I am totally opposed to the Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 for the following reasons: 1. I am a small investor that has invested in leverage funds for greater than 20 years and am quite capable of understanding the risks of using leverage funds. In fact, I find it offensive that a regulator would question my knowledge of the market by using some gimmick like passing a special test related to my understanding of the pit falls of leverage funds. 2. Because I am a small investor, I prefer not to short stocks. Therefore, the only way I can protect my investments is using leveraged funds that protect me against down turns. With this rule, you would be denying me the right to protect my money. This proposed rule would do a tremendous dis service to the small investor who could not pass a high net worth requirement. 3. Please leave us alone. I (and millions like me) have been fine for the last 20 years investing in leverage funds and do not appreciate meddling where you are not needed or wanted
Walter Krouson Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
I am totally opposed to the Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 for the following reasons: 1. I am a small investor that has invested in leverage funds for greater than 20 years and am quite capable of understanding the risks of using leverage funds. In fact, I find it offensive that a regulator would question my knowledge of the market by using some gimmick like passing a special test related to my understanding of the pit falls of leverage funds. 2. Because I am a small investor, I prefer not to short stocks. Therefore, the only way I can protect my investments is using leveraged funds that protect me against down turns. With this rule, you would be denying me the right to protect my money. This proposed rule would do a tremendous dis service to the small investor who could not pass a high net worth requirement. 3. Please leave us alone. I (and millions like me) have been fine for the last 20 years investing in leverage funds and do not appreciate meddling where you are not needed or wanted