first replied to. Specifically, step 3 [0].<p>In chollida&#x27;s description the orders are limit.<p>Step 3 appears to be, <i>exactly</i>, front-running as explained in my post [1] immediately above this one.<p>I asked if anyone could explain how that behavior was <i>not front-running</i>. You responded; indicating that the behavior was according to regulation.<p>You claim that the wholesaler must give you the best &quot;exchange price&quot;, but I claim that such a guarantee is generally impossible to fill (time-distance-information problem), and that in the specifics of chollida&#x27;s described scenario, the wholesaler is actually front-running you by examining your unfilled (limit) order and then filling it at the limit (as in, calculus) with it&#x27;s own fabricated (perhaps, synthetic, but front-ran, nonetheless) order.<p>If such a guarantee is generally impossible, then the wholesaler must be cheating, the law is incompetent, or, both.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11668835" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11668835</a>
[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11669193" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11669193</a>