May 5, 2009
Comments on File No. S7-09-07
The removal of the uptick rule was obviously intended to benefit the "rich and famous (wealthy investors and large institutions, ie. hedge funds, etc.)" and was initiated by less than honorable persons intent on manipulating the markets to their advantage. Persons that were not looking out for the average working man (small time investors like myself) but instead looking to advance their own agenda or the agenda's of those that contributed to the possible coercion of those responsible for ending the uptick rule which for 70 years or so served the public at large well and protected them from unscrupulous trading practices that made it impossible for the "small investor" to stay in the game on a level playing field.
If the SEC is to once again be trusted by "John Q. Public" to do the right thing it must start by reinstating the uptick rule among many other proposals that have been proven to work well and protected the "little guy". Otherwise, the stock market will remain a corrupt enterprise in which only the rich and well connected will be able to make any money and the SEC will continue to be considered a corrupt and self serving organization.
I strongly recommend the reinstatement of the uptick rule (rule 10a-1) which is referred to as a market wide, permanent approach - Proposed Uptick Rule (a proposed uptick rule).
Looking for the SEC to do the right thing,
Thomas Papineau