April 4, 2007
To Chairman Chris Cox:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the changes to the NASD Bylaws. It's my understanding that at this point, you are not yet soliciting comment on the proposed merger or consolidation of the NYSE and NASD regulatory functions. My comments are confined to the issue of the Bylaws.
I've talked to many old friends in the securities industry in recent weeks and have read the public comments made by SEC and SRO leadership, not only at the November 28, 2006 News Conference, but in the months that have followed.
In the opinion of this public investor of some considerable experience, I believe that it would be proper for you to institute proceedings prior to making a decision on the approval of the Bylaws changes.
From what I have been able to ascertain, you're looking at over one-thousand five-hundred registered broker/dealers who have said 'No' to these Bylaws changes. Public hearings will allow us to find out their many and various legitimate reasons for doing so; in a transparent, unbiased forum.
I believe it's very important to find out why so many firms representing a cross section of the broker/dealer community in this country have voted the way they did.
I would also be interested in hearing why the firms that voted 'Yes' did so.
From what I have learned, many of the 'No' voters are not against the Consolidation concept, but felt very strongly about the process and procedure that led up to the vote in January.
The structural change in the Board of Governors appears to have created an interesting scenario. Some people have asked: "In the future, who will be able to fire the CEO of the NASD?" The new Board structure makes the CEO immune from termination. for all practical purposes. I must tell you something - I think I want that job
Thank you for allowing me to share a few of my observations with you and I do hope you will call for an airing of all views regarding this rules change proposal.