GBH...i'm not trying to be confrontational. I only wish you the best and to capitalize on every opportunity you can. My point is that both the firm and the client are liable. The firm, you are correct, has tremendous liability and they would be the party that would be best suited to attack as a deterent against future violations, " Do you think its my responsiblity to know NASDAQ rules?" Yes, it is. Your firm is only acting as your execution broker dealer, you agent. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. You may always have redress against your brokerage firm, but you are assuming your firm has a duty to ensure you know the rules.
The ruling, or 'explanation of the NASD's interpretation', just came out last week and will take some time for the legal compliance departments to filter down to the brokers and trading desks.
We know the rules and apply the rules so that both our firm and the client don't run into problems. When will they start enforce it? Who will they go after? Will they prosecute clients as well as the firms? Who knows? But I can tell you that NOTHING is worth a prosecution , defiantely not an extra 1/8th or so.
GBH...just giving my point of view. I understand your yet I respectfully disagree. As a sales principal, reading the rules, their applications, reading the bulletins distributed by the NASD with fines and sanctions,etc., I can say that I just don't feel its worth the risk. Risk Reward..In this case, it doesnt hold for me.
Regards,
Steve@yamner.com |
