From: M. Brett Sutherland
Sent: March 31, 2005
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: File No. S7-06-04


Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549-0609

Re: SEC Proposal on Point of Sale and Confirmation Disclosures

Dear Mr. Katz:

After a 17 year tenure, I find myself very concerned about the Point of Sale and Confirmation Disclosure Rule that is pending. As in all matters in life, the cheapest product or service doesn't always turn out to be just so. I urge you to rethink the impact that this will have on the retail investor.

More people in the same products that are managed in a mass manner only leads to greater volatility for the investor. Too much money in the hands of a few managers make massive decisions isn't healthy for the markets or they subject to them. I also offer the following standard comments.

As a financial professional, I am concerned about the potential negative impact that the SECís proposal on point of sale and confirmation disclosures will have for investors.

As an independent financial advisor, I am able to offer my clients the most appropriate investment vehicles based on an unbiased assessment of their needs. The SEC point of sale disclosure system, as proposed, would have the unintended consequence of substantially limiting the broad universe of mutual funds and variable annuities that I am now able to offer my clients.

This consequence could affect approximately 150 of my clients who currently invest in mutual funds.

Furthermore, while cost is an important factor in any investment decision, this proposal misleads investors into believing that the lowest cost product is the most suitable versus encouraging investors to weigh all factors of suitability.

I fear that in the end, it will be the individual investor who will ultimately pay the added cost of implementing this proposal, either through increased fees or a limitation in the number of products offered.

The complexity of the proposal runs the risk of further confusing investors.

Rather than adopt the current proposal, I would urge the SEC to re-focus its efforts on incorporating important fee information into the prospectus and in turn, creating a more user-friendly prospectus that would better aid investors in their decision making process.

Sincerely,

M. BRETT SUTHERLAND, CRPC