Skip to main content

John Hanley Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

If regulators are really concerned about helping retail investors manage their risk in the market they should make it easier to buy fractional shares and fractional options. Let's say a retail investor has 1 position in her account. She bought 100 shares of LABU @ $4.93. It rose to $5.93 today so she's gained $100. LABU is the 3x ETF for Biotech Bull. The best protection vs an LABU fall is LABD (Biotech Bear). She can only afford $10 right now in that effort. Allow her to buy 0.10 sh of LABD for $6.10. Now she has a see-saw portfolio. If LABU falls LABD will rise reducing her risk.

Francis Evan Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I OPPOSE RESTRICTIONS TO MY RIGHT TO INVEST.
I have used both leveraged and inverse funds in the past. They have been especially useful as a hedge against adverse market conditions as well as an enhancement to favorable conditions. I am aware of both their risks and rewards. I view Inverse funds as a type of 'health insurance' for the portfolio in uncertain times; you hope you don't have to use it, but nice to have if you need it. Who doesn't need health insurance?

2020066655701 Sanjay Bhargava CRD 4495397 AWC gg (2022-1655079624002).pdf

FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER, AND CONSENT NO. 2020066655701 TO: Department of Enforcement Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) RE: Sanjay Bhargava (Respondent) General Securities Representative CRD No. Pursuant to FINRA Rule 9216, Respondent Sanjay Bhargava submits this Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) for the purpose of proposing a settlement of the alleged rule violations described below.

Robert Peterson Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I guess the idea of more far-reaching regulations is to protect some some investors from losing money. But what about those who might make money? Why should policy be based on one group, and not the other? But even if it would save all investors money, I would still opposed to it -- because it is not the role of government to effectively be making investment decisions for its citizens. The whole premise behind that is one that is inconsistent with a free people. Such a policy would foster a state of mind that would be inconsistent with a free person.

SR-FINRA-2022-012

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) a proposed rule change to amend the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes (“Code”) to align the Code with the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (“Act”).  The proposed rule change would also make a conforming amendment to FINRA Rule 2263.