SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
1–10 of 139 posts
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#2I may be in the minority here, but I don't think the changes we needed were to make it easier for higher-ups to cash out of a company before rank-and-file get a chance to.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#3The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#4[deleted]
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#5The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
A walk down r/WallStreetBets shows you that if there is an argument about a gov agency protecting unsophisticated investors, its failing spectacularly.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#6The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
There have been considerations to up the requirements of purchasing leveraged ETFs, which go up to 3x. But also keep in mind most people can easily be approved to buy options, and easily lose 100% or more of their net work in hours.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#7It's an interesting name they gave this concept. According to Wikipedia, "accreditation is the process in which certification of competency, authority, or credibility is presented"
But to be an accredited investor, all you need to do is have some money. There is no logical way that you can certify that a person's "competency, authority, or credibility" by merely knowing how much money is in their bank account.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#8The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
Agreed. While I think it is sensible to have rules that prevent gullible members of the public from being bamboozled, I also think that a more sensible policy is what the UK has. Here you can self-certify as a "sophisticated investor" which is basically the same thing except that there is no obligation on anyone to check your self-certification i.e. there is no penalty to claiming to be one when you're not nor is there any penalty for allowing someone to invest who self-certifies but doesn't actually meet the criteria. That seems fair. If you're willing to confirm that then you should be able to invest in whatever damn fool thing you want.
(Note that in the UK private individuals can trade things like contracts for difference and spread bets which I actually think is slightly mad)
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#9The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
Or any of the weird coin offerings. Which - if you believe in the thing not being a scam - is essentially a way of financing a company. Just like buying an investment in a small business.
Re: SEC proposes changes to “accredited investor” definition
#10The whole thing should be scrapped. This is supposed to be protecting unsophisticated investors, but most of the investments prevented here are equity investments in small businesses. While at the same time anybody is allowed to buy TVIX, a 2x leveraged VIX ETF, which is basically gambling.
Totally agree. If we want to protect people there should be some kind of test like a drivers license, and rich people should have to take it too. As it is now people can get into options trading on small caps but are barred from buying things like commercial real estate.