Haven't been investing very Long, but what I'm seeing seems like it's all in favor of the big company's and not for the individual investor. I like what you want to do with the rule changes, but talking about it, isn't good enough. NEED TO SEE ACTION, from all levels.
I am dismayed that this proposed rule is being considered. This could drastically reduce my options to make the investments that I believe are currently available currently. A special process to verify my capability to invest is not necessary. I adequately know how to make appropriate investments including those considered by this proposed regulation. Rather than purchasing digital currency
Every capital acquisition broker shall use reasonable diligence to know (and retain) the essential facts concerning every customer and concerning the authority of each person acting on behalf of such customer. For purposes of this Rule, facts "essential" to "knowing the customer" are those required to (a) effectively service the customer, (b) understand the authority of
Comments: FINRA is misplaced with this indicated intent on leveraged ETFs. All financial instruments and transactions have complexity. All people have brains and they can use them - to make their own choices, do their own research, and get help and advice where they deem it necessary. Transactions with these and any ETF are purely voluntary and disclaimers are clear and numerous. No new rules or
Hello, I vehemently object to the proposed rule. I should have the full right to choose public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged. I object to any requirement that requires going through any special process before investing in complex products. Leverage and inverse funds are important tools for my
As a small retail investor, I think it is outrageous that FINRA should arbitrarily decide what retail investors can invest it by restricting access to inverse and leveraged funds to only high net worth individuals, and impose others barriers like 'cooling off periods' and getting special permission from brokers. Such rules and restrictions are elitist, unfair, and paternalistic. Please
I am opposed to a plan which makes restrictions on being able to buy and sell inverse funds without jumping through a variety of hoops to get permission. However, it would be good to have rules on the prospectus documents explaining in very clear language what the unusual risks are from using the funds. The special coverage of risks could be put right at the beginning of the prospectus and
I oppose the attempt to restrict the rights of investors to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. While I see that it is an attempt to prevent possible loss by inexperienced investors, failure is sometimes a necessary learning tool. Rules made to avoid the odds of failures are simply crutches for the inexperienced and unnecessary barriers to those attempting to learn. There are already limits in
It is important to continue to allow individual investors to freely invest in inverse and leveraged ETF's and similar. Although it may be true that uninformed investors may cause great harm to themselves because the do not understand, the brokerage industry has provided significant notices and warnings to investors of the potential negative results of their decisions. As always, "caveat
I oppose the proposed Rule#S7-24-15 for the following reasons: 1. You have no right to decide for the public into what vehicle the public can invest their own funds. 2. You have no right to decide which individuals are allowed the right to invest. 3. You are creating a discriminatory system for investors decided by agencies on what is available. You are basically creating a secret system
