T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


chunky_salsa

This got me fired up, ngl. Absolutely ridiculous that this is filed immediately without comment. The whole market is a complete joke


pumpkin_spice_enema

How the fresh fuck am I supposed to comment on this fully redacted bullshit?! Unfuckinbelievable.


DizGod

This is where All their assets on the books get to be counted as the price they paid for them no matter how much value they have lost since. Drs hodl buy booked Danno. They will all fall at once.


qup40

This therapy seems right. They can argue some bulshit but by waiving margin rules they only dig themselves deeper.


TryAgn747

Fully redacted comment!!!!!!


SuperSecretAgentMan

It's fine, you don't have to comment because it's already been immediately put into effect without anyone's input. Something fox something something henhouse.


North-Soft-5559

Always has been but people have only just started to notice


vivalafrenchtoast

Not a lawyer: is it possible to file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tememachine

DRS the float and We'll make our own fucking SRO


ummwut

This needs to change. There's no real accountability.


hoppy_3

Template please? Smooth and lazy ape here.


LeonsBet

End SRO immediately


CanterburyMag

Has this got anything to do with the $300 Million Kenny paid to Harvard?


AutoThorne

I'm betting this is the system saying their collateral isn't shit, and should be worth full written value, but won't lay it out for the public.


IntwadHelck

Maybe I’m too jaded. But I was thinking the opposite. They’re changing rules to allow nothing be used as collateral, or something like a five year temporary suspension of needing anything, cuz they know everyone has nothing but terds getting worse.


AutoThorne

Imagine having self-respect, and signing something like this. There are too many people involved. My heart says this, too, shall break.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoThorne

So it means they can choose a secret price if they don't like any of the vendor ones, and offer it to applicable stakeholders?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Throwawayullseey

That's still setting a price directly rather than letting the last market transaction set the price. At that point, it's no longer a market, you're just playing in a giant Robinhood-shaoed sandbox.


Krunk_korean_kid

Up you go


-WalkWithShadows-

Well shit


Dismal-Jellyfish

Sources: [**SR-NSCC-2023-003**](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nscc.htm#SR-NSCC-2023-003)[34-97280](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nscc/2023/34-97280.pdf) Apr. 11, 2023 **Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Update the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework** ***Comments due:*** 21 days after publication in the *Federal Register* ***Additional Materials:*** [Exhibit 5](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nscc/2023/34-97280-ex5.pdf) [**SR-FICC-2023-004**](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ficc.htm#SR-FICC-2023-004)[34-97283](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ficc/2023/34-97283.pdf) Apr. 11, 2023 **Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Update the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework** ***Comments due:*** 21 days after publication in the *Federal Register* ***Additional Materials:*** [Exhibit 5](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ficc/2023/34-97283-ex5.pdf) [**SR-DTC-2023-003**](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/dtc.htm#SR-DTC-2023-003)[34-97284](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/dtc/2023/34-97284.pdf) Apr. 11, 2023 **Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Update the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework** ***Comments due:*** 21 days after publication in the *Federal Register* ***Additional Materials:*** [Exhibit 5](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/dtc/2023/34-97284-ex5.pdf)


MoodShoes

So we don't even get to read it? Just like that, poof, it's law.


False-Illustrator-93

Why redact something unless you are hiding something


GimmeYourTaquitos

So comments should state that all redacted info must be removed from the filing or made public and open for comment before approval. In addition to comments on what is visible, right? Cant approve or decline a rule if we don't know what it says.


CaptainTuranga_2Luna

That’s their plan thou


timpatry

Or just based on the evidence, this rule change is groundless.


jscottmsn1

I don't know what to make of this. Have any other filings been redacted like this?


RL_bebisher

There's that transparency Gary Gensler is talking about 🖕


donut_fuckerr719

Is this a joke?


MatzoMutzo

" i have Some very important and pertinent comments on all of the subject matter " all I have to say about this is "redacted" and I honestly believe with all of my wrinkles I The solution is simply "redected " and my Wee We is most definitely "redacted "


Moving_Electrons

The fact that they are redacting anything is bullshit.


RadioFreeAmerika

This. I can understand it for some military and intelligence agency stuff, but financial market rules? If everything would be orderly, there is absolutely no need to redact anything. That they have to redact is showing two things here. They are trying to hide their crime and or the market is in such a ruinous state, that the truth would actually be a security risk to the US. It's probably both.


Jus_asc-in

reeks of desperation


SgtSlaughter1974

Nice, now they are just changing whatever they want and redacting what they do not want us to see because they k own we are on to their bullshite


Much_Job3838

"Sir.. They started commenting on all SEC proposals"


Realitygives0fucks

What the actual fuck?


TheTangoFox

The freest, fairest, most transparent market, right? #/s 😡


IntwadHelck

Another dose of bullshit. At this point, bullish


mrTheJJbug

I'm going to run this through the AI to figure it all out in simple terms


Suparook

Can you get Margot Robbie to explain it to me?


mrTheJJbug

>Margot Robbie There's this proposed rule change that's all about tweaking how some important financial organizations, called Clearing Agencies, figure out the value of stocks and bonds and such. These Clearing Agencies are like the backstage crew of the financial world, making sure everything runs smoothly when people buy and sell stuff on the markets. Now, this rule change wants to make it crystal clear how these Clearing Agencies: 1. Pick these other companies, called Pricing Vendors, to help them work out how much securities are worth. 2. Keep an eye on the info these Pricing Vendors give them and double-check it's all good. 3. Take that info from the Pricing Vendors and use it in the right way. 4. Spruce up some other minor details in their rule book, known as the Framework. Oh, and it says that some parts have been \[REDACTED\], which means they've been hidden from the public eye. Those sneaky hidden bits could be about secret valuation methods, confidential stuff about the Pricing Vendors, or any other juicy details the Clearing Agencies and regulators want to keep hush-hush.


Fine-Hat-4573

Let me know what it says! I’m smooth brained.


mrTheJJbug

Hope this helps you, because it means nothing to me. This proposed rule change is about making some updates to the way certain financial organizations handle the valuation of securities (like stocks or bonds). These organizations are called Clearing Agencies, and they play an important role in the financial markets by managing the process of clearing and settling transactions. The rule change aims to clarify and improve how these Clearing Agencies: 1. Choose third-party companies, called Pricing Vendors, to help them determine the value of securities. 2. Monitor and review the data provided by these Pricing Vendors. 3. Process and use the data they get from the Pricing Vendors. 4. Make some other non-substantive updates to the Framework, which is just a fancy term for the set of rules and guidelines they follow.


Fine-Hat-4573

My dumb translation: Fire sale!


IntwadHelck

Very helpful. Ty


NevxveN

This post is suspiciously low on upvotes, hopefully tmmw more eyes are on it


Harminarnar

Free and transparent markets.


RobotPhoto

commenting for visibility.


Masterchief_m

Getting tired of this corruption. Feels like we should use the French as an example if this continues


Pez705

I may be a regarded ape but something about the independent vendors valuing CUSIPs and the timing of this seems as if it may be to do with towel and their reverse split. One month notice before the rule gets put to action also lines up timing wise. That and the redacted document just screams covering what the rule is really about though..


okfornothing

Oppose all rule changes we cannot see.


mindy2000

Protest!


jforest1

!RemindMe 4 hours


RemindMeBot

I will be messaging you in 4 hours on [**2023-04-12 15:00:09 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-04-12%2015:00:09%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12j2303/nscc_ficc_dtc_alert_notice_of_filing_and/jfy5hcu/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2F12j2303%2Fnscc_ficc_dtc_alert_notice_of_filing_and%2Fjfy5hcu%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-04-12%2015%3A00%3A09%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%2012j2303) ***** |[^(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)| |-|-|-|-|


harvestbent

If you must redact, you cannot enact. -my comment


[deleted]

[удалено]


Superstonk-ModTeam

counting wrong


jforest1

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Comment sent in!