Comments on: ANALYSIS-Big traders face ‘landmine’ in CFTC energy rule http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/02/17/analysis-big-traders-face-landmine-in-cftc-energy-rule/ Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:40:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: otc123 http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/02/17/analysis-big-traders-face-landmine-in-cftc-energy-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-604 Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:16:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/?p=6594#comment-604 In no sense is this a “landmine,” “buried deep in the proposal.” There is a clear pointer to it on page 3 of the Q & A, and it was referred to at many points in the public meeting at which the proposal was discussed:

http://www.cftc.gov/newsroom/cftcevents/ 2010/oeaevent011410.html

— and hey, what’s to stop these large, international financial houses from actually reading the proposal?

]]>
By: otc123 http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/02/17/analysis-big-traders-face-landmine-in-cftc-energy-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-601 Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:10:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/?p=6594#comment-601 It’s nonsense to call this provision a “landmine.” It figures clearly even in the Q&A, let alone the proposal itself.

Are we really being asked to believe that these large traders can’t read, and don’t have lawyers on their staff to do their reading for them?

Reuters staff should do their homework before parroting this nonsense.

]]>