Feb. 24, 2023
February 24, 2023 First, this rule does just enough to satisfy a retail investor. This rule should go further and outright ban failures to deliver which plague the system and create false liquidity, destroying peoples investments and help the parties who strategically fail to deliver in manipulating stock prices. The fact that best execution was a definition by FINRA and not an SEC term or defined in regulation is embarrassing. So here we are defining best execution, and this rule set still leaves ambiguity for these self regulated companies to shirk regulation as they have with spoofing orders and covering shares with soft locates. The rest of my comment will address the obvious industry plants in congress who came to the defense of their campaign financiers ever so quickly once the SEC decided to actually propose anything. Ann Wagner This suggested reform generally lacks economic justification when order competition exists in today's equities markets and investors already receive low-cost, high quality trade executions. It is untested, overly complex and likely to cause poor outcomes for a substantial number of issuers and investors compared to the current market structure. Other concepts like an SEC best execution rule are likely to be duplicative and unnecessary. This quote from Ann Wagners comment is a wonderful look at how insidious and slimy representatives bought by industry are. Ann Wagner is a liar when she states order competition exists. Order competition doesnt exist. Designated market makers control flow of securities and ATSs allow them to control price and buy shares at 4 decimal places, while retail buys at 2. Ann Wagner makes sure her office gets the first comment on this chain and uses projection: claiming a new rule would be overly complex . Of she understood a shred of market architecture she would not have signed her name to that letter. Another shameless and blatantly bought politician signing a letter written by their donors. Ann Wagners $ comes from securities and investments and the insurance industry. You know, banks and underwriters. Amazing how Ann thinks these rules would be a detriment to her donors. Bill Huizenga Bill goes on to reference Helen M. Albert, the SEC IG. Amazingly, fraud waste and abuse is rampant in America today. We can partially thank Helen M. Albert for her lack of enforcement at the HUD OIG that has since provided talking points for Bill Huizenga to pick up on. He claims, Helen says the SEC has a hard time finding good rule-makers. Maybe if they paid $200,000 like Helen makes, they could find good rule makers. What a sad excuse to reference. The detective said the people in the rule making department are bad. Therefore new rules are bad. Bill Huizengas biggest contributors to his campaign: Securities and Investment, Insurance, real estate, commercial banks. Thats who buys Bill Huizengas letters and votes. Its available for you to go look at. Open secrets. So is it a surprise, Bill Huizenga is hot on the chase with one of the first two comments on this proposal? Bill uses and signs off with the idea that proper stakeholders need to sign off on market changes. This indicates he believes retail is not a stakeholder. He may know that when people buy stocks and hold them in street name they have essentially no rights to the share. Lets see who co-signed the letter with Bill Huizengaits our industry buddy: Josh Gotthmeier who gets his campaign funding first and foremost from SECURITIES INVESTMENT This is starting to be fun, easy and OBVIOUS.