This appears to be a veiled attempt to disenfranchise retail investors to the benefit of institutional investing teams and financial managers. Even if that was not the intent, these proposed rules will have that effect. I object to being denied access to investment products others are allowed to access, regardless of the reason. If there are 'complex products' that are so
I am a buy and hold investor. I might make 2 or 3 trades each year. I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be able to invest in leveraged funds with money I can afford to lose. I am 92 and have been investing for over 70 years. One learns much quicker from their mistakes than from government rules. I also started with nothing, now I am considered wealthy. I probably would
i am opposed of additional regulations for the invest of proshare or similar investment vehicle. besides limiting future investors it will hurt the current investor by making the invest less liquid in nature. additional, the rules proposed do not help investor and therefore should not be implemented. please vote to not add additional regulations. Leveraged and inverse funds are important to your
I am writing to express my disapproval of the new proposed rule to limit leveraged ETFs for retail investor.
I am certain you have heard many arguments and I am certain you will ignore them anyway, but I will leave you with this, america is built on the concept of free market. By limiting what retail investor can you, you will once again aid in the transfer of wealth from the average American to
Comments:
I have been investing in the stock market for almost 39 years including 29 years working as a financial advisor.
I have traded leveraged and inverse ETFs
in my own account and understand the risks of same. Fidelity has provided ample warnings of the risks associated with these
Instruments. I would be supportive of FINRA efforts to protect investors for whom these ETFs would be
While I appreciate FINRAs attempt to protect investors from the Martha Stewarts and Michael Millikans of the world I would remind you I am an adult. I made the money and I chose to invest it how I want and I am offended that an institution of regulation would choose to shackle the people its meant to serve to financial servitude of large institutions and limit our freedom of choice to a pre
I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed rules for investing in leveraged and inverse funds. Its a violation of my rights as an investor and imposes unreasonable burden on my ability to trade in a timely manner. I consider myself well informed and do not need additional regulations to guide my investment choices. Leveraged and inverse products are an important part of my investment
It is my preference to invest as I choose. Limiting rights to invest in various investment vehicles made available only to a select few is un-American. Current rules regarding being or not being accredited investors are sufficient to protect investors without new restrictions being added as you are proposing. Please resist the urge to do so; especially if the restrictions you are choosing to add
I should have the ability to make investment decisions based on my educational and financial abilities. I dont need to spend additional time and money demonstrating how and why I want alternative investment vehicles in order to diversify my holdings. Furthermore, enacting this kind of rule creates further precedents for greater restrictions on how, when, and what type of investments are made
<p>NASD members must make an affirmative determination for all short sales prior to executing the sale (absent an exemption), including short positions not carried overnight.</p>
