Northcoders Share Discussion Threads

[m.t.glass] 25/6/2002 18:51

JonC - They may be using only the odd-numbered letters of the alphabet on odd-numbered dates?

[jonc] 25/6/2002 18:47

MT,

It tells me that L N and P are missing.

Now if you can find them you might be onto to something.

JC

[m.t.glass] 25/6/2002 18:06

Just to cause a bit of headscratching:

There are often batches of trades in which the variable elements are minimal; only one character differing in each ten-character set.

Eg: Go the top page of today's trades (25 June) in BT.A and look at AT trades numbered 2069-2072 timed at 16:27:30.

The first character is from the usual 16; the letters A-F and numbers 0-9 (randomly selected server? but in this case not changing). And the last two as usual are the year 02.

Only the last of the middle seven characters differs..

Thus:
2072.... 901XUK3Q02
2071.... 901XUK3O02
2070.... 901XUK3M02
2069.... 901XUK3K02

Uniqueness attributable to only one alphabetic character? What does that tell us?

;O)

PS: If I was able to pick that out of the first page I looked at, I presume there must be millions of such examples out there.

PPS: If these 'unique transaction identifiers' involve only 36 choices of character (26 letters and 10 numbers) in each of seven positions, I presume they are only used to distinguish between trades within a set period - and can be reused the next day, next week, next month, whatever. In which case does something within the code identify the time period in which it was used? (it might be a sequential rolling stream within one column - but the sequence need not be a standard numeric one). There aren't enough possible combinations to use for individual trades ad infinitum.

[paulismyname] 25/6/2002 17:44

Methinks I smell a rat. If one know the codes and could identify them with a mm then you could maybe identify the UK variant of "the Ax" on individual set stocks. Just in case pressure is put on you dailos I have copied and printed out your post

[zzaxx99] 25/6/2002 17:24

-- dailos,

Been there, done this - I've checked both stocks with small number of MMs - too many different codes to be accounted for by the MMs, and stocks with large number of MMs & trades - too few sequences to plausibly account for all the MMs.

I'm 100% convinced that this is a centrally-assigned unique identifier that has no useful meaning to anyone apart from the LSE's software.

[bullshare] 25/6/2002 17:11

dailos; to save you time and energy if you phone the London Stock Exchnage they will tell you the prefix are random. Been down this route many times myself, thought i had cracked it and the numbers then varied.

[dailos] 25/6/2002 17:10

I have edited my post with the codes to add further, it seems more than one code per MM, very similar though. Anyway enough on this subject for now, should have completed my research before getting all excited and posting! will keep you informed
d.

[kayak] 25/6/2002 16:50

dailos, or ask your friendly broker what the 3 digit code he sees is, then find your trade in the trade list and see if you can find it in the trade code.

[jonc] 25/6/2002 16:48

All you need do is look at the trades for a stock with two MMs.

If dailos is correct there should only be two separate codes.

JC

[dailos] 25/6/2002 16:43

Kayak
broker says it does?!

[kayak] 25/6/2002 16:41

dailos, MMs do have three digit codes, but they don't appear as part of the trade code.

[dailos] 25/6/2002 16:38

JonC
I'm not saying the broker has a code, the MM does so i am told. Your broker probably puts your order to an automated process and gets picked up by one of a number of MM.
Posted this after buying some BSY a while ago, did it on the phone through a broker, who, when it came up on my screen as filled, said " 648p been picked up by ?????????(MM name, cant remember) asked him how he knew which MM picked it up he replied " by the 3 digit code"
Either hes having a laugh or........

[paulismyname] 25/6/2002 16:28

You carry on dailos, am interested.

Paul

[dailos] 25/6/2002 16:20

OK
to wet your appetite........
Warburg 002
Winterflood 801
Merrills 686
Strauss T 725 (aus)
Jenkins 451
BZW 198 (i think)

Edit, am still gathering info on this, now understand Warburg has 002, 102, 302
WINS 701 801 901, will post further when i know (providing i dont get too much flak in the meantime!)

[jonc] 25/6/2002 16:01

Paul,

Ihave done several trades in the same stock with the same broker and the codes were not identical in fact they were very different.

JC

[kayak] 15/4/2002 22:26

Paulismyname: as everyone has said sadly the year number at the end is actually the most useful piece of information.

The first digit or letter identifies a sequence of numbers. There appear to be 16 sequences from which numbers are allocated (perhaps there are 16 servers receiving trades from the market). The digits after the first digit (apart from the last two which are the year) form the sequence number, again using both letters and digits. If you take all the trades with codes beginning with a given digit or letter, you will see that the sequence number increments with each successive trade, taken across the whole market chronologically. Not very useful.

[clem] 15/4/2002 22:01

Identity of the trading parties is ment to be assured. ie no one can figure it out, or thats the theory. Thats always been a market protocol as far as Im aware so it should be impossible to disentangle IMHO.

[bullshare] 15/4/2002 21:49

Humdinger; I think I will. I don't think they understand how trades are booked to book and the reporting sequence.

[trumpet] 15/4/2002 21:48

Here's some info - well lots actually, on individual Marker Makers and their codes, Crest, Firm Code, SEAQ, BIC Code. Doesn't seem to be a connection with any of those codes and the individual trade codes. In fact the trade code only needs to be a unique code that can be cross-referenced with another set of records containing all the necessary information - no need for it to be embedded.

[paulismyname] 15/4/2002 21:48

Last 2 digits are the year IMHO, I have checked about 25 tickers over two or three days trades. That cannot surely be random. I have been thinking about this whilst doing my day end post, computers think binary therefore every number and letter will have its binary equvilent, maybe I will render it down and go from there. Another idea is to get one of my brokers to buy and sell a few shares in the same company on the same day.

No disrespect intended Mike

[humdinger] 15/4/2002 21:39

Mike - give in.

Personally I think it is a conspiracy :-)

But if it isn't a conspiracy why not check out the L2 order book and all the single/very small trades - when you have worked out what they might mean you could be on to a winner - DYOR but here's the only clue I'm gonna give you - think laterally 'cos the trades themselves don't matter and they aren't to say they are a shareholder so they get the annual report and accounts.

Good luck

[the jock] 15/4/2002 21:28

Cant be random,if i questioned the trade the broker must be able to go back to the mm he bought it from and question him therefore if for instance it was a trade in vod approx 12-15 mm the code must at least be able to identify the mm or he would not have a clue who he bought it from,and i dont believe that.Also how would he know what mm to pay.

[bullshare] 15/4/2002 21:15

P: in the good olde days it was coded(and great fun to trade) but since SETS it became a random sequence. Ring the LSE for peace of mind.

[the jock] 15/4/2002 21:11

Paulismyname think you could be right,quite often the first four or five numbers repeat during a trading session.Dont know the reason could be the mm tag.Think i will do a bit of research.