Periodic Call Auctions For Illiquid Stocks – SEBI – Anti Investor

For the last few weeks was wanting to write an article on the new periodic call auction brought up by SEBI which i believe is totally anti investor and not properly thought or implemented.


But there are a few articles written which would be explain it better.


This one by Bosco - 


SEBI has recently introduced a "Periodic Call Auction" for illiquid stocks in India. Readers are invited to read about the modalities of the new system in the SEBI circular available here : http ://

List of stocks termed as "illiquid" as per the SEBI formula and therefore covered under the new system, was released by the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on 1st April 2013, and can be seen here :

There are 2050 stocks in the above list , which constitutes more than half of the active & listed stocks on the BSE.

There are 1.32 crore folio holders in these "illiquid" stocks, as per an Economic Times article published on 16th April, 2013.

While the intentions of the move to introduce the new system for trading in these "illiquid" stocks are not explained in the SEBI circular, they are believed to be laudable (to curb manipulation, reduce price volatility & impact cost, enhance liquidity).

The circular itself simply states that the recommendation was made by the Secondary Market Advisory Committee (SMAC) .

However, to many investors including the author of this note,the cure seems worse than the disease.

This writer would summarize the concerns thus :

1. Practical Difficulties Of The New System - Harasses both the office goer, and the broker

In the new scenario, once investors get familiar with the nuances of the new system, most activity will get concentrated towards the end of the first 45 minutes(reserved for order entry / modification / cancellation) of the hourly call auction session. This is because orders can be entered, changed or cancelled till the very end of this 45 minute session, which can result in the shifting of the "equilibrium price" at which the orders will be struck.

So the last few minutes of this part of the session, i.e. the business end, is when investors will need to be trading online, or else in contact with their brokers, to be able to react to changes in what other participants are doing, to give their order the best chance to be executed.

Unlike in the normal system, wherein the investor can take an appropriate decision & execute his order instantaneously.

So an investor will have effectively few minutes in every call auction session , for 6 hourly sessions, to try to ensure a successful trade in the so-called illiquid stocks. Pending orders at the end of each hourly session will be purged, and so orders need to be re-entered in each subsequent session if required.

If an office-goer wants to place an order, it will be very difficult for him to log in multiple times a day during office hours to feed in the same order again & again, if it remains unexecuted. It may also be difficult for him to log-in towards the end of the 1st 45-miute period of each hourly session, to give himself the best chance of executing his order.

Else, if he opts to trade through a broker, the small brokerage on his orders may not justify the broker to take the trouble of re-entering his order every session, and he might be politely declined, or he may be charged a higher brokerage , or told to give his broker a free hand on prices.

Even if the investor wants to take a call himself on what to do, will he be able to get through to his broker at the crucial time, given that many fellow investors will also be doing the same , is the question.

And finally, day traders who provide much needed liquidity will find it unfeasible to trade in this new system (more on this later). This will surely lead to lower depth in the market.

Net result, both the investor's right to trade, and his right to get the best possible price will be hampered.

Similarly, for the Broker too it will be a herculean job to :

  • To keep a watch on so many stocks at a specific time every hour (last few minutes of the 1st 45-minute period of the call auction session) ; handle many calls coming in at the same time every hour
  • Re-enter all the pending orders every hour

Whether the new mechanism will curb manipulation is questionable, but that it will make life difficult for millions of small investors is unquestionable (by making it very difficult for them to execute orders in more than half of the listed & active stocks) ! World over exchanges & regulators look for means to improve liquidity, here we have just done our best to limit trades & curb liquidity ! Instead of encouraging the equity cult in India, it appears we wish to stamp it out !

2. Majority of active & listed stock market companies in this list, so severe wealth erosion could be in store for investors, who could find exit difficult

This writer apprehends that the new system will lead to investors & institutions shunning these so-called "illiquid" stocks, reducing liquidity further, and thus severely hampering any exit for existing shareholders. According to an Economic Times report on 9th April, 2013, around Rs 80,000 - 1,00,000 crore worth of investor wealth is blocked in companies shunted out of active trading & into the new mechanism.While Rs 1 lakh crore may be a small percentage of the total market capitalisation of listed companies, it is by no means a small sum.

In fact, the new rules, besides affecting shareholders of the so-called "illiquid" group very negatively, will also impact all other investors.

Not only will the "illiquid" companies be shunned, other small/mid-caps may also be shunned as investors may fear that these shares to may one day end up in this "illiquid" list & be declined for continuous trading.

Also, if an investor needs to take money out of the market and is unable to liquidate an "illiquid" stock because of the new rules, he may be forced to sell a "liquid" stock instead.
Initial data post the implementation of the new system suggests a massive drop in volumes & depth the new segment, accompanied by multifold increase in spread(and hence, impact costs). 
3. Shows limited understanding of small cap market behavior, besides, the quantitative criteria for ascertaining liquidity is illogical

Small caps, by their very nature are less liquid than larger caps, due to low equity base, and large promoter & related party shareholding. Most of the stocks declared "illiquid" have been displaying similar (low) trading volumes for last many years & investors have been buying & selling these shares, inspite of the lower liquidity & higher impact cost.Now suddenly, they face barriers to trade in these stocks.

Erecting such barriers to trade is not the hallmark of a free market economy.

To make matters worse, the criteria for "illiquidity" is arbitrary & illogical. As per this "one size fits all" criteria which requires 10000 shares to be traded daily to be termed liquid, a stock quoting at 50 Paise would require just Rs 5000/- worth of turnover daily to stay liquid, whereas a stock quoting at Rs 500/- would need trading value of Rs 50 lakh daily to remain liquid.

It is also likely that several manipulated stocks may not make it to the "illiquid" list precisely because of manipulated volumes. So it does look like the criteria will actually affect less liquid stocks indiscriminately, overwhelming majority of which are not being manipulated.

4. Detrimental Impact On Small Companies

Another consequence of this action could be the gradual elimination of small but genuine companies from our stock markets, as it will be difficult for them to raise funds via the equity route from investors/institutions for expansion or other purposes, if their stocks are subject to such trading curbs.

These companies might thus be forced to go in for debt -which may not be available to them, or may be available on unfavorable terms (higher interest rates) . So a decision which is best left to the company may now be practically forced upon them.

All this even as the Finance Minister actively encourages SME's to list.

5. Favours a section of Promoters at the cost of shareholders

One section that the author feels might actually benefit from this new scenario will be certain cash rich promoters who might see the opportunity to (a) raise stakes cheaply, or (b) delist their stocks cheaply in future. Lack of proper price discovery & lack of free exit to shareholders will make their job easy.

Note that many companies with MNC pedigree have also found their way into this list, i.e. companies like Disa India, Vulcan Engineers, CMI FPE , De Nora India, Fullford (India) , Yuken India etc !

Yes, eventually Mutual Funds may also benefit from higher flows of the money earmarked for the equity (cash) market. But surely the way to entice investors to park their money with Mutual Funds should be via sterling performance of mutual funds, not be reducing other avenues for investment ?

6. Doesn't quite encourage Long Term Investing, does it ?

If investors like to buy & hold for long term, and not repeatedly churn their portfolio, or frequently trade, they may well be indirectly shooting themselves in the foot, because if many other shareholders in the same company also do the same (hold for Long Term without trading) they will contribute to sending the scrip into "illiquid" category , with resultant consequences !!
On the other hand , maybe it does encourage long term investing. Long term as in : Forever ? Maybe the idea is to have 1 crore mini Warren Buffets in India, holding their conviction ideas for ever & ever. Mera Bharat Mahaan !

7. Promoting F&O trading at the cost of the Cash Market ?Day Traders eliminated from new segment.

Last year SEBI allowed exchanges to introduce LSE's (Liquidity Enhancement Schemes) to enhance liquidity of illiquid securities in their equity derivatives segment.

It recently allowed a similar facility in cash markets.

But the ink had hardly dried on that circular , when it introduced the new system for "illiquid" securities in it's cash segment.
In the new system, days traders who provide much needed liquidity in the system have been eliminated , mostly because (over & above the practical difficulties) there is no certainty of entering into trades & then squaring up the trades, and also partly because of the penalty for certain trades (it is not clear from the SEBI circular if squaring up a trade at a loss during the day will result in the penalty or not).
Does SEBI want to encourage trading only in FnO stocks , while discouraging trading in Cash segment (which provides much needed liquidity) ?
While it is early days yet, initial data suggests a definitedecimation of volumes in the new segment.
It also seems that volumes have declined in other smaller caps too (probably a combination of a bear market + the fear that these scrips too will enter the new segment sooner or later).
So it is likely that in the next few quarters, there will more additions to the "illiquid" list than exits, leading to a steady decline in the number of stocks under continuous trading.
Truly a case of encouraging the FnO market, at the cost of the cash market.

8. Motivation/Objectives for new system not communicated & basis of confidence in meeting these objectives unclear

As the author mentioned at the outset, the reasons that motivated SEBI to introduce the new system for trading in "illiquid" scrips are not explained in the SEBI circular, however they are believed to be :

  • to curb manipulation,

  • reduce price volatility & impact cost, and

  • enhance liquidity.

If the objective is to curb manipulation, as already stated, many manipulated stocks may not make it to the "illiquid" list (or be out of it in due course) precisely because of manipulated volumes.

So it does look like the criteria will actually affect less liquid stocks indiscriminately, overwhelming majority of which are not being manipulated.

So basically the retail investor would be facing the music for the inability or unwillingness of the stock exchanges(with their expensive surveillance systems) to curb the activities of the manipulators .

If the reasons are to reduce price volatility & impact cost, this would be dependent on the new system ensuring greater participation & enhancing liquidity in these "illiquid" scrips vis-a-vis the earlier continuous trading.

Since day traders are more or less eliminated in this segment, the author finds it difficult to convince himself of this outcome. No statistics / studies have been shared with the public to give investors more confidence in this outcome. In fact, initial data post the implementation of the new system suggests quite the opposite outcome, though it is early days yet.

In fact, the author believes that such a periodic call auction system for illiquid scrips has never replaced continuous trading without the simultaneous provision for liquidity enhancers (market makers).
So it appears that the Indian stock markets will be the testing lab for a relatively untried system, studying (the success or failure of) which will keep academics, both local & from around the world, gainfully employed for some time to come.

Maybe we are closing in on the actual motive ? Just kidding.

9. BSE most affected

The BSE is the exchange most affected by this change, as it has the maximum listed stocks. More than 50% of active & listed stocks on the BSE have been put under the new mechanism.

The result is a marked fall in turnover on the BSE since the introduction of the new system.

This does seem to be unfair on the BSE, and thus puts it at a disadvantage vis-a-vis it's competitors. The author finds it strange that the BSE has taken this lying down.

Maybe the BSE sees small investors as a nuisance.

Or maybe since it adopts a comatose attitude to manipulators, it feels it cannot apply double standards and act with alacrity in this case.

10. No Public Comment sought on a matter that affects millions of investors. Investor interests not protected in the current system ?

It was only fair that the new rules & the criteria for judging "illiquidity" should have been put up for public comment before a decision was taken, given that millions of investors are impacted by the same. This was not done.

It would be pertinent to note that that in the 16 member SMAC which advises SEBI on secondary market issues, and which made the recommendation of this new system, Investors / Investor Associations have only a single member representation , i.e. only a 6.25 % weightage on the SMAC committee.

So is it any wonder that millions of investors have been shortchanged ?

11. No system to check that brokerages / securities firms are geared up for the new changes

The author has an online trading account with one of the largest brokerages in the country - HDFC Securities Ltd. On D-Day 8th April, 2013, and without any notice, the author found that he could no longer trade online in the stocks moved to the "Periodic Call Auction".

It appears that HDFC Securities would not allow it's clients to trade online in the new category. Exact reasons were not intimated, but clients were told they would have to use Call-N-Trade instead.

The author explained that Call-N-Trade was not at all suitable for "Periodic Call Auction" system, where the equilibrium price needs to be continuously monitored, especially towards the end of the Order Entry period of each session.

But to no avail. As of the date of writing this, i.e. 16th April, 2013, the firm has not communicated any willingness (or date) to allow the same. *

The author believes that many investors are sailing in the same boat. So a section of the market, not insignificant in number, has been effectively eliminated .

Surely the wrong way to go about implementing a new system ?

* 18.4.2013 -> Subsequent to posting this article, the author has been informed by HDFC Securities that they would be providing online trading facility in these scrips (though no commitment on expected start date).


The author's humble alternate suggestions are as follows :

1. If the intention of the new rules are to check manipulation, then SEBI should make the new rules applicable to genuinely dubiousstocks, regardless of liquidity or illiquidity - not stocks that simply happen to be sparingly traded.

2. If this cannot be done, at least modify it to make it workable . Some suggestions :

a. Have a call auction session once in the morning & evening, with a continuous trading session in between.

b. Remove the restrictive clauses - like unfair penalties, no hidden orders etc

c. Change the quantitative criteria drastically - so that truly illiquid stocks are separated from less liquid stocks

3. Ideally, the new system should be temporarily suspended, public input should be sought, and a proper evaluation undertaken of the inputs received , before re-introducing the same in a workable format


Author : Bosco Menezes

Date : 16.04.2013
Disclaimer / Disclosure : The above represents the author's personal views on the subject. The idea is not to disparage any new idea or any institution, but to provoke some soul searching & introspection in the larger interests of the investing community. Readers are advised not to take these views as gospel truth, but apply their own mind & evaluate for themselves if the author's views make sense or not.


Another article by Neeraj Marathe also details a bit - 


Another article by moneylife -



SEBI should better work on finding manipulated stocks like some mentioned here - 


There are many such manipulations which has been mentioned on the blog but no action taken.

posts –

Farmax Retail, ThinkSoft, texmo Pipes , Syncom Healthcare  , SEBI busts stock manipulating network


Hope that better sense prevails and some solution comes in for above issue.


Best Regards,




  1. jitesh
    April 24, 2013

    Totally agree withe the author of this article !!!! This system has further hampered the liquidity and i sincerely hope that better sense prevails and the system is scrapped soon !!!

  2. sandeep
    May 7, 2013

    There is a website of SEBI , which takes care of Investor Complaint against listed co , market participant etc which is “score” .
    But pls let me know if I feel aggrieved by this particular hourly auction system introduced By stock exchanges and SEBI , where do I knock at and whom do I complain ?
    I agree with the Author n would like to add that most of the MNCs will find their name in the list in near future as this time there was JUNE 2013 deadline for delisting and divestment , those companies next qrtr( or qrtr after next) onwards will not have this much interest from investing community .
    Moreover the intent of curbing manipulation in share prices does not go with most of the MNCs shifted this time , there are more than half a dozen MNCs like disa india, voith paper , panasonic carbon and the likes of international travel house ltd promoted by ITC ltd ,.
    I must also mention here that before any new system like this is introduced ,SEBI must take online public opinion of the investing community also , who is effected the most rather the worst , otherwise it seems as if we are under British rule , where they pass the law without our represantations or views in British Parliament .
    None of the media is covering this as they do not want to face the heat of SEBI .
    I hope SEBI will take steps ,if not immediate , at the earliest .

    1. Bosco Menezes
      May 21, 2013

      Very true.

      Right now many of us are shocked to find our hard earned money is now locked into investments where exit is impossible, or comes at a very high cost (selling at lower circuit for days & weeks).

      So a large segment of the market is already hurting, but in a few quarters time, with more & more stocks set to follow suit, EVERY retail investor will be hurting.

    2. rakesh lunawat
      May 27, 2013

      Sir, As I have said sebi doesnt want to punish the promoters.It only wants to punish teh investor afterall it is also a part of the Gov of India.No promoter-director is punished for any wrong doing.only the investor.anything happens just stop trading in the share.nothing to the company.Bacchuji jabtak promoter ke niche rela nahi aayega tab ak indian investor ko sahan karna padega.U dont have anyplace to put your views in India.These Gov ppl say Humne ye kara hai humne vo kara hai humne ye decide kiya humne vo decide kara hai.Abe salo jara unko to pucho jinko asar hogaa.But there is no system in India and the public is also like this thru centuries.Maar khate raho.Bhale hi akbar aaye changijkhan aaye dutch aaye angrej aaye sab aa ke public ko marte rahe kuch nahi hoga.U dont have any plavce to present your view iven if u dont like sebi’s action.

    May 15, 2013

    The ppl sitting in SEBI and the exchanges are just another sort of BABUS.they dont trade so they dont know the pains of holding bad stocks.They tend to make laws only to safguard the corporates.One such rule is the illiquid stock rule.How do you say that there can be price manipulation in a stock which is not even traded 50 times in a quarter?This is just ridiculous and shows teh state of mind of teh ppl sitting there.

    1. Nooresh
      May 15, 2013

      Cannot understand the reasons for SEBIs decision. No impact of thousands of e-mails sent also . Hope better sense prevails

  4. Bosco Menezes
    May 24, 2013

    Adequately liquid scrips (though they might have not being doing 10K shares volume daily) have now been actually made illiquid, leaving majority of investors stuck – their hard earned money of many years of effort is now just an electronic entry in a demat statement with no way to encash the same.
    Truly, stocks in PCAS have become one of the most illiquid financial assets in India (which wasn’t the case earlier).

    Just this week, the Supreme Court rejected the PIL to stay the IPL playoffs …. holding that spot fixing by individuals cannot be a reason to ban IPL.
    Now if only SEBI could reach the same & obvious conclusion – that manipulation by few operators cannot be a reason to shut down the small cap market (which is what the PCAS has done).

  5. rakesh lunawat
    May 27, 2013

    Till now SEBI has done nothing in real sense for the investor,Whatever steps it takes are Promoter friendly.Any thing happens and theyt suspend trading in that company.then who is at a losss- > the investor.Promoter and directors ka baal bi banka nahi hota.they get their payments regularly.If sebi rally wants to do asomething for the investor then it should pnish the wrongdovers.It should lift teh corporate viel.then its worth.The periodic call system is one more nail in the dath beed of some bechare investors who have shaers of such companies.some of them are highly priced and bot at high pricesand still are at high prices,But now under teh name of ESBI ban brokers dont allow to trade in them.where should the investor go? Will sebi help him sell his shares? there ar many ways to protect but afterall they are also humans. they dont want to protect.thats all.

  6. jitesh
    September 13, 2013

    Is SEBI rethinking on this issue at all ??? It will be 6 months now since this system was introduced in April 1st week and has totally eroded the value of these illiquid stocks and made our investments feel like junk !!!!

  7. Bosco Menezes
    October 28, 2013

    Retail investor sentiment was already low when PCAS was introduced & post PCAS, volumes plummetted. Stocks which were perfectly liquid, trading few hundreds to few thousands of shares daily, actually become illiquid.
    The ill-effects of PCAS are manifesting themselves in many ways :
    In the last month, India Infoline & HSBC have announced their decision to quit the retail brokerage space in India.
    PCAS was certainly not the main reason for this, but PCAS arguably made that crucial difference between brokerages soldiering on as they were already doing & taking the decision to close down.
    Lage Raho, SEBI.
    Lage Raho, PCAS

    1. Nooresh
      October 28, 2013

      All the newspapers, online forums etc have made their voices but there is no change !!
      Pathetic response from SEBI

  8. Jubin Jose
    November 27, 2013

    What a pity!! nowhere in the world there would be such a stupid regulatory body., they conduct experiments in real markets! SEBI and its SMAC is filled with either really stupid or really corrupted officials, Looking at the qualifications they are all having above average mathematical and reasoning abilities , so most likely there is some ill motive behind this, mostly corruption/scam.

    Here is the committee:

    • Prof Jayanth R Varma, IIM Ahmedabad chairman
    • Ms Chitra Ramakrishna, Joint MD, NSEIL
    • Shri Ashishkumar Chauhan, MD & CEO, BSE
    • Shri CS Mohapatra, Advisor(FSDC), ministry of finance
    • Dr Shashank Saxena, Director (BO‐II & Pension), ministry of finance
    • Shri Surinder Verma, Chairman, Citizens Awareness Group
    • Ms Susan Thomas, Indira Ganndhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR)
    • Dr Vikram Kuriyan, Professor of Finance, ISB, Hyderabad
    • Shri BK Sabharwal, chairman, FISE
    • Shri MD Mallya, ex-chairman, Bank of Baroda
    • Shri PS Reddy, MD & CEO, CDSL
    • Shri Jayesh Sule, executive director, NSDL
    • Shri Rakesh Somani, president, ANMI
    • Shri S Ramann, executive director, Market Regulation Department, SEBI
    • Shri PK Nagpal, executive director, Market Intermediaries Regulation and Supervision Department, SEBI
    • Ms Maninder Cheema, deputy general manager, Market Regulation Department, Division of Policy, SEBI

    1. Jubin Jose
      November 27, 2013

      I have written to SMAC committee as well, some email ids here:

      “” , “”
      , “” ,

  9. Bosco Menezes
    November 27, 2013

    A friend of mine told me recently that on his urging his broker had rung SEBI regarding Periodic Call Auction System (PCAS). He was told by the official he spoke to, that people have got used to the new system, as very few people are complaining now.
    This may or may not be indicative of SEBI’s official stand on PCAS, still, I found this reply quite astounding.
    Is it that the outcome (result) of the shift to PCAS, it’s merits or demerits, it’s success or failures – is all this of NO importance or consequence? Is just the number of complaints worthy of note ?
    Surely the fact that investors are fatigued after complaining energetically the first few months, (without receiving any acknowledgement, let alone a sympathetic ear), and have now tired of repeating themselves cannot be deemed to mean that PCAS is a success ?
    While most investors have given-up & decided to live with the new system, since they are stuck with it, by NO means is it any LESS difficult & tedious to trade in PCAs than it was earlier. The stress & anxiety when trying to convert stock into cash in an emergency (and frustration & despair at one’s inability to do so) has not receded in any significant measure with the passing of time.
    Besides the sheer difficulty in trading in PCAS, even if one looks at the results vis-a-vis the objectives, I believe it continues to be an inferior alternative to the earlier continuous trading :
    -> Insofar as reducing price volatility & impact cost , it is an absolute failure. Both have rocketed.
    -> Insofar as increasing liquidity in the so-called illiquid scrips, it is again a total failure. Volumes have fallen significantly.
    -> On curbing manipulation, here I do think that it is more difficult now to manipulate scrips on large volumes while the scrip remains in PCAS. On the flip side , due to the collapse in trading, it is now very easy to move the Market Cap of a scrip up/down by many crores of rupees on investment of 50-100 bucks. SO to that extent, manipulation of price is possible now with very less capital investment. Also, an operator can bring the scrip out of PCAS by manipulating the number of trades (rather than going for 10K daily average volumes) & then do his operation after that. Thus manipulated scrips have a much better chance of escaping PCAS , due to these vested interests, rather than genuine scrips. If one looks at the 1st list of scrips to escape PCAS last month, not a single easily recognized scrip was in that list, whereas the list of scrips going into PCAs every quarter always has many reputed names, even MNC’s. So overall, even on the issue of curbing manipulation, I would say that the new system has but “postponed” the manipulation to such time as the operator takes the scrip out of PCAS, while jailing majority of scrips (and investors holding those scrips) for life. Surely better surveillance is the way to go, not punishing retail investors for no fault of theirs ?
    So given that PCAS has (arguably) failed to meet it’s supposed objectives, will there be a review of the same ? Sufficeth to say, I am not holding my breath.

  10. Bosco Menezes
    November 29, 2013

    Jubin, Nooresh & other friends,

    I feel it is absolutely CRITICAL that any “tweak” in the system as suggested in the ET report reinstates the “Continuous Trading” element.

    Just reducing the number of sessions, or the duration of the same will not help. In fact volumes may fall further.

    The buring issue today is that an investor is not able to execute a trade even when he is willing to match an opposite trade he sees on his screen. Earlier he could match the same & his trade was executed, and he did not need to devote any more mindspace to the same.

    Now with the ability to cancel/modify an order till the 44th minute of the session, the investor is chasing a moving target …. and most of the times he fails to execute his trade.

    The few times that he manages to do so, he can sell/buy only a fraction of his qty, as most investors who could have bought/sold from him in the desired quantity have given up even watching these scrips.

    How many investors can be in front of BOLT through out the day trying their best to push through a few measly shares at a time ?

    So the correct course of action is to reinstate Continuous Trading & beef up surveillance instead, to prevent manipulation.

    If ANY sort of Call Auction needs to remain, it should be just a short session at the open or close to discover an opening/closing price.

    But given that in the 16 member SMAC which advises SEBI secondary market issues, and which made the recommendation of this PCAS system, Investors / Investor Associations have only a single member representation , i.e. only a 6.25 % weightage on the SMAC committee, i am not optimistic about PCAS’s reversal.

    I don’t think the committee will accept failure of this system , at least not without trying out some further experiments (tweaks 🙂 ) on us hapless investors (guniea pigs).

    Just my personal opinion, i may be quite wrong. I lead it to the reader to judge.

  11. Jubin Jose
    November 29, 2013

    For sure continuous market is much better, However Im glad to hear that SEBI finally gained some sense to reconsider this careless, thoughtless and senseless move.

    Stupidity and thoughtlessness are no substitute for incapability, pray SEBI may realize this.

    I have seen it many times that Phd instead of making a man wiser , it just closes his mind. Sometimes it make him 100% theoretical and there comes the problem. To be useful one needs to be both imaginative & realistic at the same time :-), and that needs much practice. hehe..

    SEBI might take many steps to salvage their ego. Lets see, eventually they should come back to the proven continuous market!

    1. jitesh
      December 2, 2013

      I hope that the system is completely scrapped instead of changinf or tweaking the same. Retail investors have done no harm and are being penalised for the past 8 odd months due to this system. Hope sense prevails and this sytem is totally scrapped by first week of jan 2014 when the scrips will be reviewed again .


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.