The Market System Or The Sorrow Of Becoming A Stock Market.

Retail market is not the fault of retail investors, but the market system of money collection.

There is nothing wrong with developing the market to reform, but it should not allow retail investors to take the blame.

What is the essence of this "cut" word? Is it not worth thinking about?

"Investors' appropriateness management measures" (hereinafter referred to as the "measures") can not only effectively protect retail investors, but may make the "cut leek" more and more serious.

It is better to deprive them of the right to enter the capital market and obtain the investment return than the less conservative retail investors, whether they are "conservative" or "stable".

Admittedly, there is a certain risk in the new stock paction, and there is a certain risk in the merger and acquisition. ST stocks will have greater risks. But everyone knows that for the capital market, risks and benefits are twin brothers.

Without risk, it means no profit.

If

Neither can we buy and sell new shares, and we are doomed to lose the chance to share with any other restructured stocks or shell and resource stocks that may potentially yield risky investments. So what is the significance of their stay in the market? In fact, the "A" market is positioned in the "middle risk" area, which means that our market is a place where "big fish eat small fish, small fish eat shrimps".

The problem is that it is impossible to drive all small fish and shrimp out of the way. On the contrary, the more risk-taking and frequent buying and selling of retail investors, the more likely they are labeled as risk investors.

What insurance factor is more than 500 thousand of the capital? As an individual investor, even if it is possible to have millions of tens of millions of capital strength, it may not stand the test of major financial risks.

Is it even more difficult to guard against the common traps of landmines?

There is no denying that in our A share market, more than 500 thousand of the individual investors are in the minority. However, more funds, at best, are only large retail investors.

The greater the number of large retail investors, the greater the speculative risk of the market.

If the implementation of the Ordinance is equal to the issuance of permits to large retail investors who are keen on radical speculative risks and even small investors who are very dedicated to their work, how can they not run counter to the original intention of regulating the market? Investor protection, especially for small and medium investors, is our top priority.

That is to say, this is also a difficult problem that we have been trying to solve and can not solve very well.

If we can face up to the "measures", though we are majority in number

But the strength of the retail group is no longer a cut of stubble, then the starting point and the foothold of its protection policy should not be to drive the fish into the cluster to drive the sparrow, nor to divide and rule one by one.

Otherwise, what is the difference with cutting leek?

There is no denying that if our market is like a mature market in developed markets abroad, institutional investors may be the main body of the market, and there may be no retail issue. There is no question of how to distinguish and divide appropriate investors.

No one can not face up to their own reality, it is impossible to pull out their own hair can get on the sky.

No matter how the designers of the measures want to be in line with international standards.

However, if we think that a large number of retail investors should be driven to the "conservative" and "steady" type of idle doing, then it is not a big mistake to be able to cut the tail again when the time is right. After all, the retail market is not the fault of the scattered households, but the market system of the money collection.

It is not wrong to say that the market needs reform, development and standardization.

How can we cut the tail and cut the leek? What is the essence of this "cut" word? Isn't it worth all of us, especially those who decide the policy?

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.