FOR
Forestar Group Inc.
stock NYSE

# MOASSES FOR MOASS!!!

Tweet Mirror:[DeItaone](https://twitter.com/DeItaone/status/1921478955946680827)
>US\-CHINA TRADE TALKS IN GENEVA RESUME FOR SECOND DAY, SAYS SOURCE FAMILIAR WITH SITUATION

I bought calls FOR Monday ON Friday, boys.

For me it is all about being exposed to the REAL WORLD. Sa mga classmates, kapitbahay and friends ko lang rin naman natutunan yung realities of life. Pag shield mo magiging anak mo sa realities then they will live in a bubble, fake world. Then after college LIFE WILL HIT THEM.
With my kids, as an IT living abroad, if they ask for something kahit 6-digit salary ko and kahit excess money I always tell them na I need to save money for it. We should not make acquiring "unnecessary" things for them every easily. PART OF THE TRAINING FOR THE REAL WORLD.

WAR SEEMS TO COME TO AN END. THEY ALL BACKED OFF. NO FIRING AFTER 11PM. LIFE GETTING NORMAL. WHATS THE EXPECATATION FOR MONDAY! HOW MUCH OF GAPUP EXPECTED?????????

WAR SEEMS TO COME TO AN END. THEY ALL BACKED OFF. NO FIRING AFTER 11PM. LIFE GETTING NORMAL. WHATS THE EXPECATATION FOR MONDAY! HOW MUCH OF GAPUP EXPECTED?????????

After digging up piles of crap for days I’ve found an opportunity worthy of me posting a due diligence. I wanted to post it on other subreddits but I don’t have enough Karma. I don’t want credit you guys can copy and paste it if you guys have Karma and spread the word I just want people to make money. Not financial advice.
*This is by far the best opportunity in the stock market in my personal opinion*
I think Super Micro Computer is literally one of the best opportunities in the market right now. I’ve been digging deep, and the more I look at it, the more I can’t believe it’s trading at these levels.
They did $14.94 BILLION in revenue last year. That’s up 111% from 2023. And earnings? Doubled. They pulled in $1.3B in profits. This isn’t some concept AI stock, they’re printing money. And they just guided for $22B in revenue for 2025. The stock dropped because that was “lowered guidance,” but that’s still another 50% growth. It’s absurd.
What’s crazier is the valuation. The market cap is around $19B right now. The PE is 17. The PS is under 1. A PS RATIO UNDER ONE, UNO, FOR A COMPANY GROWING FASTER THEN PALANTIR.
You cannot name another company growing this fast trading at those multiples, you literally can’t. The stock is being priced like a dying legacy hardware company while it’s actually a key infrastructure piece of the AI boom.
Here’s how I see it: if they do $3.2–$3.5B in earnings in 2027 (totally doable), and you throw just a 30 PE on that — we’re talking about a ~$100B company. That’s a 5x from here. And that’s not even being aggressive.
And I’m not even factoring in their future dominance. Their systems are the ones that support the big AI workloads. Everyone’s focused on chips, but you need something to run them on, and SMCI is delivering full rack-scale, liquid-cooled setups at scale. They’re fast, efficient, and in demand, and the CEO even said they’re already seeing orders coming back that were delayed.
My theory on where AI is headed over the next 10 years and why it plays into SMCI:
AI infra is going it’s not just about raw power anymore. That phase is going to slow. The next phase is efficiency. Cooling, density, cost per watt, that’s the war now. And SMCI is positioned perfectly for that with their direct liquid-cooled systems. They’re not just selling hardware, they’re selling sustainability and scale. Plus, AI infrastructure is going to shift to being rented, not built. Most small to mid-sized companies won’t be able to afford their own systems, they’ll need platforms and software that let them tap into this power without having to build it from scratch. And SMCI is in the perfect spot to supply that backbone.
On top of that, they’ve got over a billion in cash and they’re expanding globally. New facilities, new infrastructure. They’re clearly expecting even more demand.
And people are sleeping on this because they’re zoomed in on short-term CapEx “slowdowns.” But… every business is going to have to adopt AI. That’s not a maybe. And when they do, they’re going to care about efficiency, not just raw horsepower. That’s exactly where Super Micro wins.
I seriously think this could be a 10x in a few years if they keep executing. I don’t get this excited unless something actually makes sense. And this does. Like… everything lines up.
This isn’t hype, it’s fundamentals, margin expansion, global scale, infrastructure demand.
If Wall Street doesn’t wake up soon, I’ll just load the boat myself. $10k ready on Monday to buy shares and debit spreads.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!!

- https://citadelsecurities.com/news-and-insights/enhancing-competition-and-innovation-in-u-s-financial-markets/
- https://citadelsecurities.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/04/Citadel-Securities-White-Paper-Enhancing-Competition-and-Innovation-in-US-Financial-Markets-April-2025.pdf
- Citadel Securities White Paper Enhancing Competition and Innovation in US Financial Markets April 2025
- https://archive.ph/6b0oI
1/3 | Part 2/3 [It's too big!] | 3/3
----
CITADEL | Securities
Since then, several exchanges and alternative trading systems have attempted to implement their own variation of an intentional delay — typically combined with embedded logic in the matching engine that enables displayed quotations to be adjusted or cancelled during the intentional delay — while still maintaining protected quote status.²⁸ As the Commission has evaluated these proposals that have the practical effect of making displayed quotes “conditional,” it is clear that there is not a defined framework for determining what constitutes a “de minimis” intentional delay and the degree to which protected quotes can be made “conditional,” leading to arbitrary decision making. Further, recent proposals have sought to extend protected quote status to asymmetric intentional delays that are only applied when a market participant seeks to access liquidity, which are particularly nefarious, as they provide certain market participants with a “last look” option to cancel resting orders before execution, impairing efficient access to displayed quotes and reducing fill rates and increasing transaction costs for investors.
We recommend that the Commission reverse its decision to impermissibly reinterpret the term “immediate” in Regulation NMS and cease granting protected quote status to displayed quotations that are not immediately accessible in practice.
**Equities Recommendation #8:** The Commission should reverse its 2016 interpretation regarding intentional delays and cease granting protected quote status to displayed quotations that are not immediately accessible in practice.
9. MAKE SECTION 31 FEES MORE FAIR AND PREDICTABLE
U.S. equity and equity options market participants are responsible for funding the Commission’s budget, which is assessed through Section 31 fees. As these costs continue to increase, it is important for the Commission to improve the fairness of the Section 31 framework. For example, Section 31 fees should not dramatically fluctuate from year-to-year (as they have recently), and it does not appear appropriate for U.S. equity and equity options market participants to fund the entirety of the Commission’s budget given the multitude of asset classes that the Commission oversees.
**Equities Recommendation #9:** The Commission should improve the fairness of the Section 31 regime, including by (i) making the fee more stable and predictable year-over-year and (ii) spreading it across a broader range of asset classes under the Commission’s purview, instead of funding the Commission’s budget through a fee on only equities and equity options.
10. ENHANCE TRANSPARENCY REGARDING THE RULEMAKING PROCESS
The Exchange Act requires the Commission to determine whether a rulemaking will “promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation”²⁹ and prohibits any rulemaking that “would impose a burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
²⁸ *See, e.g.*, 84 Fed. Reg. 30282 (June 26, 2019), available at: https://govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-06-26/pdf/2019-13537.pdf and 87 FR 79401 (Dec. 27, 2022), available at: https://finra.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/sr-finra-2022-032-federal-register-notice.pdf.
²⁹ 15 U.S.C. § 78c(f).
Page 11
----
CITADEL | Securities
furtherance of the purposes” of the statute.³⁰ However, in recent years, the Commission has attempted to skirt these fundamental requirements to assess the economic consequences of proposed regulation by issuing multiple related proposals around the same time, each with a siloed economic analysis that completely ignores the potential effects of the other related proposals.³¹ For example, the Commission issued *four* separate equity market structure proposals on the same day, without even attempting to consider the effects these proposals would have on each other.³²
This new approach to rulemaking inappropriately outsources to market participants the task of analyzing the *cumulative* impact of several related rulemakings. Instead, the Commission should update its “Current Guidance on Economic Analysis in SEC Rulemakings”³³ to specifically clarify that, with respect to rulemaking proposals that are related, the Commission must assess the cumulative economic effects and ensure policy consistency across the rules.
**Equities Recommendation #10:** The Commission should update its “Current Guidance on Economic Analysis in SEC Rulemakings” to specifically clarify that, with respect to rulemaking proposals that are related, the Commission must assess the cumulative economic effects and ensure policy consistency across the rules.
11. ADDRESS EXCESSIVE DATA FEES
In the current market structure, market data fees constitute a material percentage of the overall revenue generated by the exchanges, significantly raise trading costs for all investors, large and small, and increase barriers to entry for smaller broker-dealers. In recent years, the Commission has taken a more active role in ensuring market data fees are fair, reasonable, equitable and non-discriminatory.³⁴ It is important that the Commission closely scrutinize these filings to ensure consistency with the Exchange Act.
In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act amended the Exchange Act to permit SRO filings that establish or change a member fee to become immediately effective upon filing (which the exchanges have leveraged for not only market data fees, but also other fees such as those for CAT). Further, these filings are not required to be affirmatively approved by the Commission, and purport to be immune from judicial review. Even if the Commission objects to a fee filing, an exchange can repeatedly withdraw and refile to collect the relevant fee, thus circumventing any Commission control over the process. We urge the Commission to advocate for commonsense reform in this area, including reversing the Dodd-Frank Act change that insulates exchange fee filings from appropriate review.
**Equities Recommendation #11:** The Commission should closely scrutinize fee filings to ensure market data fees are fair, reasonable, equitable and non-discriminatory. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act statutory change that insulates exchange fee filings from appropriate review should be reversed.
³⁰ 15 U.S.C. § 78w(a)(2).
³¹ *See, e.g.*, Citadel Securities comment letter on equity market structure (Mar. 31, 2023), available at: https:/sec.gov/comments/s7-30-22/s73022-20163091-333078.pdf.
³² *See* SEC Open Meeting Agenda (Dec. 14, 2022), available at: https://sec.gov/newsroom/meetings-events/open-meeting-12142022.
³³ Memorandum from the Division of Risk, Strategy, and Financial Innovation and the Office of the General Counsel (March 16, 2012), available at: https://sec.gov/divisions/riskfin/rsfi_guidance_econ_analy_secrulemaking.pdf.
³⁴ *See, e.g.*, Staff Guidance on SRO Rule Filings Relating to Fees (May 2019), available at: https://sec.gov/about/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees.
Page 12
----
CITADEL | Securities
12. ENHANCE CONTINUED LISTING STANDARDS
Both Congress and the Commission have concluded that highly speculative, low-priced securities pose heightened risks to investors, and can be associated with fraud and manipulative trading schemes.³⁵ In recent years, however, the number of low-priced securities listed on exchanges has significantly increased.³⁶ Trading activity in such exchange-listed low-priced securities can now account for a material percentage of overall market volume (by shares), distorting key market-wide statistics.³⁷
Given these observed trends, we recommend that the Commission enhance continued listing standards at the exchanges by increasing the minimum market value of publicly held securities to $5 million (consistent with the minimum initial listing standards established by the Commission for “penny stocks”). In addition, a 10 (or more) to 1 reverse stock split should be required if a given symbol trades under $1 on average over a 90-day period. Finally, the listing exchanges should ensure that applicants provide adequate evidence of satisfying the relevant listing standards and ensure their listing standards are consistently and transparently enforced.
**Equities Recommendation #12:** The Commission should enhance continued listing standards at the exchanges by increasing the minimum market value of publicly held securities to $5 million (consistent with the minimum initial listing standards established by the Commission for “penny stocks”). In addition, a 10 (or more) to 1 reverse stock split should be required if a given symbol trades under $1 on average over a 90-day period.
13. ENSURE CONSISTENT RULES GOVERNING 24HOUR TRADING
Several exchanges have recently filed to support overnight trading, and various alternative trading systems either have entered, or are planning to enter, this space.³⁸ As such, we recommend that the Commission ensure that the regulatory framework applicable to overnight trading is clear, fit for purpose, and consistent across venues, including with respect to topics such as order handling requirements, execution quality disclosures, and volatility controls. In addition, key market infrastructure must be available to support this activity, such as NSCC, the Securities Information Processors, and the Transaction Reporting Facilities. There must also be consistency across market infrastructure regarding how trade dates and settlement dates are assigned during overnight sessions.
**Equities Recommendation #13:** With respect to overnight trading:
- The regulatory framework for order handling requirements, execution quality disclosures, and volatility controls must be clear, fit for purpose, and consistent across venues.
- Key market infrastructure, including NSCC, the Securities Information Processors, and the Transaction Reporting Facilities, must be available to support this activity.
- There must be consistency across market infrastructure regarding how trade dates and settlement dates are assigned during overnight sessions.
³⁵ *See, e.g.*, Penny Stock Reform Act (Public Law 101-429, 104 Stat. 951 (Oct. 15, 1990)) and Exchange Act Rules 15g-2 through 15g-6.
³⁶ Nasdaq Has Hundreds of Penny Stocks. Now It’s Trying to Purge Them, WSJ (Aug. 8, 2024), available at: https://wsj.com/finance/stocks/nasdaq-penny-stock-proposed-rule-change-74677b00.
³⁷ *See, e.g.*, “Wall Street Enters Darker Age With Most Stock Trading Hidden,” Bloomberg (Jan. 24, 2025), available at: https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-24/wall-street-enters-darker-age-with-most-stock-trading-now-hidden.
³⁸ *See, e.g.*, Exch. Act Rel. No. 101777 (Nov. 27, 2024), available at: https://sec.gov/files/rules/other/2024/34-101777.pdf and Exch. Act Rel. No. 101985 (Dec. 19, 2024), available at: https://sec.gov/files/rules/sro/nysearca/2024/34-101985.pdf.
Page 13
----
CITADEL | Securities
## II. Equity Derivatives
While the U.S. cash equity market has attracted continuous scrutiny in recent years, equity derivatives markets have received less attention. Advances in technology have also transformed these important markets, unleashing an enormous degree of growth and competition and markedly improving conditions for all investors. However, this competition among market centers, and the resulting market fragmentation, has also introduced new challenges that deserve the attention of regulators. In particular, the Commission should identify the areas in which the regulatory framework and critical market infrastructure have not kept pace with market structure changes.
1. FACILITATE CROSS-MARGINING BETWEEN EQUITY OPTIONS AND EQUITIES
Cross-margining between options positions cleared at the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) and equities positions cleared at the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) is currently not supported. This means that risk-reducing correlated positions are not taken into account at either clearinghouse when margin requirements are calculated, thus imposing unnecessary costs and discouraging wider participation in the listed options market. The Commission should facilitate the introduction of cross-margining between the OCC and NSCC.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #1:** The OCC and NSCC should introduce cross-margining between listed equity options and equities.
2. IMPROVE THE MARGIN FRAMEWORK FOR LISTED OPTIONS
As part of efforts to enhance liquidity and market competition in the listed options market, it is important to regularly review the OCC’s margin framework — including elements that are mandated by Commission or FINRA rules — in order to ensure that it is appropriately calibrated and incorporates best practices utilized by clearinghouses in other asset classes.
In particular, elements of the margin framework appear to be insufficiently risk-based. For example, per contract minimum margin levels often appear to dictate overall margin requirements, even though they are completely divorced from the market risk associated with a particular cleared portfolio. In addition, while the OCC devotes significant resources to the implementation of its System for Theoretical Analysis and Numerical Simulations (“STANS”) margin methodology, it also applies the Theoretical Inter-Market Margin System (“TIMS?”) to certain portfolios based on Commission and FINRA rules. These two margin methodologies can yield very different results for the same portfolio.
We recommend that the OCC work with the Commission and FINRA to (i) increase the importance of risk-based margin requirements compared to per contract minimums and (ii) unify the STANS and TIMS models into a single margin methodology that appropriately balances risk-sensitivity and complexity.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #2:** The OCC should work with the Commission and FINRA to (i) increase the importance of risk-based margin requirements compared to per contract minimums and (ii) unify the STANS and TIMS models into a single margin methodology that appropriately balances risk-sensitivity and complexity.
3. INCREASE CERTAINTY REGARDING THE TREATMENT OF CORPORATE ACTIONS
A variety of corporate actions can impact the valuation of a company’s listed options, including the issuance of cash dividends. Each time a cash dividend is announced, the OCC determines on a case-by-case basis for the entire market whether to make a special economic adjustment to the listed options or to consider the dividend as “ordinary” issued pursuant to an established policy or practice of the company (meaning no economic adjustment will be made). The OCC has issued interpretative guidance to the industry
Page 14
----
CITADEL | Securities
setting forth the process for determining whether a special adjustment will be made.³⁹
However, recent experience has demonstrated that there are a number of concerns with the current process. For example, there are no specific timelines for making or publicizing the OCC decision regarding a special adjustment, leading to considerable uncertainty in situations where the decision is not made in a timely manner. In addition, the OCC, without adequate explanation, arguably deviates from the published interpretative guidance (and accompanying market precedent) from time to time, which undermines the certainty that the guidance is intended to foster and negatively impacts investor confidence and market liquidity.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #3:** The OCC should improve the process for declaring adjustments for special dividends (and other corporate actions) by:
- Communicating to the market that an adjustment for a dividend (or other corporate action) is under review no later than the next business day after the relevant announcement.
- Issuing a final determination regarding whether an adjustment for a dividend (or other corporate action) is warranted no later than two business days after the relevant announcement.
- Accompany any adjustment decision with supporting rationale that explains the decision, including how it is consistent with established market precedent.
4. ENHANCE EXECUTION QUALITY DISCLOSURE
As in other asset classes, it is critically important that investors in the options market have access to accurate, transparent, and standardized execution quality metrics that allow order flow to be directed on the merits. However, key disclosures provided in the cash equities market are not mandated in the options market. Thus, we recommend that the Commission start by expanding the Rule 605 execution quality disclosures to cover listed equity options.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #4:** The Commission should expand the Rule 605 execution quality disclosures to include listed equity options, increasing transparency for investors.
5. INTRODUCE POST-TRADE TRANSPARENCY FOR OTC OPTIONS
Across asset classes, academic research has found that post-trade transparency improves price discovery and competition, lowers transaction costs, and enhances market resiliency and investor confidence.⁴⁰ By enabling investors to compare the prices they receive from liquidity providers with concurrent trading activity across the market, post-trade transparency enhances investor confidence and incentivizes price competition as investors are able to demand more accountability from their liquidity providers. Reducing information asymmetries also contributes to market resiliency by ensuring that changes in supply and demand are more efficiently reflected in current price levels.
³⁹ Interpretative Guidance On the Adjustment Policy for Cash Dividends, OCC, available at: https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/21ed2c99-ab15-472a-aef1-a142f140e2b7/Interpretative-Guidance-on-the-Adjustment-Policy-for-Cash-Dividends-and-Distributions.pdf.
⁴⁰ *See, e.g.*, Goldstein, M. A., et al., “Transparency and Liquidity: A Controlled Experiment on Corporate Bonds,” Review of Financial Studies (2007), available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=686324; Edwards, A. K., et al., “Corporate bond market transaction costs and transparency,” The Journal of Finance (2007), available at https://jstor.org/stable/4622305; Asquith, P., et al., “The Effects of Mandatory Transparency in Financial Market Design: Evidence from the Corporate Bond Market” (April 2019), available at https://nber.org/papers/w19417; Loon, Y. C. & Zhong, Z. K., “Does Dodd-Frank affect OTC transaction costs and liquidity? Evidence from real-time CDS trade reports,” Journal of Financial Economics, (2015), available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2443654; and Erik Sirri, “Report on Secondary Market Trading in the Municipal Securities Market” (July 2014), available at https://msrb.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/MSRB-Report-on-Secondary-Market-Trading-in-the-Municipal-Securities-Market.pdf.
Page 15
----
CITADEL | Securities
Currently, the over-the-counter options market is opaque, and market participants (not only in OTC options but also in correlated markets) would meaningfully benefit from the introduction of timely public reporting of transaction-level data (including price, size, and execution time). While we support the immediate implementation of comprehensive, real-time post-trade transparency, we appreciate that the Commission may prefer to move forward in an incremental manner. We would, therefore, also support initially tailoring the public reporting framework to focus on the most liquid OTC options (such as those that closely resemble listed options) and to permit reporting delays (and caps for reported volume) for especially large transactions that are appropriately classified as “block trades.” While the above recommendations are an important first-step, they should be the first of several designed to ultimately disseminate transaction-level information for as many transactions as possible in as close to real-time as possible, similar to other asset classes, such as equities, listed options, and corporate bonds.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #5:** The Commission should introduce post-trade transparency in the OTC options market (including price, size, and execution time) similar to the reporting frameworks implemented in other asset classes, including TRACE reporting for corporate bonds and SDR reporting for OTC derivatives.
6. ACHIEVE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR BROKER-DEALER CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
For competition among liquidity providers to flourish in the equity derivatives market, it is critical that there be a level playing field with respect to broker-dealer capital requirements. In particular, the Commission has, pursuant to a 2004 Commission rule, approved “alternative net capital” (“ANC”) treatment for broker-dealers affiliated with the largest U.S. banks, which permits the use of internal models and unlocks material capital and operational efficiencies.⁴¹ However, since the 2008 financial crisis, the Commission has indicated that it will not grant ANC treatment to a broker-dealer that does not have a prudentially-regulated holding company.⁴² This creates an unlevel playing field with respect to broker-dealer capital requirements, where a small number of firms have a competitive advantage compared to the rest of the market.
To address this concern, we recommend that the Commission update the net capital rule to allow certain highly-capitalized broker-dealers to use model-based capital charges for specific products — e.g. listed options and OTC options. To qualify, a broker-dealer would be required to have at least $1 billion in tentative net capital and at least $500 million in net capital, which are the capital requirements under the ANC rules.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #6:** The Commission should update the net capital rule to allow certain highly-capitalized broker-dealers to use model-based capital charges for specific products — e.g. listed options and OTC options. To qualify, a broker-dealer would be required to have at least $1 billion in tentative net capital and at least $500 million in net capital, which are the capital requirements under the ANC rules.
7. IMPROVE EQUITY SWAP DATA
The Commission introduced post-trade transparency for equity total return swaps in early 2022. Unfortunately, however, this effort has not meaningfully improved market transparency due to data quality issues. We recommend that the Commission revise the post-trade transparency framework for equity swaps to improve data quality, including by:
- Standardizing the definition of a reportable security-based swap transaction (at the moment, reporting parties may incorrectly disaggregate a single transaction into multiple reports and/or incorrectly aggregate multiple transactions into a single report).
⁴¹ Alternative Net Capital Requirements for Broker-Dealers That Are Part of Consolidated Supervised Entities, 69 FR 34428 (June 21, 2004), available at: https://sec.gov/rules-regulations/2004/06/alternative-net-capital-requirements-broker-dealers-are-part-consolidated-supervised-entities.
⁴² *See, e.g.*, https://sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-230.htm.
Page 16
----
CITADEL | Securities
- Requiring the reported price to relate to the specific transaction that is being reported (rather than an average across multiple transactions).
- Requiring the reported notional to be precise (rather than rounded).
We also encourage the Commission to engage with the CFTC to apply these enhancements across all types of equity swaps.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #7:** The Commission should revise the post-trade transparency framework for equity swaps to improve data quality, including by:
- Standardizing the definition of a reportable security-based swap transaction (at the moment, reporting parties may incorrectly disaggregate a single transaction into multiple reports and/or incorrectly aggregate multiple transactions into a single report).
- Requiring the reported price to relate to the specific transaction that is being reported (rather than an average across multiple transactions).
- Requiring the reported notional to be precise (rather than rounded).
8. CHECK EXCHANGE PROLIFERATION
As in equities, the number of options exchanges has significantly increased in recent years. While we strongly support market competition and innovation, there are also significant costs associated with this proliferation, including those related to connectivity, physical infrastructure, and operational complexity. Thus, the Commission should ensure that this growth is not resulting from artificial economic incentives, and that new exchanges have real value propositions.
We recommend that the Commission examine the key revenue sources for new exchanges, with a view to eliminating artificial economic incentives. In particular, we recommend the Commission modify how OPRA revenue is shared with exchanges by introducing a minimum volume threshold for participation (e.g. 2% market share) and ensure that exchange assessments of regulatory-related fees are not serving as a profit-center. In addition, until a new options exchange eclipses the minimum volume threshold, it should not be permitted to charge more than $2,500/month for quote feeds, $5,000/month for cross connect fees, and $100/month per session fee.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #8:** The Commission should modify how OPRA revenue is shared with exchanges by introducing a minimum volume threshold for participation (e.g. 2% market share) and ensure that exchange assessments of regulatory-related fees are not serving as a profit-center. In addition, until a new options exchange eclipses the minimum volume threshold, it should not be permitted to charge more than $2,500/month for quote feeds, $5,000/month for cross connect fees, and $100/month per session fee.
9. INCREASE REGULATORY CONSISTENCY WITH CASH EQUITIES
Many important components of Regulation NMS, such as rules requiring fair and non-discriminatory access to quotations, solely apply to the U.S. equity market (and not the options market) as a technical matter. The Commission has previously proposed updating Regulation NMS to achieve a more consistent regulatory framework across cash equities and listed options, but has never finalized these proposals.⁴³
We recommend that the Commission increase the regulatory consistency with cash equities. Particular focus should be given to ensuring fair and non-discriminatory access to quotations given market structure features such as (i) the continued use of physical trading floors (despite recent experience with boys-who-cried-wolf scamdemic-related trading floor closures demonstrating that electronic markets are more efficient and yield better execution quality for investors), (ii) increased market fragmentation with the entry of multiple new exchanges, and (iii) attempts to introduce asymmetric intentional delays for the first time.
⁴³ Exch. Act Rel. No. 61902 (Apr. 14, 2010), available at; https://sec.gov/files/rules/proposed/2010/34-61902.pdf.
Page 17
----
CITADEL | Securities
Asymmetric intentional delays, often effected through embedded logic in the matching engine that enables displayed quotations to be more quickly adjusted or cancelled, are particularly nefarious, as they provide certain market participants with a “last look” option to cancel resting orders before execution, reducing fill rates for investors. These mechanisms — recently proposed to be introduced in the options market for the first time — not only impair efficient access to displayed quotes, but also raise fundamental fairness questions that the Commission should carefully consider under the Exchange Act.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #9:** The Commission should ensure fair and non-discriminatory access to listed option quotations and prohibit intentional delays on options exchanges.
10. APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFY “PROFESSIONAL CUSTOMERS”
Options exchanges typically grant priority to orders entered on behalf of retail customers, but exclude “professional customers” from this benefit in order to prevent misuse. Accurately identifying professional traders is important, as allowing them to have execution priority adversely affects fill rates for institutional investors’ limit orders and impairs the provision of liquidity by market makers. At the moment, the threshold is quite high for designating a trader as a “professional customer” — more than 390 orders per day in listed options — and even this threshold can be circumvented by the use of multiple affiliated entities or multiple different brokers.
We recommend that the Commission and the exchanges take additional steps to appropriately capture professional traders as “professional customers.” First, the threshold of 390 orders per day should be lowered given typical retail investor trading activity. Second, the SROs should increase surveillance and enforcement of the lower threshold, including ensuring that orders are aggregated across entities under common control and across all broker-dealers used for order entry.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #10:** The Commission and the SROs should take additional steps to appropriately capture professional traders as “professional customers,” including by:
- Lowering the threshold of 390 orders per day.
- Enforcing the lower threshold by ensuring that orders are aggregated across entities under common control and across all broker-dealers used for order entry.
11. DECREASE OPERATIONAL RISK ON HALF-DAYS
A couple of days a year, either preceding or following a holiday, the listed options market has a half-day, typically closing at 1p.m. Eastern. On those days, the deadlines for delivering exercise notices are adjusted in conjunction with the shortened trading day. However, at the moment, the timing for providing final closing price files is not adjusted, meaning that those are not provided on half-days until well after the exercise cut-off time. This introduces unnecessary operational risk, as market participants must rely on unofficial closing prices. The OCC should work with the options exchanges to address this issue by publishing the final closing price files earlier on half-days such that the operational process for exercise notices more closely replicates full days.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #11:** The OCC should work with the exchanges to reduce operational risk by publishing the final closing price files earlier on half-days when there is an early market close so that the operational process for exercise notices more closely replicates full days.
Page 18
----
CITADEL | Securities
12. REDUCE OPERATIONAL RISK IN KEY MARKET INFRASTRUCTURE
As the equity options market continues to increase in significance, it is important to ensure that market structure components that could serve as a single point of failure are well-regulated and resilient. In addition to the OCC serving as the sole clearinghouse for this market, the Options Price Reporting Authority, LLC (“OPRA”) is the sole transaction reporting infrastructure. In recent years, OPRA has experienced multiple outages that resulted in incorrect data being disseminated to market participants,⁴⁴ suggesting that further steps should be taken to increase resiliency. In addition, certain key contracts, such as the SPX option on the S&P 500, continue to be listed on a single exchange. Consideration should be given as to whether market resiliency would be improved by at least dual-listing these important contracts on other venues operated by the same exchange group.
**Equity Derivatives Recommendation #12:** The Commission should act to improve the resiliency of key options market infrastructure, including the OCC and OPRA.
⁴⁴ *See, e.g.*, “Opra Outages Cause Consternation in Options Markets,” Risk.net (Nov. 3, 2023), available at: https://risk.net/derivatives/7958170/opra-outages-causes-consternation-in-options-markets.
Page 19
----
CITADEL | Securities
## III. U.S. Treasuries
The U.S. Treasury market continues to be the deepest and most liquid government securities market in the world. The Commission, partnering with other members of the official sector, has recently taken steps to modernize the regulatory framework applicable to Treasuries, including with respect to central clearing and post-trade transparency. However, more remains to be done in order to fully implement these reforms in a manner that increases market efficiency and competition.
1. SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT CENTRAL CLEARING
The Commission correctly concluded that transitioning more Treasury cash and repo transactions to central clearing will deliver significant benefits, including optimizing dealer balance sheet utilization, reducing credit and operational risk, enhancing competition, and fostering innovation in trading protocols.⁴⁵ However, despite establishing the timelines by which more trading activity must be centrally cleared, the Commission left many of implementation details to the registered clearing agencies. Much remains to be done — two new clearing agencies in this market (CME and ICE) have yet to obtain rulebook approval from the Commission and the incumbent clearing agency (FICC) has indicated that significant rulebook revisions are yet to be made, including with respect to default management (such as separating guaranty fund and initial margin contributions, and enabling porting), and margin (such as enhancing the cross-margining framework with CME). Taking into account these considerations, the Commission recently extended the implementation timelines;⁴⁶ however, it is important to ensure that clearing agencies and market participants continue to make tangible progress with respect to implementation. Two additional topics merit particular focus.
**(i) Prohibit the Forced Bundling of Execution and Clearing Services**
In order to realize the benefits of market-wide central clearing, market participants must be able to access central clearing in a cost-efficient and operationally-efficient manner. Since becoming a direct member of a clearing agency is not a viable pathway for many market participants due to the associated eligibility requirements and default management responsibilities, the vast majority of market participants should be expected to access central clearing through an indirect client clearing model.
“Done-away” clearing (where a client may access clearing regardless of the identity of its original executing counterparty) is a necessary component of an efficient client clearing model. In the absence of a viable done-away clearing model, clients will need to establish a clearing relationship with each executing counterparty in order to execute transactions subject to the mandate. This simply would not work for cash transactions executed on interdealer broker platforms — which typically account for over $500 billion of daily trading activity and more than 50% of total daily volumes in the cash Treasury market — since the interdealer broker is the original executing counterparty and does not itself offer client clearing services. Similarly, requiring every client to bundle execution and clearing in the repo market would fragment cleared portfolios, increase cost, complexity, contractual risk and operational risk, and limit choice of, and competition among, trading counterparties. These outcomes threaten the efficiency and resiliency of the U.S. Treasury market, and are directly inconsistent with the regulatory objectives underpinning the Commission’s clearing rule.
Unfortunately, while current FICC rules permit the clearing of “done-away” transactions, they do not prohibit clearing members from compelling clients to
⁴⁵ Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies for U.S. Treasury Securities and Application of the Broker-Dealer Customer Protection Rule With Respect to U.S. Treasury Securities, 89 FR 2714 (Jan. 16, 2024), available at: https://govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-01-16/pdf/2023-27860.pdf.
⁴⁶ SEC Extends Compliance Dates and Provides Temporary Exemption for Rule Related to Clearing of U.S. Treasury Securities (Feb. 25, 2025), available at: https://sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-43.
Page 20
----
1/3 | Part 2/3 [It's too big!] | 3/3

>🥭: I AM REMOVING THE EXTREMELY UNFAIR 145% TARIFFS THAT BIDEN PUT ON CHINA. HIS POLICIES WERE RECKLESS AND BAD FOR AMERICA!

Luis VUtton CEO steps down... "Fake Fashion by China provides proof" even LV, did fraud outsourcing tag fraud in china to fake their altieliers and ghosted fake artisans.
HAHAHAHAHAH enjoying the socieity, other then waiting for GME to moon at least...
we know cars are outsource and manufactured together... but i always know LV, Tiffiany, Rolex and all that other shit like Hermes was worhtless.. and now its getting the RIGHT PRICING FOR FRAUD -80% to -95% less

China did Good.

Just sad that china got screwed by Achepegos 36billion dollar puts by Bill Hwang.
But you get what ya deserved.. FAFO..
But you didn't let us Gamers MOON with our tendies.. so guess what?
NOT GIVING THEM UNTIL I TAKE EVEN FRANCE and your fake fashin industry to shit..
WE ARE ALL CONNECTEd to the Gamestonk Blackhole.. even this Tariffs are connected.
Hold or HODL...?
HAHAHAHAH.. why not... BOTH))) till you capulate.

Your clients will smell that a mile away. You need to want a good product or service FOR your clients first......then the money will arrive almost if by magic.

ITS FUCKING OVER FOR THE BEARS LMAO!!!!!!!

You know what's crazy af! I got 18 down votes for something that's 100% true!
100%! 🤣 lmao
When you sell a cash secured, put the premium pays to you is the difference in the strick price and the marketprice . This means the cash that's used to secure the puts that your selling, isn't enough to cover the shares at the strike of your assigned.
That premium that you think you're getting paid is actually the extra amount needed to buy the shares!
The brokerage will lock the premium up as collateral until the trade is closed. Becaue, if it goes AGAINST you and your put the shares(forced to buy them), they need the cash used to secure the position to open when selling the puts Plus, the premium that you lost in that moment .
You DO NOT GET PAID IF YOU ARE PUT THE SHARES! THEY TALE THE PREMIUM PLUS THE COLATERAL CASH HOLDING YOU USED SECURE THE PUTS , AND TOGETHER THEY EQUAL THE COST OF THE SHARES AT THE DAMN STRIKE PRICE!
YOUR ALL WRONG! PERIOD!
I KNOW THIS FOR AN ABSOLUTE FACT!
Go look at the options chain right now. Do the math!
The only way you get to keep some of the primium is if you win and buy back to close early. Or you get it all if the puts expire worthless.
But if they are assigned to you. YOU MAKE NOTHING!
CAN YA HEAR ME KNOW!? 😁🫡🤏🖕

Trump says there are some 5-10 Trillion of investments incoming. Foreign investors are building new factories in the US to avoid tariffs. TSMC, Chips, Auto Mfg, Steel, Aluminum, 100’s of Companies HQ moving back from Ireland, yada yada yada.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS WOULD MEAN FOR GDP? 😳😳😳
TRY 12.5 to 25% Headline GDP Growth 🍾🥂🍸
Not to mention added growth from reducing our imports by 300 to 600 billion -that would add another 2 points.
STOCKS SHOULD BE ROCKING HIGHER SOONER THAN LATER 🚀🚀
An abrupt $10 trillion of foreign investment in U.S. factories would show up as a direct $10 trillion boost to that year’s GDP—on a $40 trillion base, roughly a 25 percent surge—since gross fixed investment is counted one‐for‐one. If no similar spending follows, headline growth would turn sharply negative the next year as the one-off boost unwinds, though output would remain permanently higher thanks to the new factory capacity.

Tweet Mirror:[DeItaone](https://twitter.com/DeItaone/status/1921284174725390754)
>US\-CHINA TRADE TALKS IN GENEVA END FOR THE NIGHT \- SOURCE SAYS
>
>
>
>US\-CHINA TRADE TALKS WILL CONTINUE ON SUNDAY IN GENEVA \- SOURCE FAMILIAR WITH TALKS
Tweet Mirror:[StockMKTNewz](https://twitter.com/StockMKTNewz/status/1921284175878836700)
>In just the last 5 years China 🇨🇳 has taken over the car making market [\[Twitter Video\]](https://twitter.com/StockMKTNewz/status/1921284175878836700)

Tweet Mirror:[StockMKTNewz](https://twitter.com/StockMKTNewz/status/1921265050163036254)
>US 🇺🇸 \- CHINESE 🇨🇳 TRADE TALKS IN GENEVA FINISHED FOR THE DAY, DISCUSSIONS TO CONTINUE TOMORROW

US - CHINESE TRADE TALKS IN GENEVA FINISHED FOR THE DAY-Bloomberg 

# TAKE THE BIG EMOJIS AWAY REDDIT GODDAMMINT FOR FUCKS SAKE

**Everything purchased and paid for today will be shipped out on MONDAY**
**Please be warned that I will never send you unsolicited messages offering to sell something that is not part of this sale.**
**I use 2FA and will not share my password, don't waste your time**
Please send me Chat, would prefer not to use DMs any longer
___
[**PROOF FOR EVERYTHING**](https://imgur.com/a/proof-5-10-2025-Om7AINU)
Everything is priced with AU spot @$3325 and AG spot @$32.81 (Kitco quotes)
I use custom poured silver bar made by u/420pepe in my verification photos, I think you should too! :)
_______
**BIIIIIIIIG BAG OF BARBER QUARTERS!!!**
90% Barber Quarters - total $185FV. Price is ~~27.50x~~ $27 per $1FV, I can do any quantity but $5FV minimum please. But if you'd like to buy $7FV or $41.25FV that's not a problem. All coins are decent, some better, some worse, but nothing dateless | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/barber-25c-IlVzr5m)
____
**NEW GOODIES!**
1875-S Seated Liberty 20 Cents MS65- $2250. Beautiful high grade example. It was sold on HA for $2400 this January, priced with discount for quick sale | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1875-s-20c-ms65-SrLgpqp)
1911 $5 Indian XF45 - $850. Super cheap example of a better date $5 Indian and it's graded! | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1911-5-indian-xf45-DGvlgk1)
1825 Capped Bust Half AU55 - $475. Very attractive coin with lots of luster | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1825-capped-bust-50c-au55-jO5Qtkz)
1891-S Seated Quarter AU58 - $450. Old holder, last year of issue for the type, bit of toning and buckets of luster!! | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1891-s-seated-25c-au58-rHrmgrr)
1900-O $1 Morgan MS65 - $180. Some color on obverse, rim toning on reverse, old Fatty holder | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1900-o-1-morgan-ms65-nxOQclY)
___
1916-D Mercury Dime VG8 - $1850. King of Mercury Dimes! Very nice, wholesome coin, as close to VG10 as you can get imo, some old album toning | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1916-d-mercury-vg8-gO3Bok1)
1899 $1 Morgan MS66+ - $2400. Absolutely sick coin, was sold at HA few years ago for $2640, I added TrueView and screen from that auction at the end of the album | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1899-morgan-ms66-oTw7e0p)
1932 $10 Indian MS64 - $1950. Beautiful near gem | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1932-10-indian-ms64-cOUgjVI)
1936 Robinson MS66 - $280. Darker toning, old Fatty holder with Gold Foil | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1936-robinson-ms66-Sc87KEm)
1930 Switzerland 20 Francs MS64 - $660 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1930-swiss-20-francs-ms64-lluAW3H)
1866 10 Francs Napoleon III - $345 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1866-10-francs-ANTYzAy)
1873 $2.5 Liberty - $475 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1873-2-5-liberty-e5qjEW9)
Turkey 50 Kurush - $380. I don't know what year is that, I'm sure someone can read it. But It's in very nice condition and priced barely above melt | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/turkey-50-kurush-fSpVEwv)
2016 Standing Liberty Quarter Gold in OGP - $925 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/2016-slq-ogp-ydjAnog)
___
**GRADED $1 MORGANS AND PEACE**
1885 $1 Morgan MS65 - $160 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1885-1-morgan-ms65-xDY74IL)
1896 $1 Morgan MS65 - $160. Very attractive crescent on obverse| [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1896-1-morgan-ms65-z5l0K9J)
1898-O $1 Morgan MS65 - $160 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1898-o-1-morgan-ms65-Tjg0AaZ)
1902-O $1 Morgan MS65 - $160 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1902-o-1-morgan-ms65-rHyj9Ey)
1921-S $1 Morgan MS63 - $135 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1921-s-1-morgan-ms63-wBuIIQB)
1922 $1 Peace MS65 - $110. Beautiful gem | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1922-1-peace-ms65-rp0evcN)
1923 $1 Peace MS65 - $110. Beautiful gem | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1923-1-peace-ms65-SYnyKXX)
1925 $1 Peace MS65 - $110. Beautiful gem | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1925-1-peace-ms65-po4aX0q)
___
**USSR 1980 Olympics set** - ~~$725~~ $700. 28 coins total, over 20oz of ASW | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1980-ussr-olympics-set-ILb8v7N)
**Germany 5 Marks Collection** - 49 coins various designs, comes with cool case. ~~$450~~ $425 for everything | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/german-5-marks-collection-j74QOaX)
2024 Flowing Hair Medal Early Release PF69 - ~~$240~~ $225 each, 2 available, each one comes with gift box | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/2024-flowing-hair-BgiJ1Pd)
1930 Switzerland 20 Francs - $750. Cool David Hall (PCGS founder) sample. I've had one ages ago but they are pretty rare | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/20-francs-david-hall-sample-yYhVyxS)
1876-S Trade $1 AU53 Details - $325. Details grade but super attractive coin | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1876-s-trade-1-au53-details-101JZau)
1853 Arrows and Rays Seated 25c AU Details - $350. Popular type, pretty coin, shame that NGC called it cleaned | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1853-25c-au-details-O6lStxz)
1831 Capped Bust Half AU Details - $350. I think it's high AU coin, might crack it and resend to PCGS if it doesn't sell, NGC been super tough on type coins lately | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1831-capped-bust-au-details-s7zXWiW)
___
**PRE-33 GRADED AND RAW FOREIGN GOLD!**
1909 $5 Indian AU55 - $900. Pretty coin with touch of wear, better date | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1909-5-indian-au55-Q3OmBXg)
1913-S $5 Indian AU53 - $900. Super cheap example of a better date $5 Indian | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1913-s-5-indian-au53-NRH1rDY)
1902-S $5 Liberty MS64 - $1050. Better date | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1902-s-5-liberty-ms64-2OfLHy0)
1992 Russia 50 Rubles 360th Anniversary of Yakutia Entering Into Russia PR69DCAM - $900. This is 1/4oz of .999 and super attractive coin to boot | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1992-russia-50-rubles-pr69dcam-AbLemYJ)
___
**RAW TYPE COINS**
**Buy 2 or More of Bust Halves and get $5 off each!**
1810 Capped Bust Half - $50. Rare date | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1810-bust-50c-9hDWHUd)
1824 Capped Bust Half - $175. | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1824-bust-50c-FY4do1S)
1825 Capped Bust Half - $100 | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1825-bust-25c-sVcrMch)
1832 Capped Bust Half - $100. | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1832-bust-50c-oJRVkgU)
1836 Capped Bust Half - $140. Lots of meat on this one | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1836-bust-50c-Ahzm0Vc)
___
1879-CC $1 Morgan - $250. Better date, nice example | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1879-cc-1-morgan-PzzhHEH)
1885-O $1 Morgan - $75. Very attractive coin | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1885-o-morgan-toner-y5QDRbh)
1888-O $1 Morgan - $55. Affordable toner | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1888-o-1-morgan-toner-kdoCIMw)
1896 $1 Morgan - $85. Very attractive coin | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1896-1-morgan-toner-iBSBWOX)
1809 Capped Bust Half - $50. Great detail but unfortunately holed, priced accordingly | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1809-capped-bust-half-rlPA0ze)
1915-D Barber Half Dollar - $125. Very solid coin | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1915-d-barber-half-E2jrvZh)
1782 8 Reales - $125. Nice popular type | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1782-8-reales-cJDMNOy)
1921 $1 Peace - ~~$175~~ $165. Great album coin, great detail | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1921-1-peace-WQynZeX)
1890-CC $1 Morgan - ~~$130~~ $125. Good looking example | [**ALBUM**](https://imgur.com/a/1884-s-1-morgan-luaMk2E)
___
**Shipping at cost** - First Class (aka Ground Advantage) starts at $4, Priority at $9.50. If you would like insurance (Cost is $1 per $100 of value of the package) or signature (+$3.50) this will be extra. Please let me know if you want any of these extra services. I pack safely and discretely, and ship fast. All paid for purchases will be on their way NEXT BUSINESS DAY.
Payment via **PPFF** (Sorry, I do not accept G&S payments anymore), **CashApp** or **Zelle**. If you are a trusted buyer/seller I can accept Venmo (sorry, no Venmo for newer users). USPS money order is cool too