From: Frank Akridge Jr
Sent: August 4, 2006
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: File No. SR-NASD-2005-114


To Whom...

Please accept these comments in the best possible way.

For the most part, I am in agreement with the rule changes. I believe that full disclosure is the primary responsibility and the burden. I have great angst with the compensation limits.When a SRO and or the Federal Government attempt to put caps on compensation in any arena, it is a form of Socialism. We have a capitalistic, free enterprise system, not socialism. I don't see caps on fuel distributors, jewelers,etc.. We are one of the few industries that actually disclose our compensation to the Nth degree and I am for that. I am not for telling a manufacturer, wholesaler, or retailer of any product, how much they can make.
In a free enterprise system, with full disclosure, allow the customers to decide is they are okay with the above associates compensation. If they are not , then they can do business with a different REIT DPP etc. Supply and demand with full disclosure will set a fair price. Always has, always will.
Real estate agents have no cap on profits, they must disclose and the customer can get a different agent if they think its too much compensation for the work.

Your proposed compensation limits make it more advantagous for the larger BD who has lower costs per representative, to profit from the same product. They do not level the playing field, they only socialize it.

Frank Akridge Jr.CFP CCO

Cambridge Legacy Group www.clgsite.com frank@clgsite.com