Displaying 1581 - 1590 of 4654 Results
IMPORTANT MAIL VOTE
OFFICERS, PARTNERS AND PROPRIETORS
TO: All NASD Members
LAST VOTING DATE IS DECEMBER 31, 1986.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NASD members are invited to vote on proposed new Article III, Section 42 of the NASD Rules of Fair Practice. The proposed new rule would prohibit NASD members from effecting, directly or indirectly, over-the-counter transactions in a security as to which a trading
On July 10, 2009, FINRA halted over-the-counter trading in Motors Liquidation Company (formerly known as General Motors Corporation) because it believed the trading volume in the security represented a potential widespread misunderstanding that this security may be related to interests in the new General Motors Company, as opposed to Motors Liquidation Company.
I think individual investors are severely disadvantaged when compared to other market participants when it comes to the issue of access to information. We desperately need more transparency surrounding short selling. I urge you to implement requirements for more frequent reporting of short positions. Anything you can do to get more data in the hands of the public is a step in the right direction.
As the world’s largest securities self-regulatory organization, NASD has been helping to bring integrity to the markets and confidence to investors for more than 60 years.
For a market to be free and fair all information on a tradeable asset must be disclosed. These updated rules protect all parties but particularly retail investors like myself who do not have access to the same data set as large firms. I support these rule changes, a more transparent market would benefit current investors and protect the confidence of future investors in the US stock market.
I think when it comes to FTD's and naked shorting that the fines and punishments should be much more than what the companies failing are making in profit. These companies should be held accountable and have assets liquidated if they do not cover FTD's. Settlement periods should be removed. It shouldn't be a T+2 system. How is it fair to the retail investor when it dates days for us
I object to government regulators deciding what I can and cannot do with my investable funds. I receive a prospectus when I buy products that require them, and the burden is on me to make an informed decision. I do not want to have to take any special courses or pass any tests or explain my reasoning to someone outside my family. I have an investment advisor with whom I can discuss whether
Dear FINRA,
I am an individual investor, and I write in opposition to the proposed regulations which seek to substitute the judgement of federal regulators for that of individual investors seeking to make informed decisions about their own money. Your role is supposed to be to protect investors, not to hurt and control them. Unfortunately, any efforts that upend the existing disclosure-based
you make sure BD are well regulated to provide adequate information to investors. Do you assume they are not doing their job? If it is a current public investment already okayed by you why shouldnt the regular public have the right to buy it? whether it is for leverage or protection. If we end up with only passive investments there will be no market in the true sense of the word and will just
I have been informed that the above referenced regulatory notice is being considered.
I strongly object to the intent of this proposed regulation. I do not believe that FINRA should be able to restrict my ability to chose my investments or to make me go thru a bureaucratic process to establish my right to make those investments. I have been trading these investment vehicles for many years and