Philip McBride Johnson argued in a recent comment article against ELX Futures’ desire to use exchange of futures for futures. Here, Neal Wolkoff, chief executive of ELX Futures, responds to that article.
The former chairman of
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Philip
McBride Johnson, opined that ELX’s rule on
exchange of futures for futures, which the CFTC approved in
October 2009, was like the following property trespass:
"RESOLVED, that effective immediately, the Johnson
family shall have full and unfettered access to their
neighbour’s swimming pool."
While it sounds folksy, it fails as a good metaphor on
Does the Johnson family’s neighbor own the
water company? Does that family keep access to the water
strictly available for its own pool? Do we care if the
neighbors bought the water company many years ago when the
population was small and few children lived in the town who
wanted to swim?
This article is available to subscribers and registered users
Please log in to continue reading.
Not yet registered? Take a free trial.
If you have already taken a free trial you
have ongoing access to the analysis section of FOW.com including this story.
Log in using your details below to read.
Already have an account? |