The crime is making orders with the intent to cancel before being fulfilled. ... The intent to cancel, in order to create a false market perception, is the crime. ... a pattern of cancelled-while-unfulfilled orders, combined with other orders that profit from the market perception that the unfulfilled orders create, is a very clear establishment of such intent.
Is it also an establishment of intent if you (as a large financial firm) deploy, in actual trading on real markets with real money, an algorithm that exhibits such behavior? If, in addition, you KEEP it deployed even after its behavior is noticed and complained about in public media of the sort likely to be read by trading professionals?
And it is something that the traders at Goldman Sachs can make a fortune without doing.
But it's something that they can make a BIGGER fortune by DOING. And something that can count toward the rise of individuals and groups through the corporate ladder and pay scale.
While don't recall if G.S. was specifically one of the organizations complained about (and am not going to spend the time right now digging through archives to check), I DO recall com"plaints about high-speed traders taking advantage of the cancellation features of the online market engines in just this way.
One of the advantages of shaving milliseconds off the communication delays and algorithms that was specifically mentioned (once the pattern was observed) was the ability to send an order and a cancellation in rapid enough succession that it could not be pounced on (and thus didn't really risk money), sending price signals that tricked competing, slightly less high-speed or well-tuned, algorithms into making other bad trades from which their operators lost and the perpetrators gained.