Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : MB TRADING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan Swartzendruber who wrote (3691)	2/6/1999 4:09:00 PM
From: john o	Respond to of 7382

What exactly is the purpose or reasoning behind this (these) rules? What's the address for the SEC discussion of the rules? I believe either AB Watley or MB Trading had a link to a page discussing this but I haven't been able to find it. Thanks.

To: Dan Swartzendruber who wrote (3691)	2/6/1999 4:23:00 PM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7382

The only thing I can think of is that waterhouse and datek are not following the rules" Waterhouse recently changed to this standard, so I doubt they're being 'sloppy'. I believe Datek has been under scrutiny by regulators because of their sloppy loaning of shorts. They have been tightening up on all manner of inconsistencies. It is my suspicion that either SWS is behind, or it has something to do with the fact that they are a daytrading firm. The only other alternative that I could see is that's it's a house rather than a gov't or exchange rule. But I was hoping someone could give me a definitive answer. When I daytrade, I get 'stuck' on a particular name. Although I rarely hold overnight, I don't like the idea of having my money restricted like that. There is no point to the rule. Barb