you're nuts. Nobody's complaining about the legalities of allowing users to subscribe to the C2 portfolios. The key issue here is whether the portfolio publishers need to get registered if they wish to allow autotrading on their portfolio.
No, you are nuts. The issue with the SEC is not going to have anything to do with AutoTrading, although that may have been your intent in contacting the SEC. Their focus is going to be specifically on whether or not the system signal providers need to be registered as RIAs. It will have nothing to do with the methodology of how the signals are traded in someone's account.
lin - the point here is not shut C2 down. The point is rather simple actually - if these publishers need to get registered to protect EVERYONE, including C2, then just get registered. It's not difficult, just some extra paperwork. You are acting like by requiring the publishers to register that it's the end of the world. Hardly. Just register with the SEC and off you go. How it that a bad thing?
Registration is not simple. It requires passing a series 65, and dealing with countless NASD forms and state regulators. No, it is not impossible, but it is not at all simple. I know, because I've been through it. And with regard to C2, further rulings will then need to be made on where subscribers live, the size of their accounts, their net worth, etc., etc., etc., etc. Because these currently all impact how one registers, and with whom one can do business. And because the SEC and NASD regulations are very restrictive on how an RIA can promote themselves and their systems, the entire process may impossible without years of wrangling with the regulators. Trust me. NOTHING is simple when you get into government regulation.
You're missing the point. The SEC exists solely to further the interests of wall street brokers by making it look as if there's a watchdog agency that actually protects them. If C2 provides a potential method of leveling the playing field for the small guys then the SEC will shut them down. If Joe Idiot from ML or GS decides to invest your full account in Enron the SEC won't notice or will be too busy going after C2 to take action. Inside line: Martha Stewart will be the next SEC chair
I'm not missing the point at all, as I agree with you. As I said, regulators are paid to regulate. C2 is to the brokerage and fund industry as discount computerized realtors are to the traditional brokers. They each offer a valuable service to a certain segment of the population, but eventually the entrenched powers (and they are very powerful) will do what they can to shut them down. I am a huge fan of Matthew, and think he has done a great service to the public. But as C2 grows, it will no doubt become a target.
If some extra paperwork is what it takes to weed out the losers, then so be it. Registration is not hard at all, it is just time consuming and requires paperwork. I would actually think that by requiring this step at C2 that the many losing systems and traders there would dry up quickly. Right now you can just sign up and off you go. If there was paperwork required that would be filed with the SEC was involved, I would think you would see less providers and systems, but perhaps better quality. I know that's a guess, but it would eliminate the tire kickers.
The other way around this for C2 would be to simply eliminate the auto-trading feature and/or only have it available for systems that are registered.
LOL! If paying for, and taking a course and exam, then filing reams of paperwork that require delays, and putting yourself on notice with the government, is not hard, then please tell me how you define easy. And do you think for a moment that C2s' business model can exist with federal regulators involved? Of course not. What a ridiculous thought.
actually, many vendors (and subscribers as well) live abroad. e.g. what are the requirements when someone from the UK is autotrading a system offered by a vendor from France?