I am opposed to proposed rule #22-08
Stop this rule. It violates our rights
I object to the Finra proposal Rule#22-08
I don't think this rule should be passed!
<p>Applicability of NASD Rules to registered representatives of subsidiary bank of member broker/dealer.<br/></p>
Do not become a fascistic body married to only allowing the already well-todo profit from leverage. When its obvious with Archaegos as just one example that you all are just as degenerate as the retail if not more grossly so. Stop trying to steal the working mans ability to make a buck, because your entire cottage industry is being exposed for just how fraudulent and slanted it is. Just like the
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Trade Reporting Facility Limited Liability Company Agreements
Proposed Rule Change to Establish An Administration and Delivery Fee for the Municipal Advisor Representative Examination (“Series 50 examination”)
(a) Party Portal
(1) Parties must use the Party Portal to file initial statements of claim and to file and serve pleadings and any other documents on the Director or any other party except as provided in paragraph (a)(2). The Director may exercise authority to permit the use of other means of filing or service in the case of an extended Party Portal outage or in other extraordinary
TO: All NASD Members and Other Interested Persons
LAST DATE FOR COMMENT: JANUARY 24, 1986
BACKGROUND
In Notice to Members 85-58, dated August 30, 1985, the NASD solicited comments from members and other interested persons on a proposed new rule (new paragraph (m) Article III, Section 26, NASD Rules of Fair Practice) that would govern the prompt payment by NASD members for investment company
