As a long time registered representative I disagree with the notion of eleiminating the 12b-1 charge. If you could see the world from our point of view, especially those of us who work with smaller investors you would see that we provide a valuable service for hose who desperately need advise, guidance, hand holding and comfort. Some people are do-it-yourselfers and don't need/want advise. The vast majority do. With the elimination of 12b-1's, reps won't get paid for servicing accounts and there will be an incentive for fund switching. Currently the 12b-1 is way too low for the work I do for my clients. The question really is, do people get value for this fee? The media would say no, but they are sadly ignorant on this subject. People cannot get personal financial advise from a magazine. The no load 1-800 reps are barred from giving advise. Who motivates the little guy to start a plan, stick with it and not dump it when times are bad? I do. Who benefits/ Everybody.

I applaud you for trying to do more for the consumer. It would make more sense to pay the 12b-1 's to those reps who maintain a relationship. And not to the ones who don't. In group insurance we have to get the client to renew each year and re-elect us as their rep. So we get paid when we show up and service the client. Everybody wins.

The reps are not the problem. Don't punish the 995 for the acts of the 1%

Stephen L. Day, CLU, ChFC
MetLife Financial Services
225 108th NE #450
Bellevue, WA 98004
425-945-1413
425-454-6318 fax