Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

AMC to the MOON!


keylime
 Share

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, keylime said:

Exactly what I was thinking. I honestly can't imagine anyone giving this guy more than 5 minutes listen. And those 5 minutes are out of curiosity like you'd give to one of those circus freaks in a traveling carnival.

retail investors have short memories for the most part. and you're forgetting about all the millions of 401k's out there where the investor really has no choice what's in their portfolio. It would be a short term lull, but retail would still jump back in.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dinarrock said:

No what’s interesting Mark is your choice to actually post this total nonsense from this crackhead!! This is your DD Mark good luck man you really really need some help!!

 

I must respectfully point out the NUMEROUS excellent videos, comments and articles that markb57 has posted. The video in question is just a flip of the coin, nothing more. He neither states anything with regards to validity.

 

Just Saying. We don't want to push off a valuable poster over one post now do we ?

 

JM 2 cents.   pp

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow, I see many didn't read what I said at the posting of the video. "Interesting and DISTURBING"

Not to long ago many of you were saying that Lou was a shill. Now he walks on water for you.

I read and listen to all points. Then I choose what I want to believe.

 

I am done here.....

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, markb57 said:

wow, I see many didn't read what I said at the posting of the video. "Interesting and DISTURBING"

Not to long ago many of you were saying that Lou was a shill. Now he walks on water for you.

I read and listen to all points. Then I choose what I want to believe.

 

I am done here.....

 

Don't leave Mark. Many here appreciate you. Me for one.

 

   pp

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, markb57 said:

Need a break anyway. This covid is kicking my butt...

 

Anyway, best of luck to us all. Even you Dinarrock.....

Take a break but come on back. We'll keep the light on for ya! 😊💡

  • Like 1
  • Pow! 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, markb57 said:

retail investors have short memories for the most part. and you're forgetting about all the millions of 401k's out there where the investor really has no choice what's in their portfolio. It would be a short term lull, but retail would still jump back in.

You may be right. I think it depends on the collapse and the knowledge that perhaps 10 million investors were screwed for the benefit of the 1 percent. And what they would do to spread the word. 

Because if the game is rigged for the them and everyone knows it that would be a breach of faith that the market may never recover from. 

  • Pow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, markb57 said:

retail investors have short memories for the most part. and you're forgetting about all the millions of 401k's out there where the investor really has no choice what's in their portfolio. It would be a short term lull, but retail would still jump back in.

History would say different. After the collapse of the 1930s most people who lost everything NEVER got back in. And those who would have waited didn't break even for more than 40 years. 

Just saying. 

As to your posting, please don't hesitate. You are a valuable member. My comments were only directed at the author of the video. Nevertheless, it's educational to consider all aspects of whatever one is doing. 

 

 

10 hours ago, pokerplayer said:

 

I must respectfully point out the NUMEROUS excellent videos, comments and articles that markb57 has posted. The video in question is just a flip of the coin, nothing more. He neither states anything with regards to validity.

 

Just Saying. We don't want to push off a valuable poster over one post now do we ?

 

JM 2 cents.   pp

No we don't. 

And thanks for speaking up. :tiphat:

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feb 27, Effective date,

can someone read this ans see if this is what we are waiting for!
 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (Release No. 34-92254; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2021-31)
June 24, 2021
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 7.31E to Add a Retail Order Modifier and the NYSE American Equities Price List and Fee Schedule to Cross Reference the Retail Order Modifier
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)2 and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on June 21, 2021, NYSE American LLC (“NYSE
American” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”)
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared
by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to Rule 7.31E
and amend the NYSE American Equities Price List and Fee Schedule. The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it
      1 2 3
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78a.
17 CFR 240.19b-4.
1

received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places
specifiedinItemIVbelow. TheExchangehaspreparedsummaries,setforthinsectionsA,B,and
C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to Rule 7.31E (Orders and Modifiers) to add a description of a Retail Order modifier and to amend the Price List to add a cross-reference to Rule 7.31E(i)(4).
Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31E to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to provide for ETP Holders4 to designate an order with a retail modifier (“Retail Order”). An order designated as a “Retail Order” pursuant to proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4) would be eligible for the Retail Order Rates specified on the Exchange’s Price List.
Proposed Modifier for “Retail Orders”
To define “Retail Orders,” the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31E (Orders and Modifiers) to add a new subsection (i)(4), titled “Retail Modifier” to establish requirements for Retail Orders on the Exchange. These requirements are based on the requirements to enter orders with “retail” modifiers for purposes of rates available for such orders on the Exchange’s affiliates, New York Stock Exchange, LLC (“NYSE”) and NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”).5
     4 5
See Rules 1.1E(m) (definition of ETP) & (n) (definition of ETP Holder).
See NYSE Rule 13 regarding Retail Modifiers and the NYSE Arca procedures for designating orders with a retail modifier for purposes of fee rates. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August 3, 2012) (SR- NYSEArca-2012-77). These requirements are distinct from, but related to, the requirements for a “Retail Order” on the Retail Liquidity Programs available on NYSE
2

Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(A) would define “Retail Order” as an agency order or a riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 that originates from a natural person and is submitted to the Exchange by an ETP Holder, provided that no change is made to the terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized methodology.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(B) would specify that in order for an ETP Holder to access the proposed Retail Order pricing, the ETP Holder would be required to designate an order as a Retail Order in the form and/or manner prescribed by the Exchange.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(C) would specify that in order to submit a Retail Order, an ETP Holder must submit an attestation, in a form prescribed by the Exchange, that substantially all orders designated as “Retail Orders” would meet the requirements set out in the definition above.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(D) would specify that an ETP Holder must have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to assure that it would only designate orders as “Retail Orders” if all requirements of a Retail Order are met. Such written policies and procedures must require the ETP Holder to (i) exercise due diligence before entering a Retail Order to assure that entry as a Retail Order is in compliance with the requirements specified by the Exchange, and (ii) monitor whether orders entered as Retail Orders meet the applicable requirements. If an ETP Holder represents Retail Orders from another broker-dealer customer, the ETP Holder’s supervisory procedures must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it receives from such broker-dealer customer that it designates as Retail Orders meet the definition
and NYSE Arca. See NYSE Rule 7.44 and NYSE Arca Rule 7.44-E. The Exchange does not offer a “Retail Liquidity Program.”
 3

of a Retail Order. The ETP Holder must (i) obtain an annual written representation, in a form acceptable to the Exchange, from each broker-dealer customer that sends it orders to be designated as Retail Orders that entry of such orders as Retail Orders would be in compliance with the requirements specified by the Exchange, and (ii) monitor whether its broker-dealer customer’s Retail Order flow continues to meet the applicable requirements. Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(E) would specify that an ETP Holder that fails to abide by the requirements specified in paragraphs (i)(4)(A) - (D) of Rule 7.31E would not be eligible for the Retail Order rates for orders it designates as “Retail Orders.”
Proposed Cross-Reference in the Price List to Rule 7.31E(i)(4)
The Price List currently contains a subheading “b. Retail Order Rates*,” with text at the asterisk as follows: “See section III under ‘General’ at the end of this Price List for information on designating orders as ‘Retail Orders.’” The Exchange proposes to amend that text to also include a reference to Rule 7.31E(i)(4).
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,7 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
  6 7
15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
15 U.S.C. 78f(b) (5).
4

a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule 7.31E(i) to add a Retail Modifier would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed requirements are based on existing requirements for orders designated as “retail” on NYSE and NYSE Arca for purposes of fees and credits on those exchanges, and therefore are not novel. In addition, the proposed designation, attestation, and written policies and procedures are also based on existing procedures for
similarly-defined orders on NYSE and NYSE Arca, and therefore are not novel.8 The Exchange believes that the proposed requirements to submit attestations and to maintain written policies and procedures are not unfairly discriminatory, because they apply equally to all ETP Holders that wish to receive the Retail Order Rates. The Exchange further believes that the proposed addition of a cross-reference to proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4) in the Price List would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would enhance the clarity and transparency of the Price List and reduce any potential customer confusion.
The proposed retail modifier for purposes of providing different rates for “Retail Orders” is also based in part on the availability of such modifiers on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
 8
As noted above (see supra note 11[sic]), the proposed changes are based not on the Retail Liquidity Programs available on NYSE and NYSE Arca, but on the availability of retail fees on those exchanges for orders properly designated as “retail” orders. See NYSE Rule 13; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72253 (May 27, 2014), 79 FR 31353 (June 2, 2014) (SR-NYSE-2014-26) (approving the addition of “retail” order modifier at NYSE Rule 13(f)); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August 3, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-77) (approving the addition of “retail” order modifier on NYSE Arca).
5

(“Nasdaq”) and Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (“EDGX”), which both offer pricing for orders designated as “retail” under their respective rules, even in the absence of a retail price improvement program. For example, Nasdaq defines the term “Designated Retail Order” on its Price List as:
 [A]n agency or riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule
 5320.03 and that originates from a natural person and is submitted to Nasdaq by a
 member that designates it pursuant to this section, provided that no change is
 made to the terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the
 order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
 methodology. An order from a "natural person" can include orders on behalf of
 accounts that are held in a corporate legal form - such as an Individual Retirement
 Account, Corporation, or a Limited Liability Company - that has been established for the benefit of an individual or group of related family members, provided that
 the order is submitted by an individual. Members must submit a signed written
 attestation, in a form prescribed by Nasdaq, that they have implemented policies
 and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that substantially all orders
 designated by the member as “Designated Retail Orders” comply with these
 requirements. Orders may be designated on an order by-order basis, or by
 designating all orders on a particular order entry port as Designated Retail
 Orders.
9
Nasdaq does not have a corresponding definition of “Designated Retail Order” in its trading rules.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,10 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would promote competition because it is based on the availability of similar “retail” modifiers on NYSE, NYSE Arca, Nasdaq, and EDGX. More specifically, multiple other cash
  9 10
Nasdaq Equity 7, section 118; see also Cboe EDGX Rule 11.21 (defining “Retail Order” and establishing attestation requirement to access preferential pricing for such orders).
15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
 6

equity exchanges offer pricing for orders designated as “retail” orders, even in the absence of a
retail price improvement program on those exchanges.11 The Exchange believes that the
proposed change could promote competition between the Exchange and other execution venues,
including those that currently offer similar order types and comparable transaction pricing, by
encouraging additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.13 Because the proposed rule change: (i) does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.14
    11 12 13 14
See supra note 17 [sic].
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
7

A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)15 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b- 4(f)(6)(iii),16 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission notes that the proposal is based on the rules of other national securities exchanges and finds that the proposal presents no legal or novel regulatory questions.17 For these reasons, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.18
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)19 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
 15 16 17 18
19
17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). See supra note 5.
For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
8

IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning
the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Electronic comments:
 Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
 Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-
NYSEAMER-2021-31 on the subject line. Paper comments:
 Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2021-31. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission’s Internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications
relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without
      9

change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR- NYSEAMER-2021-31 and should be submitted on or before [insert date 21 days from publication in the Federal Register].
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.20
  20
17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
J. Matthew DeLesDernier Assistant Secretary
 10
 

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,7 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, markb57 said:

Need a break anyway. This covid is kicking my butt...

 

Anyway, best of luck to us all. Even you Dinarrock.....

 

Just got over Covid myself. Two weeks it kicked my butt and I had the shots and booster. 

My O2 saturation was down to 90%, but I monitored it with an oximeter. Took mucinex, vitamin D, iron and Colostrum supplements. No idea if the supplements helped, but I am through it on the back end. Still a bit out of puff. Likely woulda killed me if I hadn't been vaxxed. (Likely, I don't have much natural immunity!?)

Hang in there!

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bkeiller said:

 

Just got over Covid myself. Two weeks it kicked my butt and I had the shots and booster. 

My O2 saturation was down to 90%, but I monitored it with an oximeter. Took mucinex, vitamin D, iron and Colostrum supplements. No idea if the supplements helped, but I am through it on the back end. Still a bit out of puff. Likely woulda killed me if I hadn't been vaxxed. (Likely, I don't have much natural immunity!?)

Hang in there!

One of the guys I work with is fully maxed, got Covid. Got over it and back to work. After a week, he got it again and was laid up for another week. 

He still had after effects like a numb tongue and couldn't smell anything. Then he ate some sushi with a lot of wasabi and ginger and he said it completely took away the after effects. He could suddenly taste, no numbness, and could breathe normally again through his sinuses and smell. 

He believes the wasabi and ginger were the reason as his effects went away while he ate.

But he couldn't believe he got Covid back to back while being fully vaxed.

  • Pow! 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bkeiller said:

 

Just got over Covid myself. Two weeks it kicked my butt and I had the shots and booster. 

My O2 saturation was down to 90%, but I monitored it with an oximeter. Took mucinex, vitamin D, iron and Colostrum supplements. No idea if the supplements helped, but I am through it on the back end. Still a bit out of puff. Likely woulda killed me if I hadn't been vaxxed. (Likely, I don't have much natural immunity!?)

Hang in there!

 

Perhaps ivermectin would have taken care of you in a couple of days like it did me and my wife. (I was not vaxed and she was vaxed, kicked her ass much harder than mine. I've had common colds 10X worse than my covid experience). People who are vaxed and boosted have cauhgt covid multiple times and many have died. Just saying, if you are sick don't shun ANY possible cure offered.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Pow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bkeiller said:

 

Just got over Covid myself. Two weeks it kicked my butt and I had the shots and booster. 

My O2 saturation was down to 90%, but I monitored it with an oximeter. Took mucinex, vitamin D, iron and Colostrum supplements. No idea if the supplements helped, but I am through it on the back end. Still a bit out of puff. Likely woulda killed me if I hadn't been vaxxed. (Likely, I don't have much natural immunity!?)

Hang in there!

Glad you are okay but your statement is simply Not true! Had you not had the shots you would have been much better off!! People who have had the vaccine can get COVID more then once because that’s what they just trained their body to do, it only built up the antibodies for the One protein that was targeted in the vaccine. Apparently Covid has about 27 different proteins. When an unvaccinated person gets COVID their bodies builds up immunity to all the different proteins which pretty much makes them immune for life! Unfortunately so many people fall the MSM and government nonsense and believe that big Pharma really is here to help people and not their own pockets..lol.. People need to wake up and see this is nothing more then a money grab since the narrative is going to be pushed you must get a COVID vaccine every year BS!!! Good luck!!

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jg1 said:

Feb 27, Effective date,

can someone read this ans see if this is what we are waiting for!
 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (Release No. 34-92254; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2021-31)
June 24, 2021
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 7.31E to Add a Retail Order Modifier and the NYSE American Equities Price List and Fee Schedule to Cross Reference the Retail Order Modifier
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)2 and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on June 21, 2021, NYSE American LLC (“NYSE
American” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”)
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared
by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to Rule 7.31E
and amend the NYSE American Equities Price List and Fee Schedule. The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it
      1 2 3
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78a.
17 CFR 240.19b-4.
1

received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places
specifiedinItemIVbelow. TheExchangehaspreparedsummaries,setforthinsectionsA,B,and
C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to Rule 7.31E (Orders and Modifiers) to add a description of a Retail Order modifier and to amend the Price List to add a cross-reference to Rule 7.31E(i)(4).
Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31E to add new subparagraph (i)(4) to provide for ETP Holders4 to designate an order with a retail modifier (“Retail Order”). An order designated as a “Retail Order” pursuant to proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4) would be eligible for the Retail Order Rates specified on the Exchange’s Price List.
Proposed Modifier for “Retail Orders”
To define “Retail Orders,” the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31E (Orders and Modifiers) to add a new subsection (i)(4), titled “Retail Modifier” to establish requirements for Retail Orders on the Exchange. These requirements are based on the requirements to enter orders with “retail” modifiers for purposes of rates available for such orders on the Exchange’s affiliates, New York Stock Exchange, LLC (“NYSE”) and NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”).5
     4 5
See Rules 1.1E(m) (definition of ETP) & (n) (definition of ETP Holder).
See NYSE Rule 13 regarding Retail Modifiers and the NYSE Arca procedures for designating orders with a retail modifier for purposes of fee rates. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August 3, 2012) (SR- NYSEArca-2012-77). These requirements are distinct from, but related to, the requirements for a “Retail Order” on the Retail Liquidity Programs available on NYSE
2

Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(A) would define “Retail Order” as an agency order or a riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 that originates from a natural person and is submitted to the Exchange by an ETP Holder, provided that no change is made to the terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized methodology.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(B) would specify that in order for an ETP Holder to access the proposed Retail Order pricing, the ETP Holder would be required to designate an order as a Retail Order in the form and/or manner prescribed by the Exchange.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(C) would specify that in order to submit a Retail Order, an ETP Holder must submit an attestation, in a form prescribed by the Exchange, that substantially all orders designated as “Retail Orders” would meet the requirements set out in the definition above.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(D) would specify that an ETP Holder must have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to assure that it would only designate orders as “Retail Orders” if all requirements of a Retail Order are met. Such written policies and procedures must require the ETP Holder to (i) exercise due diligence before entering a Retail Order to assure that entry as a Retail Order is in compliance with the requirements specified by the Exchange, and (ii) monitor whether orders entered as Retail Orders meet the applicable requirements. If an ETP Holder represents Retail Orders from another broker-dealer customer, the ETP Holder’s supervisory procedures must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it receives from such broker-dealer customer that it designates as Retail Orders meet the definition
and NYSE Arca. See NYSE Rule 7.44 and NYSE Arca Rule 7.44-E. The Exchange does not offer a “Retail Liquidity Program.”
 3

of a Retail Order. The ETP Holder must (i) obtain an annual written representation, in a form acceptable to the Exchange, from each broker-dealer customer that sends it orders to be designated as Retail Orders that entry of such orders as Retail Orders would be in compliance with the requirements specified by the Exchange, and (ii) monitor whether its broker-dealer customer’s Retail Order flow continues to meet the applicable requirements. Proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4)(E) would specify that an ETP Holder that fails to abide by the requirements specified in paragraphs (i)(4)(A) - (D) of Rule 7.31E would not be eligible for the Retail Order rates for orders it designates as “Retail Orders.”
Proposed Cross-Reference in the Price List to Rule 7.31E(i)(4)
The Price List currently contains a subheading “b. Retail Order Rates*,” with text at the asterisk as follows: “See section III under ‘General’ at the end of this Price List for information on designating orders as ‘Retail Orders.’” The Exchange proposes to amend that text to also include a reference to Rule 7.31E(i)(4).
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,7 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
  6 7
15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
15 U.S.C. 78f(b) (5).
4

a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule 7.31E(i) to add a Retail Modifier would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed requirements are based on existing requirements for orders designated as “retail” on NYSE and NYSE Arca for purposes of fees and credits on those exchanges, and therefore are not novel. In addition, the proposed designation, attestation, and written policies and procedures are also based on existing procedures for
similarly-defined orders on NYSE and NYSE Arca, and therefore are not novel.8 The Exchange believes that the proposed requirements to submit attestations and to maintain written policies and procedures are not unfairly discriminatory, because they apply equally to all ETP Holders that wish to receive the Retail Order Rates. The Exchange further believes that the proposed addition of a cross-reference to proposed Rule 7.31E(i)(4) in the Price List would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would enhance the clarity and transparency of the Price List and reduce any potential customer confusion.
The proposed retail modifier for purposes of providing different rates for “Retail Orders” is also based in part on the availability of such modifiers on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
 8
As noted above (see supra note 11[sic]), the proposed changes are based not on the Retail Liquidity Programs available on NYSE and NYSE Arca, but on the availability of retail fees on those exchanges for orders properly designated as “retail” orders. See NYSE Rule 13; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72253 (May 27, 2014), 79 FR 31353 (June 2, 2014) (SR-NYSE-2014-26) (approving the addition of “retail” order modifier at NYSE Rule 13(f)); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August 3, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-77) (approving the addition of “retail” order modifier on NYSE Arca).
5

(“Nasdaq”) and Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (“EDGX”), which both offer pricing for orders designated as “retail” under their respective rules, even in the absence of a retail price improvement program. For example, Nasdaq defines the term “Designated Retail Order” on its Price List as:
 [A]n agency or riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule
 5320.03 and that originates from a natural person and is submitted to Nasdaq by a
 member that designates it pursuant to this section, provided that no change is
 made to the terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the
 order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
 methodology. An order from a "natural person" can include orders on behalf of
 accounts that are held in a corporate legal form - such as an Individual Retirement
 Account, Corporation, or a Limited Liability Company - that has been established for the benefit of an individual or group of related family members, provided that
 the order is submitted by an individual. Members must submit a signed written
 attestation, in a form prescribed by Nasdaq, that they have implemented policies
 and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that substantially all orders
 designated by the member as “Designated Retail Orders” comply with these
 requirements. Orders may be designated on an order by-order basis, or by
 designating all orders on a particular order entry port as Designated Retail
 Orders.
9
Nasdaq does not have a corresponding definition of “Designated Retail Order” in its trading rules.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,10 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would promote competition because it is based on the availability of similar “retail” modifiers on NYSE, NYSE Arca, Nasdaq, and EDGX. More specifically, multiple other cash
  9 10
Nasdaq Equity 7, section 118; see also Cboe EDGX Rule 11.21 (defining “Retail Order” and establishing attestation requirement to access preferential pricing for such orders).
15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
 6

equity exchanges offer pricing for orders designated as “retail” orders, even in the absence of a
retail price improvement program on those exchanges.11 The Exchange believes that the
proposed change could promote competition between the Exchange and other execution venues,
including those that currently offer similar order types and comparable transaction pricing, by
encouraging additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.13 Because the proposed rule change: (i) does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.14
    11 12 13 14
See supra note 17 [sic].
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
7

A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)15 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b- 4(f)(6)(iii),16 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission notes that the proposal is based on the rules of other national securities exchanges and finds that the proposal presents no legal or novel regulatory questions.17 For these reasons, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.18
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)19 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
 15 16 17 18
19
17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). See supra note 5.
For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
8

IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning
the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Electronic comments:
 Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
 Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-
NYSEAMER-2021-31 on the subject line. Paper comments:
 Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2021-31. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission’s Internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications
relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without
      9

change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR- NYSEAMER-2021-31 and should be submitted on or before [insert date 21 days from publication in the Federal Register].
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.20
  20
17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
J. Matthew DeLesDernier Assistant Secretary
 10
 

 

 

This looks like a job for own esteemed Pitcher. The dialogue is far above my pay scale, that is for sure... :)

 

   What say your pitcher ? Care to help a grey haired granny out ?

 

   pp

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun day today. Not sure I can ever remember us going up over 15 percent with this low of volume.

And with reported 100 percent Utilization we may just be on the precipice of something special.

Hold on APES! 

  • Upvote 2
  • Pow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, keylime said:

Fun day today. Not sure I can ever remember us going up over 15 percent with this low of volume.

And with reported 100 percent Utilization we may just be on the precipice of something special.

Hold on APES! 

Seeing as I’m real green on this stuff. What is utilization and why is 100% good for us.  I can duck duck go it but probably not really get the terminology. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, nannab said:

I don't have a clue but there is an awful lot about retail order this and retail that. That is

who we are right retail invertors?  🤞

I’ve never bought stocks before because of how I knew it was rigged. I also didn’t have money to donate (lose) to their yacht curtain funds. Now I know how really really bad the whole system is criminal and corrupt. When this goes our way or bombs I’ll never invest again in their illusionary scheme. Fortunately just like my Dinar money-If this or Dinar bombs my life just goes on as it is now. 

certainly I’m hoping for the positive outcomes on both. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Pow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pokerplayer said:

 

 

This looks like a job for own esteemed Pitcher. The dialogue is far above my pay scale, that is for sure... :)

 

   What say your pitcher ? Care to help a grey haired granny out ?

 

   pp

 

Hey poker player, easier to get someone’s attention if you add a @ sign like, @Pitcher. Bam. It will alert him.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jg1 said:

Hey poker player, easier to get someone’s attention if you add a @ sign like, @Pitcher. Bam. It will alert him.

 

Thanks for the tip jg1.  I always wondered why people did that.

 

@Pitcher  care to do some deciphering work for us challenged folks, well maybe I'm the challenged one 😆 

 

   pp

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cws said:

Seeing as I’m real green on this stuff. What is utilization and why is 100% good for us.  I can duck duck go it but probably not really get the terminology. 

To dress it down. You have 10 snicker bars and loan out two. That's 20 percent Utilization. If you loan all of your Snickers out, that's 100 percent Utilization. Legitimately, you have no more Snickers to lend.

100 percent Utilization means there should be no more shares to lend for shorting or no one is lending them out. 

Now tomorrow some entity can put 1 million shares to loan but raise the short interest to borrow those shares. In the last big run up, in June, we saw about a 98 percent Utilization and SI ( Short Interest) above 24 percent. Anything over 6 or 7 percent is high. In the 20s is astronomical. SI is currently at 21 percent. I believe we are again drawing close to another huge run up if history repeats itself. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.