IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jespps/v43y2016i3p447-457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the London Stock Exchange require an upstairs market? Evidence from block trades

Author

Listed:
  • Andros Gregoriou

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to test if the empirical relationship between the size of trades and market liquidity can be pooled across different block sizes on the London Stock Exchange (LSE). Design/methodology/approach - – The authors use pooling and non-pooling econometric tests in a panel framework. Findings - – When the authors differentiate between various block sizes, the authors find that for trades in excess of 50,000 shares, there is a positive association between the size of the trade and the bid-ask spread, due to a lack of liquidity in the financial market. The results provide strong evidence that an upstairs market may be required in order to provide liquidity for large block trades on the LSE. Originality/value - – This is the first study to directly test if the LSE requires an upstairs market to provide liquidity for large trade transactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Andros Gregoriou, 2016. "Does the London Stock Exchange require an upstairs market? Evidence from block trades," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 43(3), pages 447-457, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:jespps:v:43:y:2016:i:3:p:447-457
    DOI: 10.1108/JES-07-2014-0122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-07-2014-0122/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-07-2014-0122/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JES-07-2014-0122?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jespps:v:43:y:2016:i:3:p:447-457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.