October 16, 2021
Do not allow this proposed rule to take effect as written. This proposal is far too permissive. Moreover, there is no objective standard for making this determination.
This proposal, on its face, has the appearance of corruption. The public has reason to believe this rule will be used to protect the CEO' financial positions without reasonable and objective standards for use.
Additionally, this proposal is unnecessary as there are already circuit breakers on the system. If a stock is rising or dropping precipitously, it should encounter circuit breakers. If market demand remains after the circuit breaker is engaged, the resulting movement is legitimate market sentiment.
The only conceivable reason for this proposed rule would be to protect the sellers of options contracts and futures contracts. These individuals and organizations took the risk of writing those contracts and should not be afforded the luxury of not bearing said risk. By modifying the risk for these contract writers, is a dangerous move. It will encourage people to write these contracts without appropriately hedging the risk. This risk reduction will lead to further issues down the line.