Subject: File No. SR-Amex-2005-072
From: Jan Smith

March 19, 2006

These would be the beneficiaries of a (correct) decision to refrain from interfering in the passage of the ETF:

1. The principle and operation of an efficient free market
2. The global mining industry and its employees
3. The global investment industry and its employees
4. The replenishment of above ground reserves of silver
5. Private investors throughout the US and elsewhere
6. The reputation of the SEC.

The sole beneficiary of interfering with the passage of the ETF would be the profit sheets of a few large silver-using entities

As other posters have pointed out, the silver users' argument is actually an argument in favour of the ETF: illiquidity and tightness of supply is caused by the silver users' ongoing excessive (and unsustainable) consumption at the low prices set by short sellers in the paper market. The ETF is the cure, not a threat.

People have little faith in governmental and regulatory arms these days. The SEC should be prepared to explain in detail its consideration of all conflicting data on global silver reserves, not just some figures presented to it by people who happen to have been invited in. If it decides to interfere in the passing of the ETF it ought to explain why it placed the interests and dubious arguments of a relatively small group of industrials over wider interests, greater numbers of jobs, key principles and more credible arguments. The SEC should be prepared to withstand public scrutiny of any links between SEC officials and individuals/entities associated with SUA members.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

We hope, the custodes themselves.

Failing that, the media.