July 16, 2008
The following is what I have read you guys proposed. I can't believe what you are doing. Have you no common sense or logic or fairness or desire to really help the markets and give the small guy a flat playing field with the big boys.
I am not against short selling per se. But I cannot find any justifiable reason, fact, or logic why the market ever needs a naked short seller.
Just don't allow naked short selling ever in any market, period! If you don't own the security that you are shorting then you can't go short. END OF STORY!!!!!!
So stop this nonsense and give us something that will help our markets. OK?
SEC Release No. 34-58107
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued Release No. 34-58107, Amendment to Regulation SHO, on July 7, 2008, to extend the comment period to August 13, 2008, for a proposed change to its short-selling rule. The proposed change to the July 2004 rule in Release No. 34-50103, Short Sales (Regulation SHO), is the latest attempt by the SEC to eliminate the persistent problem of fails to deliver of stocks that have been sold short. Fails result when a short seller can not close out a trade at the time of settlement, often because the seller never had title to the securities.
In the August 2007 final rule in Release No. 34-56212, the SEC got rid of one of two exceptions to Regulation SHO (17 CFR 242.200 et seq.), the grandfather provision. The proposal pending in Release No. 34-58107 would, if approved as a final rule, end the second loophole, the options market maker exception. Both provisions permitted short sellers to avoid closing out their positions under certain conditions.
A June 2008 study from the SEC's Office of Economic Analysis (OEA) said that fails to deliver on optionable securities increased sharply following the elimination of the grandfather provision. The data should permit interested parties to submit informed comments about the effect the options market maker exception has had on short selling, the agency said.