I strongly suppose SEC proposed Rule #S7-24-15 I believe just like everyone has a choice to smoke, drink, choose their career the people should also have the choice to invest their money where ever they deem best. You shouldnt have to prove a high net worth to be able to have access to riskier funds.
I oppose any restrictions that may unnecessarily eliminate or appropriate restrictions on investments being considered under SEC Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 to the extent that it provides a platform for intuitions to manipulate or gain advantage over retail investors. Free market capitalism should not be compromised by individuals fears or inability to educate oneself in an era of communication and
I lost tons of money by holding inversed leveraged ETFs, but it has more to do with Feds willfully propping up the market with easy money than misunderstanding of the risks of these type of instruments. Investors should have the freedom to invest in what they believe, and the regulator should be make sure fair rules for everyone, not by limiting the instruments available to investors.
Investors should not be vented with personal investment decisions. The prospectus outlines all extra risks and no one should be tested or censored by anyone if a decision to invest personally. I have a right to do what I want with my own money. Regulators should not harass investors with rules about purchases in leverage/geared investments and pay more attention to crypto?
While I understand the dangers of inverse etfs, and given the economic uncertainties in these difficult times with inflation, the horrifying war and a divided nation, I strongly urge that the sec does not interfere with free market and our free choice to invest. Please dont change the rules or impede. Its our due process in a free market economy. With respect, Cindy Gu
I oppose the proposed SEC rule change. We the investor should be able to make decision regarding what we want to invest in without any limits. Leveraged funds can be complex, but we the investors should decide if they are the right fit for our portfolio. Furthermore, Public investments should be available to all of the public,not just the privileged.
Sec. 4. (a) A person whose association with a member has been terminated and is no longer associated with any member of Corporation or a person whose registration has been revoked or canceled shall continue to be subject to the filing of a complaint under the Corporation Rules based upon conduct that commenced prior to the termination, revocation, or cancellation or upon such person
(a) Failure to Participate Below
If an appealing Party did not participate in the disciplinary proceeding before a Hearing Officer, a Hearing Panel or, if applicable, an Extended Hearing Panel, and fails to show good cause for the failure to participate, the matter shall be considered by the Subcommittee or, if applicable, the Extended Proceeding Committee, and the National Adjudicatory
(a) U.S. Hearing Location
(1) The Director will decide which of FINRA's hearing locations will be the hearing location for the arbitration. Generally, the Director will select the hearing location closest to the customer's residence at the time of the events giving rise to the dispute, unless the hearing location closest to the customer's residence is in a different state,
More information is what we need to achieve the correct price signals for the market. As a small retail investor, the proposed rules would help me to have better, more up to date info on the companies that I am taking ownership in.
