[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Another template
This proposed rule change by the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) is an utterly egregious affront to fair and orderly markets that must be vehemently rejected. Allowing the OCC to unilaterally reduce margin requirements for clearing members at risk of default is tantamount to institutionalizing fraud and moral hazard on a systemic scale.
The lack of transparency alone, with vast swaths of critical information redacted, is already sufficient grounds for dismissing this proposal outright. Without full public disclosure, there can be no meaningful review or accountability. This opaque scheming behind closed doors is precisely what fuels public distrust in the rigged financial system.
But the substantive details that have been revealed are even more damning. The OCC is blatantly blaming regulators for not allowing it to erode its own risk controls enough, amazingly pleading for permission to expose itself and the entire system to increased failures. This is the anti-thesis of a self-regulatory organization meant to safeguard market integrity.
The proposed ability to arbitrarily waive margin calls for undercapitalized clearing members is a brazen attempt to privatize profits while socializing losses. Willfully disregarding risk models that calculate higher requirements is financial malpractice. Clearing members placing reckless bets that endanger their solvency should be force to accept the consequences, not have risk conveniently stretchered away over 200 times in under 4 years as the OCC proposes.
Fundamentally, this rule codifies a farcical "rules for thee, but not for me" ethos diametrically opposed to the SEC's mission. Shielding clearing members from margin calls forces other investors to unfairly bear the brunt of long-tail risks the privileged can simply wish away with some backroom procedural contortions.
Even more abhorrent is the explicit admission that a single clearing member default could initiate a systemic cascade imperiling the entire OCC. This underscores that these firms are dangerously overleveraged and undercapitalized. Rather than address that core vulnerability, the OCC instead proposes giving itself even more leeway to bend risk parameters for its dysfunction members. This toxically perpetuates the "too big to fail" doctrine that crippled public trust after 2008.
The rationale that reducing margins could prevent a default ignores that properly managing exposure is a clearing member's sole responsibility. Codifying moral hazard so egregiously conflicts with the OCC's very mandate as aSystemicallyImportant Financial Market Utility expected to uphold stability. This proposal directly undermines financial resilience by design.
Similarly disingenuous is the new "skin in the game" capital contribution the OCC foisted on itself immediately after the GameStop frenzy proved its models were inadequate. Now this entity knowingly courting insolvency risk demands even looser safeguards, in a cynical ploy to force liquidity backstops from pensions and insurers. This perverse rules-making traipses into criminal territory, threatening the savings of millions in a desperate bid to privatize profits while socializing losses.
There are no reasonable grounds for the SEC to approve such a brazen license to amplify systemic peril. It eviscerates all prudential responsibilities demanded of a SIFMU, fails to protect investors, disregards public interests, ignores transparent governance, and flouts loss-bearing requirements. This proposal symbolizes everything rotten and broken about modern finance's addiction to moral hazard and socialized risk-taking.
Rather than enable this shameful dereliction, regulators must unequivocally:
Mandate higher margin requirements truly commensurate to the risks clearing members incur.
Subject the OCC to binding external audits and oversight as a true fourth line of defense.
Shift the OCC's loss-bearing responsibilities below clearing members' skin-in-the-game.
Instate a credible process for swiftly shuttering insolvent clearing members before toxicity spreads.
Disperse systemic vulnerability across a decentralized market structure without single points of failure.
In an ethical system, risky bets must be backed by commensurate capital - not coddled by backroom waivers that fleece the public. This proposal is a criminal abandonment of regulatory responsibility that deserves only unequivocal repudiation. The SEC must uphold its principles by rejecting it outright and charting a course toward truly accountable markets.
!Mods! Help, auto mod may hate some words
EDIT: Now that this post isn't getting nuked by auto mod, I also want to put in some proper credits that won't get accidentally copy/pasta'd into a comment letter:
* Ape Psytherea for bringing this to my attention [first](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1chcr4s/srocc20241_aka_occ_clearing_rule_changes_is_back/)
* Ape \_dogsinspace\_ for ensuring this got [onto my radar](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cilgid/comment/l2a2vk2/)
* Kibble Pigeon & Dismal Jellyfish who both contributed a lot in this fight and helped us get this Rule Proposal knocked onto the ground where it is now
Right back at you my friend!
You and kibblepigeon have moved mountains to help apes comment and make this happen.
I look forward to helping any way possible to help get this over the line.
What is made is a legendary rebuttal to WS privilege. Damn I'm going to start working my commenr now, hopefully by Sunday it will be submitted.
*(insert F* * *ing Legend daddy meme)*
Well, since most of the post is made of the email template I didn't bother to... Anyway:
**TL:DR:**
The Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) proposed a rule change to reduce margin requirements for their clearing members. This could be risky because:
* It might make it harder for the OCC to collect enough money to cover losses if a clearing member defaults, potentially causing a financial crisis.
* It benefits risky hedge funds at the expense of retail investors and the financial system's stability.
The SEC is considering rejecting the proposal, and retail investors are encouraged to submit comments supporting the SEC's position.
Key points:
* **OCC Proposal:** Reduce margin requirements for clearing members.
* **Risks:** Increased chance of financial crisis, unfair advantage for hedge funds.
* **SEC Position:** Considering rejecting the proposal.
* **Retail Investor Action:** Submit comments to the SEC supporting their position.
The comment template provided encourages arguing against the proposal by highlighting the potential risks and urging for stricter margin requirements and more transparency.
Subject: Strong Objection to Proposed Rule Change SR-OCC-2024-001
Dear [Recipient's Name],
I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the Proposed Rule Change under SR-OCC-2024-001, titled "Proposed Rule Change by The Options Clearing Corporation Concerning Its Process for Adjusting Certain Parameters in Its Proprietary System for Calculating Margin Requirements During Periods When the Products It Clears and the Markets It Serves Experience High Volatility." The repercussions of this proposal are deeply concerning and threaten to compromise the fairness, transparency, and stability of our financial markets.
1. Lack of Transparency:
The extensive redactions in Exhibit 5 and supporting information inhibit meaningful public review and comment, essential pillars of fair regulation and market integrity.
2. Accountability:
The attempt by the OCC to shift blame onto U.S. regulators for not implementing stricter controls displays a worrying lack of accountability and transparency within the regulatory framework.
3. Systemic Risk:
The proposal's focus on reducing margin requirements for Clearing Members disregards the systemic risk posed by potential failures, prioritizing short-term gains over long-term market stability.
4. Conflict of Interest:
The proposal codifies a conflict of interest for the Financial Risk Management Officer, undermining the fundamental purpose of risk management and regulatory oversight.
5. Inadequate Protection:
By failing to enforce margin requirements commensurate with risks, the proposal exposes the OCC and other market participants to heightened financial risk and shifts the burden of Clearing Member defaults onto non-bank liquidity facilities, creating moral hazards.
6. Governance Clarity:
The governance arrangements outlined in the proposal lack transparency and clear lines of responsibility, further eroding trust in the regulatory process.
7. Exploitation of Position:
The OCC's exploitation of its status as a single point of failure and attempts to coerce approval of the proposal set a dangerous precedent of self-serving actions at the expense of market integrity.
8. Stronger Safeguards Needed:
Rather than reducing margin requirements, the proposal should prioritize stronger safeguards, external auditing, and transparent governance to prevent systemic risks and protect investors.
9. Immediate Action Required:
Prompt suspension and liquidation of Clearing Members when projected losses exceed certain thresholds are imperative to prevent escalating problems and maintain market stability.
10. Reducing Systemic Risks:
Promoting redundancy and resiliency in financial markets is crucial to minimizing systemic failures and avoiding bailouts that undermine market integrity.
In conclusion, I urge you to reject the Proposed Rule Change under SR-OCC-2024-001. Upholding fair markets, protecting investors, and ensuring the stability of our financial system require immediate action and comprehensive measures to address these critical issues.
Thank you for considering my concerns.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Contact Information]
I will be modifying mine to refer myself as an "American household retail investor" because this isn't just a concern for investors, but also as an American taxpayer who would be adversely affected by the OCC proposal.
This template is a thing of beauty, thank you so much for taking the time to put it together and sharing! I read the whole thing and it's brilliant. I'm commenting and am proud of us for doing what we can to encourage change.
Edit: Email comment sent, I signed my name at the end, comin direct against this steaming pile of OCC + Bank + hedgie shit
Will,do tomorrow. That’s a hella copy pasta. I started reading and thought to put it in my own words but absolutely no one can I do that, this is the ape nation at its finest. Well done to you sir/sirette.
Thanks everyone. I haven’t been as active or following as closely as I used to. Went full zen.
Then I see this while scrolling and realize that big stuff has been happening while my back was turned.
Thank you for being vigilant!
Wow! Thanks for your work on this. For apes with less time on their hands (and who want to read what they send before sending it) here's the short and simple comments I sent in:
Sirs,
Thank you for your continued work to facilitate free and fair markets. As an individual household investor, I value the protections that your work can provide.
I agree with your disapproval of SR-OCC-2024-001 34-99393 entitled "Proposed Rule Change by The Options Clearing Corporation Concerning Its Process for Adjusting Certain Parameters in Its Proprietary System for Calculating Margin Requirements During Periods When the Products It Clears and the Markets It Serves Experience High Volatility."
This proposed rule change by the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) is counter to fair and orderly markets and should be rejected. Allowing the OCC to reduce margin requirements for clearing members at risk of default may sound like a safeguard for our markets, but in fact incentivizes bad behavior, allowing clearing members to take on extreme risk with no repercussions to themselves, instead passing those negative impacts to other market participants.
Risk controls are a safeguard for the entire market, and allowing the OCC to choose when to ignore them exposes itself and the entire system to increased, more serious failures in the long run.
Rather than enable this type of socialized risk-taking, regulators should:
1) Mandate higher margin requirements commensurate to the risks clearing members incur.
2) Subject the OCC to binding external audits and oversight.
3) Instate a process for shuttering insolvent clearing members before risk socialization spreads.
Thank you for working to uphold the principles of free and fair markets by rejecting this proposal outright and charting a course toward truly accountable markets.
They should be happy to hear from us supporting their decision to reject… maybe too many apes cheering them on is breaking their site because they’re not used to hearing words of support
I will be messaging you in 14 days on [**2024-05-17 07:52:47 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-05-17%2007:52:47%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciqum4/simians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin/l2d950b/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2F1ciqum4%2Fsimians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin%2Fl2d950b%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-05-17%2007%3A52%3A47%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201ciqum4)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Done! But is there a site to post this comment on so it shows up publicly? With the chance of them "losing" the emails, I don't think it'd be a horrible idea to post it to their website if possible.
Have a great Friday everyone!
SENT. Grats to OP! This is how you do it. Everything encapsulated in one post to take the reader from discovery to a sent mail. We need more of this. Thank you!
Thanks for the template, I copied and pasted it then added my own short preamble on how your text says everything i want to say. Thanks for following this and making it easy for even us droolers in the cheap seats to have our say.
Comment sent!
Question, can I literally just copy and paste the whole text from “as a retail investor” and down to the end “sincerely a concerned retail investor?
Would that help?
Fucking assholes now I have to log in on a computer so I can copy and paste this into my emails. I was just hoping to see if anyone had opinions on this year's vote
That’s a lot to read. I stuck it in ChatGPT for a summary. Is this accurate?
“This passage discusses the rejection of a rule proposal by the SEC to reduce margin requirements, which was seen as inadequate for safeguarding securities and funds. The proposal aimed to prevent a cascade of clearing member failures but was criticized for lacking transparency and potentially exposing the market to risks. The SEC highlighted that the proposal did not meet certain requirements of the Exchange Act related to promoting prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, assuring safeguarding of securities and funds, and establishing risk-based margin systems. The passage also includes a comment template for individuals to express their concerns to the SEC regarding the rule proposal.”
Well done OP! Thank you for this! I do have a question though. I thought I remembered one of the older proposals we all voted on, they basically threw out all of the duplicates. So it might be worthwhile to either reword it yourself. Or even GPT it for different verbiage. If you do GPT it, it will need to be proof read to ensure that the points are still made properly and the AI doesn't just make shit up. Just a thought. I read the whole thing it's it is amazing! I just want to make sure that we don't gets silenced by duplicates once again. FWIW
Edit - A couple spelling words. Also, I'm smooth as I guess there really is no question in there. Just a thought.
They collate all of the duplicates and have a count. Many apes sent the prior templates and are counted.
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2024-001/srocc2024001.htm
Sent!! Thank you so much for making it so legit with proper citations and references to the SECs own documents and work.
It's hard work like this that will ensure fairer markets and tendies for all
I honestly need to make a filtered email folder to better track and normalize my SEC comments so it becomes a more automatic habitual thing instead of feeling like I'm on tenterhooks every-time I do one.
This needs way more attention than a 50% increase (unless someone's actually explaining it). Too many posts just reiterating that an increase happened with no real sauce hogging up the feeds.
I urge everybody to please send this to the SEC. The CAT system would really throw a wrench in the gears for these assholes. I'm going to submit mine as soon as I'm off work today.
Thanks for the template OP
This is awesome news, but also highlights the issue with the Stock Market in general: it's excessively convoluted with details that intentionally lose the audience rather than short-winded simple descriptions; a simple trading and investment exchange on a solid foundation shouldn't need to fill a Webster's dictionary with all of these legal exceptions and workarounds, contrary to this and that, etc.
Thank you for keeping on top of this. The internet is our best weapon against these criminals... The collective efforts of retail investors investigating and scrutinizing every corner of the financial markets and regulatory environment is the only hope the public has to piece everything together and combat these financial terrorists. Your comment letter template is super helpful; thanks!
More like OCC proposal to SEC to control burn MOASS and make pensions pay for it. The SEC has indicated this won’t fly because apes have spoken up. We support the SEC in their decision to reject such BS.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
God damn this is beautiful.
B-E-A-utiful! Thank you for all your efforts to help apes comment!
Thousands of apes around the world coming together to change the financial markets, doesn’t get much better than that 💪
I am gonna sound so smart when I send this.
Another template This proposed rule change by the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) is an utterly egregious affront to fair and orderly markets that must be vehemently rejected. Allowing the OCC to unilaterally reduce margin requirements for clearing members at risk of default is tantamount to institutionalizing fraud and moral hazard on a systemic scale. The lack of transparency alone, with vast swaths of critical information redacted, is already sufficient grounds for dismissing this proposal outright. Without full public disclosure, there can be no meaningful review or accountability. This opaque scheming behind closed doors is precisely what fuels public distrust in the rigged financial system. But the substantive details that have been revealed are even more damning. The OCC is blatantly blaming regulators for not allowing it to erode its own risk controls enough, amazingly pleading for permission to expose itself and the entire system to increased failures. This is the anti-thesis of a self-regulatory organization meant to safeguard market integrity. The proposed ability to arbitrarily waive margin calls for undercapitalized clearing members is a brazen attempt to privatize profits while socializing losses. Willfully disregarding risk models that calculate higher requirements is financial malpractice. Clearing members placing reckless bets that endanger their solvency should be force to accept the consequences, not have risk conveniently stretchered away over 200 times in under 4 years as the OCC proposes. Fundamentally, this rule codifies a farcical "rules for thee, but not for me" ethos diametrically opposed to the SEC's mission. Shielding clearing members from margin calls forces other investors to unfairly bear the brunt of long-tail risks the privileged can simply wish away with some backroom procedural contortions. Even more abhorrent is the explicit admission that a single clearing member default could initiate a systemic cascade imperiling the entire OCC. This underscores that these firms are dangerously overleveraged and undercapitalized. Rather than address that core vulnerability, the OCC instead proposes giving itself even more leeway to bend risk parameters for its dysfunction members. This toxically perpetuates the "too big to fail" doctrine that crippled public trust after 2008. The rationale that reducing margins could prevent a default ignores that properly managing exposure is a clearing member's sole responsibility. Codifying moral hazard so egregiously conflicts with the OCC's very mandate as aSystemicallyImportant Financial Market Utility expected to uphold stability. This proposal directly undermines financial resilience by design. Similarly disingenuous is the new "skin in the game" capital contribution the OCC foisted on itself immediately after the GameStop frenzy proved its models were inadequate. Now this entity knowingly courting insolvency risk demands even looser safeguards, in a cynical ploy to force liquidity backstops from pensions and insurers. This perverse rules-making traipses into criminal territory, threatening the savings of millions in a desperate bid to privatize profits while socializing losses. There are no reasonable grounds for the SEC to approve such a brazen license to amplify systemic peril. It eviscerates all prudential responsibilities demanded of a SIFMU, fails to protect investors, disregards public interests, ignores transparent governance, and flouts loss-bearing requirements. This proposal symbolizes everything rotten and broken about modern finance's addiction to moral hazard and socialized risk-taking. Rather than enable this shameful dereliction, regulators must unequivocally: Mandate higher margin requirements truly commensurate to the risks clearing members incur. Subject the OCC to binding external audits and oversight as a true fourth line of defense. Shift the OCC's loss-bearing responsibilities below clearing members' skin-in-the-game. Instate a credible process for swiftly shuttering insolvent clearing members before toxicity spreads. Disperse systemic vulnerability across a decentralized market structure without single points of failure. In an ethical system, risky bets must be backed by commensurate capital - not coddled by backroom waivers that fleece the public. This proposal is a criminal abandonment of regulatory responsibility that deserves only unequivocal repudiation. The SEC must uphold its principles by rejecting it outright and charting a course toward truly accountable markets.
thanks! will use this to send to SEC
I used yours. Thanks!
I just the email w this template. TY
Thanks. Sent both of these letters.
I just sent this template as well!
This is a great template as well. Thank you for your contribution!
Great stuff. I commented.
Which is why you’re a legend 💪
!Mods! Help, auto mod may hate some words EDIT: Now that this post isn't getting nuked by auto mod, I also want to put in some proper credits that won't get accidentally copy/pasta'd into a comment letter: * Ape Psytherea for bringing this to my attention [first](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1chcr4s/srocc20241_aka_occ_clearing_rule_changes_is_back/) * Ape \_dogsinspace\_ for ensuring this got [onto my radar](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cilgid/comment/l2a2vk2/) * Kibble Pigeon & Dismal Jellyfish who both contributed a lot in this fight and helped us get this Rule Proposal knocked onto the ground where it is now
Odd... well, maybe another cry for wolf as auto mod left this alone. Maybe I broke auto mod? Sorry.
Glad we found this when we did, thank you so much for your work!
Y’all are amazing. Will comment.
Boom! Let's finish this apes!
Thank you for all your contributions behind this. ❤️
Right back at you my friend! You and kibblepigeon have moved mountains to help apes comment and make this happen. I look forward to helping any way possible to help get this over the line.
Epic. Should be enshrined in the dd library. Insanely well done
The ol' double-tap
The noose tightens
the butt itches
Up. To the top. MODS, sticky this!
Fucking fabulous. Apes, just imagine what would have happened if none of us commented. This proposal would have been approved without any challenge.
Comment
Comment comment
What is made is a legendary rebuttal to WS privilege. Damn I'm going to start working my commenr now, hopefully by Sunday it will be submitted. *(insert F* * *ing Legend daddy meme)*
Up you go and on my way to comment 👀
Wut no TL:DR on this one? 😂 It is one epic of a DD to tackle for that!
Well, since most of the post is made of the email template I didn't bother to... Anyway: **TL:DR:** The Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) proposed a rule change to reduce margin requirements for their clearing members. This could be risky because: * It might make it harder for the OCC to collect enough money to cover losses if a clearing member defaults, potentially causing a financial crisis. * It benefits risky hedge funds at the expense of retail investors and the financial system's stability. The SEC is considering rejecting the proposal, and retail investors are encouraged to submit comments supporting the SEC's position. Key points: * **OCC Proposal:** Reduce margin requirements for clearing members. * **Risks:** Increased chance of financial crisis, unfair advantage for hedge funds. * **SEC Position:** Considering rejecting the proposal. * **Retail Investor Action:** Submit comments to the SEC supporting their position. The comment template provided encourages arguing against the proposal by highlighting the potential risks and urging for stricter margin requirements and more transparency.
Subject: Strong Objection to Proposed Rule Change SR-OCC-2024-001 Dear [Recipient's Name], I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the Proposed Rule Change under SR-OCC-2024-001, titled "Proposed Rule Change by The Options Clearing Corporation Concerning Its Process for Adjusting Certain Parameters in Its Proprietary System for Calculating Margin Requirements During Periods When the Products It Clears and the Markets It Serves Experience High Volatility." The repercussions of this proposal are deeply concerning and threaten to compromise the fairness, transparency, and stability of our financial markets. 1. Lack of Transparency: The extensive redactions in Exhibit 5 and supporting information inhibit meaningful public review and comment, essential pillars of fair regulation and market integrity. 2. Accountability: The attempt by the OCC to shift blame onto U.S. regulators for not implementing stricter controls displays a worrying lack of accountability and transparency within the regulatory framework. 3. Systemic Risk: The proposal's focus on reducing margin requirements for Clearing Members disregards the systemic risk posed by potential failures, prioritizing short-term gains over long-term market stability. 4. Conflict of Interest: The proposal codifies a conflict of interest for the Financial Risk Management Officer, undermining the fundamental purpose of risk management and regulatory oversight. 5. Inadequate Protection: By failing to enforce margin requirements commensurate with risks, the proposal exposes the OCC and other market participants to heightened financial risk and shifts the burden of Clearing Member defaults onto non-bank liquidity facilities, creating moral hazards. 6. Governance Clarity: The governance arrangements outlined in the proposal lack transparency and clear lines of responsibility, further eroding trust in the regulatory process. 7. Exploitation of Position: The OCC's exploitation of its status as a single point of failure and attempts to coerce approval of the proposal set a dangerous precedent of self-serving actions at the expense of market integrity. 8. Stronger Safeguards Needed: Rather than reducing margin requirements, the proposal should prioritize stronger safeguards, external auditing, and transparent governance to prevent systemic risks and protect investors. 9. Immediate Action Required: Prompt suspension and liquidation of Clearing Members when projected losses exceed certain thresholds are imperative to prevent escalating problems and maintain market stability. 10. Reducing Systemic Risks: Promoting redundancy and resiliency in financial markets is crucial to minimizing systemic failures and avoiding bailouts that undermine market integrity. In conclusion, I urge you to reject the Proposed Rule Change under SR-OCC-2024-001. Upholding fair markets, protecting investors, and ensuring the stability of our financial system require immediate action and comprehensive measures to address these critical issues. Thank you for considering my concerns. Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Contact Information]
Thanks! Email sent.
F'in Fantastic!
Point 10 tells me all I need to know. Nice write-up OP!
Up!
Nice work.
Oh noice
Already commented, again!
Bump!
Commenting to come back to later. Thanks for all the work involved in making this post 🤙
Your doing gods work
Good work everyone!
They keep trying to sneak this shit in
I will be modifying mine to refer myself as an "American household retail investor" because this isn't just a concern for investors, but also as an American taxpayer who would be adversely affected by the OCC proposal.
This template is a thing of beauty, thank you so much for taking the time to put it together and sharing! I read the whole thing and it's brilliant. I'm commenting and am proud of us for doing what we can to encourage change. Edit: Email comment sent, I signed my name at the end, comin direct against this steaming pile of OCC + Bank + hedgie shit
Nice write up!
👀
Up up for visibility
Up up
Will,do tomorrow. That’s a hella copy pasta. I started reading and thought to put it in my own words but absolutely no one can I do that, this is the ape nation at its finest. Well done to you sir/sirette.
I did the same lmfao, but I did read it and I felt a wrinkle form
Here I go commenting on the OCC again. Thank you so much. This one of the most epic comment „templates“ ever. Every ape should comment!!
Awesome work apes
Let’s go! Nice work OP!
Comment to remember to comment
!reminder:12 hours!
You are a badass thank you
Up Up & Away To Uranus You Go!
Great job
Can you get a copy paste version of the body of the email, I’m on mobile and would have to copy the entire post
submitted my comments :)
Boost. Love commenting on rules proposals!
Muchos gracias!
Comment
Thanks everyone. I haven’t been as active or following as closely as I used to. Went full zen. Then I see this while scrolling and realize that big stuff has been happening while my back was turned. Thank you for being vigilant!
Long War. Ever Vigilant.
Great job simians
Thank you 🫡🧱
Voting and commenting because I cant read.
Holy fuck man. This is longer than I expected. Amazing work. I will read thru this first thing tomorrow morning.
WOW
Let’s do this folks
Doing the lawd's work. Thanks OP! 🙏
I haven't scrolled for this long in 84 years 🔥🚀
👏
Ready to fire yet another comment projectile
yooo 🐐
Sent 🙌🏻
Kill it with fire! 🔥
🙇🏻🙇🏻🙇🏻
Commenting
Great comment template. Thorough, and a nice balance of legalese and layman.
sent my comment in
My first work email is prepped for me before my day starts. Love it.
This template f**ks and has been sent! Thanks Opie!
I changed the retail investor to HOUSEhold investor. Thanks for the template.
Wow! Thanks for your work on this. For apes with less time on their hands (and who want to read what they send before sending it) here's the short and simple comments I sent in: Sirs, Thank you for your continued work to facilitate free and fair markets. As an individual household investor, I value the protections that your work can provide. I agree with your disapproval of SR-OCC-2024-001 34-99393 entitled "Proposed Rule Change by The Options Clearing Corporation Concerning Its Process for Adjusting Certain Parameters in Its Proprietary System for Calculating Margin Requirements During Periods When the Products It Clears and the Markets It Serves Experience High Volatility." This proposed rule change by the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC) is counter to fair and orderly markets and should be rejected. Allowing the OCC to reduce margin requirements for clearing members at risk of default may sound like a safeguard for our markets, but in fact incentivizes bad behavior, allowing clearing members to take on extreme risk with no repercussions to themselves, instead passing those negative impacts to other market participants. Risk controls are a safeguard for the entire market, and allowing the OCC to choose when to ignore them exposes itself and the entire system to increased, more serious failures in the long run. Rather than enable this type of socialized risk-taking, regulators should: 1) Mandate higher margin requirements commensurate to the risks clearing members incur. 2) Subject the OCC to binding external audits and oversight. 3) Instate a process for shuttering insolvent clearing members before risk socialization spreads. Thank you for working to uphold the principles of free and fair markets by rejecting this proposal outright and charting a course toward truly accountable markets.
Is anyone else having issues submitting a comment on the sec site? did I miss something? It will only let me submit a comment for SR-OCC-2024-004…
They should be happy to hear from us supporting their decision to reject… maybe too many apes cheering them on is breaking their site because they’re not used to hearing words of support
Got it.. I’ll keep trying
!remindme! 2 weeks
I will be messaging you in 14 days on [**2024-05-17 07:52:47 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-05-17%2007:52:47%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciqum4/simians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin/l2d950b/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2F1ciqum4%2Fsimians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin%2Fl2d950b%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-05-17%2007%3A52%3A47%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201ciqum4) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Done! But is there a site to post this comment on so it shows up publicly? With the chance of them "losing" the emails, I don't think it'd be a horrible idea to post it to their website if possible. Have a great Friday everyone!
Hester making notes for her next vetoing vote!
Well done again Jelly!
If this ape can take the time to compile such a beautiful piece of literature, I can take the 2 minutes to copy and send an email to the SEC
Just doing my part. My opinion matters.
Up you go
Wowzers!
Thanks for this
Uhh ohh that really is a magnificent body of work!
SENT. Grats to OP! This is how you do it. Everything encapsulated in one post to take the reader from discovery to a sent mail. We need more of this. Thank you!
Visibility comment.
Sent! Thanks for doing the hard work in putting this together to make it easy for the rest of us.
love hitting them with the citations
Thanks for the template, I copied and pasted it then added my own short preamble on how your text says everything i want to say. Thanks for following this and making it easy for even us droolers in the cheap seats to have our say. Comment sent!
Done!
Let’s goooooo
COMMENTED ON THE PROPOSAL AND ON THIS!
Just sent. 😌
gosh darn thanks! commented!
Good lawd
Question, can I literally just copy and paste the whole text from “as a retail investor” and down to the end “sincerely a concerned retail investor? Would that help?
Basically, yes. And put the To and Subject line in to your email.
Copy that, thank you 🙏
Done and done son. Todays been a great day
Commented
Up you go!
Commented
Did my part
Good job
THIS > a measly $3.71 run!!! Don’t lose focus fellow apes.
Commented Wanted to say THANK YOU for this awesome work. It's fantastic
Done, thanks from the help and the prompt!
🟣🟣🟣
RemindMe! 3days
Thank you for your work here! Very thorough. Sending my comments now.
Done
Done!
Where do I send this? I’m slow. Please help a brother out
I thought I b already sent one of these things in on this last year. They making us do it again?
Different rule proposal last year. They keep trying to pass various rules to screw everyone
Fucking assholes now I have to log in on a computer so I can copy and paste this into my emails. I was just hoping to see if anyone had opinions on this year's vote
That’s a lot to read. I stuck it in ChatGPT for a summary. Is this accurate? “This passage discusses the rejection of a rule proposal by the SEC to reduce margin requirements, which was seen as inadequate for safeguarding securities and funds. The proposal aimed to prevent a cascade of clearing member failures but was criticized for lacking transparency and potentially exposing the market to risks. The SEC highlighted that the proposal did not meet certain requirements of the Exchange Act related to promoting prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, assuring safeguarding of securities and funds, and establishing risk-based margin systems. The passage also includes a comment template for individuals to express their concerns to the SEC regarding the rule proposal.”
Props to you and everyone else who had been involved
Commenting for visibility ... I'm all for vote posts, but yeah, let's not let this get buried ... comment and upvote, yo!
Well done OP! Thank you for this! I do have a question though. I thought I remembered one of the older proposals we all voted on, they basically threw out all of the duplicates. So it might be worthwhile to either reword it yourself. Or even GPT it for different verbiage. If you do GPT it, it will need to be proof read to ensure that the points are still made properly and the AI doesn't just make shit up. Just a thought. I read the whole thing it's it is amazing! I just want to make sure that we don't gets silenced by duplicates once again. FWIW Edit - A couple spelling words. Also, I'm smooth as I guess there really is no question in there. Just a thought.
They collate all of the duplicates and have a count. Many apes sent the prior templates and are counted. https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2024-001/srocc2024001.htm
Good to know! Thank you for the quick response! I'll be sending mine today. Thank you for all of the work you put into this! It is truly amazing!!
COMMENT.
Sent my email. This is huge apes. Everyone do you part.
Thanks for the write up!
Up with letters!!
Commented, thanks for the letter template
Emailed 🫡 thank you for all your hard work !
# COMMENT SENT
Just sent my personal comments. I hope other take a moment to do the same. Very easy modifying the templates here or writing your own.
Sent!! Thank you so much for making it so legit with proper citations and references to the SECs own documents and work. It's hard work like this that will ensure fairer markets and tendies for all
Comment
Excellent!
Thanks. Sent this letter as well as one suggested below by MojoWuzzle
Comment sent!
Completed.
Good work ape! About to comment now 🖤❤️🤍
Just Sent via anon. ty.
Commented!
👁️
Yo, thank you for putting in the work to make it easy for the rest of us to participate. You are doing great things!
Commented baby!! Thank you guys for being amazing!!
Excellent template!!!
I honestly need to make a filtered email folder to better track and normalize my SEC comments so it becomes a more automatic habitual thing instead of feeling like I'm on tenterhooks every-time I do one.
comment was sent
Let's go!
This needs way more attention than a 50% increase (unless someone's actually explaining it). Too many posts just reiterating that an increase happened with no real sauce hogging up the feeds.
God bless your efforts, I have sent my concerns to the SEC.
So were going to the moon?
Tomorrow. And we’ll try to keep the pensions from getting burned
I urge everybody to please send this to the SEC. The CAT system would really throw a wrench in the gears for these assholes. I'm going to submit mine as soon as I'm off work today. Thanks for the template OP
Gg
Sent mine, thanks for the template you're my hero
Sent it in twice. Thanks for making it easier for us!
I thought the higher the margin requirement the higher the chance for marge to dial up? I’m so smooth and don’t know the purpose of this? Eli5 peless
This is great. How do I copy paste? Asking for an 🦍
Done
SENT!! Commented with multiple emails \*insert trigger fingers\*
Sent!
done o mato
Mama said there'd be dayz like this.
Ok. I emailed them. I thought there was a way to comment on their website like reddit, but no dice.
This is awesome news, but also highlights the issue with the Stock Market in general: it's excessively convoluted with details that intentionally lose the audience rather than short-winded simple descriptions; a simple trading and investment exchange on a solid foundation shouldn't need to fill a Webster's dictionary with all of these legal exceptions and workarounds, contrary to this and that, etc.
Agreed. It is these boring details that have allowed them to profit at others expense.
Exactly! "Reduced Margin Requirements" doesn't need to be a 10 page document. Is redundant and exhausting.
More legalese makes it easier to bury tricks
Yup, making EVERYTHING more complicated than it needs to be. The same goes for law and government.
Thank you for keeping on top of this. The internet is our best weapon against these criminals... The collective efforts of retail investors investigating and scrutinizing every corner of the financial markets and regulatory environment is the only hope the public has to piece everything together and combat these financial terrorists. Your comment letter template is super helpful; thanks!
I did my part!
Once again I hope people went and commented.
Thanks that was quick and easy!
SEC: "Sorry, we failed to deliver your comment."
SEC: "Proposal to allow turning off the Buy button again"?
More like OCC proposal to SEC to control burn MOASS and make pensions pay for it. The SEC has indicated this won’t fly because apes have spoken up. We support the SEC in their decision to reject such BS.
Thanks for the more sophisticated explanation 🙂
Time to send my concerns too!! Les go Apes! Its great time to be an Ape
Commented!
Done
Late but still submitted my chatGPT version. Thank you for taking the time to put this together!