SERIES 56 News

That is a bold statement .. they will push the dateline back ? No guarantee. I would Not count on the deadline being extended. Only a possibility. However the request from the cboe to the sec has been pending for several months before this news release last week . The sec seems to be slow at making decisions & we may just run out of time. that is the reality. You would figure the rules would be clear by now & their not at all. All these new rules are not to the benefit of the trader. The cboe says they are working hard on trying to extend the deadline. Who knows ?

I think the sec will crack down on any firm that does not comply with the rules . everyone will have to be licensed & be in compliance or be out of business. firms that have other structures will be history soon . new zero tolerance policy. the good old days are gone.

Hopefully the sec will do the fair thing & give people more time .

You should have a backup plan just in case

.
 
Quote from scorpion:

Don. much to do about nothing maybe at chx. for bright traders. The cboe registered traders that is not the case. Other exchanges may have different rules that will apply to it's 7 licensed traders possibly . CHX is awaiting approval for accepting the # 56 license from the sec. As other exchanges have filed with the sec to do the same. Your firm may get some 7 licensed traders that are with cboe that don't want to wait for a potential waiver & rather continue trading without any potential disruption. For cboe traders . It's either a waiver or take the # 56 test to stay trading . A trader can apply for a waiver but no one knows how long it will take to get a reply if your waived? Their are traders that will probalby take the #56 just in case they don't get waived. It's going to be rough for many trader's unless they extend the test deadline .
More...

I do agree that the deadline may be a bit harsh, reminds of when we first had to take the S7.... I think we had at least 3 months, not 100% sure. In any event, the playing field has been leveled somewhat... up to you which test you would like to take. I'm still told it's "either or" for us and the other major firms.... for now anyway.

In any event, I hope the traders will be able to continue working without interuption.

Don
 
DON... This is strange.. The cbsx will hold the 7 license. Now if you have a 7 with them you have to get a waiver or are required to take the # 56 test .. However with other exchanges. chicago exchange (CHX) they are Not requiring traders to get a waiver for the 7 & it's business as usual for them currently. what i was told yesterday. Not sure how other exchanges involved are going to handle their 7 licensed trader's & what their requirements will be moving forward regarding anyone taking 56 test ? It appears that traders could switch to another prop firm connected with a different exchange if they are Not granted a waiver & are forced to take the # 56 test to comply if necessary. If every exchange is going to have different rules then what is the point of this standarized test. It's confusing to what is necessary to avoid any issues.

Your opinion on this?
 
Quote from scorpion:

DON... This is strange.. The cbsx will hold the 7 license. Now if you have a 7 with them you have to get a waiver or are required to take the # 56 test .. However with other exchanges. chicago exchange (CHX) they are Not requiring traders to get a waiver for the 7 & it's business as usual for them currently. what i was told yesterday. Not sure how other exchanges involved are going to handle their 7 licensed trader's & what their requirements will be moving forward regarding anyone taking 56 test ? It appears that traders could switch to another prop firm connected with a different exchange if they are Not granted a waiver & are forced to take the # 56 test to comply if necessary. If every exchange is going to have different rules then what is the point of this standarized test. It's confusing to what is necessary to avoid any issues.

Your opinion on this?
More...

I think new traders can either get S7 or S56. Works for me...since we get so many who already have S7. New people can simply choose. I'm told the other exchanges will do the same...makes sense. Sort of a "National Drivers license" -
Don
 
DON.. the philladelphia ( nasdaq omx) exchange is up in the air at this point. Just Today. I asked if their traders are Required to get a waiver for the 7 or take the 56 test. They are not sure at this point ? Their waiting to get clairity from the sec on how they should proceed. They said they want to be uniform with the cboe/cbsx rules & follow that model. This is a pending issue with them right Now.

Every exchange may have different rules. Not one size fits all with these exchange rules.

Your traders are lucky with (chx ) chicago exchange in Not having to make any changes with their 7 at this point. business as usual.

Bright trader's really dodged a bullet with these changes.

Other traders are stuck with waivers or taking a test .

Not a level playing field at all.
 
Quote from scorpion:

DON.. the philladelphia ( nasdaq omx) exchange is up in the air at this point. Just Today. I asked if their traders are Required to get a waiver for the 7 or take the 56 test. They are not sure at this point ? Their waiting to get clairity from the sec on how they should proceed. They said they want to be uniform with the cboe/cbsx rules & follow that model. This is a pending issue with them right Now.

Every exchange may have different rules. Not one size fits all with these exchange rules.

Your traders are lucky with (chx ) chicago exchange in Not having to make any changes with their 7 at this point. business as usual.

Bright trader's really dodged a bullet with these changes.

Other traders are stuck with waivers or taking a test .

Not a level playing field at all.
More...

NYSE, Philly, and CHX are all "ok" with licensing the way it is now.... at least that's what I've been told. That pretty much takes care of most firms, except for the CBSX firms..... we'll see soon I guess.

As I said "as I've been told" nothing for sure yet that I've seen. I only get straight scoop from my SRO (CHX).

Don
 
Don.. Not with cbsx firm. Now in pending status with this test process. What i stated about philly is from talking to them today.They are status quo for the moment . They are waiting on clarity from the sec on how to move forward. the facts directly from the source. just sharing. much to ado about nothing with your firm as you mentioned. We all can't be lucky to be a bright trader lol.. suprised by the lack of discussion aboout this test & what other trader's are going to do. very strange response from the et community.
 
Quote from scorpion:

Don.. Not with cbsx firm. Now in pending status with this test process. What i stated about philly is from talking to them today.They are status quo for the moment . They are waiting on clarity from the sec on how to move forward. the facts directly from the source. just sharing. much to ado about nothing with your firm as you mentioned. We all can't be lucky to be a bright trader lol.. suprised by the lack of discussion aboout this test & what other trader's are going to do. very strange response from the et community.
More...

Hmm, what I don't understand is that this is simply a test that is required to be part of the professional trading community. Most professions require some sort of testing procedure to differentiate them from the "lay" or "retail" (in our case).... Dr's, lawyers etc. It just took a while for some of the other exchanges to "catch up" with the reg's we, and most firms, have had to follow for a decade.

And, 'it's just a test" - I remember when we first had to concern ourselves with the S7, after decades of simply being Exchange members... at Bright, we were concerned about losing a bunch of people, but really didn't...and, in fact, we found that we got a much better group, more serious about their profession... with the S7 vs. the "hey, let's try real estate (trading) for a while, see how it goes, LOL.

I think in the global sense, that having a universal code/exam to separate traders from the retail group is another step in the right direction...

All the best, Mr. Scorpion....

Don :)
 
Quote from Don Bright:

Hmm, what I don't understand is that this is simply a test that is required to be part of the professional trading community. Most professions require some sort of testing procedure to differentiate them from the "lay" or "retail" (in our case).... Dr's, lawyers etc. It just took a while for some of the other exchanges to "catch up" with the reg's we, and most firms, have had to follow for a decade.

And, 'it's just a test" - I remember when we first had to concern ourselves with the S7, after decades of simply being Exchange members... at Bright, we were concerned about losing a bunch of people, but really didn't...and, in fact, we found that we got a much better group, more serious about their profession... with the S7 vs. the "hey, let's try real estate (trading) for a while, see how it goes, LOL.

I think in the global sense, that having a universal code/exam to separate traders from the retail group is another step in the right direction...

All the best, Mr. Scorpion....

Don :)
More...

Don,

Dr.'s and lawyers aren't trading their own money. That's the difference. But, never mind that - I have a problem with Big Brother sticking his nose into everything.

The test is what it is (as these registration tests go, I think it covers some stuff that is really good to know. Much better than the S7).

The problem is the compliance period. As a principal in your firm, you must pass the 56 and 24 and your compliance officer must also pass the 14 if CBOE is your DEA. All by Aug 12. Even if study material for the 56 were available, that is too short a time horizon to comply.

There's something else going on here. Never in the history of registration tests has the compliance period been less than 9 months - and that's for a single test (for firms already doing business - new firms usually had to comply before starting operations as a BD).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top