Date:    05/17/2000  7:38 AM

Subject: Proposed Regulation FD, File No. S7-31-99

Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary
Securities and Exchange Commission
     
Dear Mr. Katz:
     
I strongly support the  SEC's proposed regulation on Selective Disclosure and 
Insider trading.
I am an individual investor, my occupation is homemaker.
I read Mr. Stuart J. Kaswell, the Securities Industry Association's Senior Vice 
President and General Counsel, comments. I do not agree with him in many 
points. 
I invest in corporations for the long term, after I thoroughly research the 
company, its fundamentals, business model, culture, managers, etc. Since the 
purpose of my investment is to make money by giving my financial support to a 
company I believe in, I think it is more than fair that this company rewards me 
with providing timely financial information based on which I will reevaluate my 
relationship with the company. Why only certain shareholders should be able to 
profit from this information , those who do business with the brokerage firms 
that pay the analysts? My support for a corporation, even if it is minimal 
compared with a big institution, should be as valuable as anyone's.
Mr. Kaswell can rest assured that analysts always will always have work. There 
are many investors who don't like the work and trouble of "ferreting out 
information", who will like for someone else to "...screen, distill, and 
evaluate "raw" information.", who need for someone to "...digest and interpret 
the news...". But, there are other investors who have teeth, and they should 
have the opportunity to sink them in the "raw" information.
I don't have any doubt about the high qualifications of many analysts, and I 
listen to the opinions of several. But I think that Mr. Kaswell is very 
arrogant in stating that "Parity of knowledge and understanding among these 
professionals and all other market participants will never be achievable". As I 
said before, analysts will always be needed, and their importance of their 
profession in today's market will depend in its ability to evolve, as the new 
economy is evolving.
Mr. Kaswell is afraid that this ruling is "...a substantial intrusion into 
issuers' everyday business affairs.", because "...could have a substantial 
commercial impact...". He suggests that corporations will suffer from the 
exposure to the whole world of their R&D, sales and marketing, supply 
contracts, etc., strategies. It is totally understandable that companies cannot 
make available "...almost every aspect of commercial life." to the public, but 
analysts should be consider public. If a corporation cannot make public to its 
shareholders some information, it shouldn't be available to analyst either. 
Shareholders should be able to participate in legitimate "business talk" with 
the company. Indeed, it is she shareholders - not the analysts - who own the 
company and have a direct stake on it. Of course the analysts can participate 
in this "business talk" if they are in representation of shareholders.
     
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity of voicing my opinion.
     
Sincerely,
     
Mercedes Nunez
Tallahassee, Florida
     
     
     
     
__________________________________________________ 
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. 
http://im.yahoo.com/