February 25, 2007
February 25, 2007
I am writing to oppose the proposed rule change to Article 5 of the CBOE Charter. The proposed rule change has not been made in good faith. It is simply the CBOE's attempt to confiscate the property of Full CBOT Members by manipulating the federal regulatory process.
The CBOE offers that Membership Rights in the CBOE were given to compensate all Full CBOT Members for their contribution in founding, financing, supporting, and providing intellectual property. They acknowledge that Full CBOT Members play a role in supporting fair and orderly markets at their exchange. The CBOE readily admits that the CBOT was the founder of their exchange. They broadly acknowledge that the CBOE would have been a division of the CBOT if it had been permitted by the same federal regulatory structure they are now attempting to manipulate.
The CBOE argument regarding what a Full CBOT Member is after a completed merger with the CME are self-serving and inequitable. All of the CBOE arguments supporting why Full CBOT Members will no longer exist after the proposed merger with the CME are minor technicalities involving property rights issues that should be disputed in the courts and not through the federal regulatory process.
I see no other equitable purpose for the proposed rule change. I believe this proposal is completely inconsistent with the terms governing the exchange, all of the Acts administered by the Commission, and the mandate the SEC has to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation.
Respectfully,
John Halston