February 20, 2010
As an investor who has followed the considerartion of reinstatement of the uptick rulke, I feel it is important to submit a comment.
The problem with the recomendation currently being voted on is that it appears to be all show and no substance.
The uptick rule added stability to the markets for over 70 years. After its elimination, volatilityu dramatically increased, and eventually this led to the recent meltdown of the markets. The case for reinstatement is clear.
The SEC is supposed to protect the markets from manipulation. Any review of marjket action in recent years, bith before and since the meltdown, make it clear that much more needs to be done for this goal to be achiaved.
Yet, the SEC, based on the current proposal seems to lack the will to act. The current proposal appears to this observer to be a total sham. The 10% "trigger" would never have been pulled in the recent meltdown and certainly will have no effect on the regular manipulation of the market by short sellers, including significant hedgefund players.
I urge the SEC to reinstate the Up-tick rule as part of a comprehensive series of reforms, but NOT the current sham "trigger version.