November 2, 2010
SEC Comment Letter
REF: "File Number S7-15-10"
To: Elizabeth M. Murphy--Secretary, Securities Exchange Commission
I have been a Licensed Insurance Professional and Registered Representative for over 37 years.
I am supportive of the proposed new Rule 12b-2, which would continue the 25 basis points fee that is used to ensure that Investors continue to receive ongoing advice and service, and the SEC's proposed use of the terms"marketing and service fees" in lieu of the reference to 12b-1 fees, in an effort to enhance transparency in the disclosure documents---this seems to be logical and a common sense approach.
I am adamantly opposed to the SEC proposing a Rule that would permit Mutual Funds to issue a new class of shares at NAV, that in turn, would allow Broker-Dealers to set their own Schedule of Sales Charges and Commission pay-outs---this would be disruptive to the marketplace and create a "race to the bottom" by Broker-Dealers to undercut the competition to the point, whereby Consumers would be adversely impacted and the priciples of long-term fundamental investing would be gravely undermined--as the focus would shift to who was the "deep discounter" in the market---churning of mutual funds would become the standard operating procedure and short-term trading would be incentivized and wreak havoc with the inflows and outflows to the mutual fund companies--the middle and lower income markets once again will have more limited access to advice and mutual fund offerings--the very people that the SEC is trying to assist and protect will be disenfranchised if this Rule is put into effect, as it will no longer be financially feasible for Registered Representatives to provide products, individualized advice, and high-quality personal service. In addition, fee-based advisors will not deal with smaller mutual fund clients due to economies of scale.
It seems to me that the first rule to be adopted--should be "First--Do No Harm".