Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Reduce Fees for NASDAQ Basic Data Feeds, 17273-17276 [E9-8416]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices
Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine
(‘‘TRACE’’), but not disseminated.
FINRA has filed the proposed rule
change for immediate effectiveness. The
operative date of the proposed rule
change will be 30 days after the date of
filing.
2. Statutory Basis
FINRA believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the provisions
of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,15 which
requires, among other things, that
FINRA rules must be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the
proposed rule change will clarify
members’ trade reporting obligations,
enhance market transparency and
protect investors and other market
participants by ensuring that transfers
that do not contribute to market price
discovery and could confuse market
participants are not disseminated.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
FINRA does not believe that the
proposed rule change will result in any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments were neither
solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Because the foregoing proposed rule
change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant
burden on competition; and (iii) become
operative for 30 days from the date on
which it was filed, or such shorter time
as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 16 and Rule 19b–
4(f)(6) thereunder.17
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission may summarily abrogate
such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors,
or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
15 15
U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
17 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
16 15
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:39 Apr 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–FINRA–2009–024 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
17273
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.18
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–8417 Filed 4–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–59712; File No. SR–
NASDAQ–2009–028]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To
Reduce Fees for NASDAQ Basic Data
Feeds
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
April 6, 2009.
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days
between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at
the principal office of FINRA. All
comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–FINRA–2009–024 and
should be submitted on or before May
5, 2009.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 27,
2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–FINRA–2009–024. This file (‘‘NASDAQ’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Commission process and review your
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will have been prepared by the Exchange.
post all comments on the Commission’s The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
proposed rule change from interested
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
persons.
submission, all subsequent
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NASDAQ is proposing a rule change
to reduce fees for ‘‘NASDAQ Basic’’
which is a real time data feed combining
both NASDAQ’s Best Bid and Offer
(‘‘QBBO’’) and the ‘‘NASDAQ Last Sale.
NASDAQ Basic was approved on March
16, 2009,3 as a pilot program (‘‘Basic
Pilot’’) that included fees for usage and
distribution of the data. NASDAQ has
determined to further promote the
deployment and usage of NASDAQ
Basic by reducing the fee for its
distribution. NASDAQ is seeking
approval to implement this change
effective April 1, 2009.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available from NASDAQ’s Web site at
https://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at
NASDAQ’s principal office, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
18 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59582
(March 16, 2009) (SR–NASDAQ–2008–102).
1 15
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
17274
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for,
the proposed rule change. The text of
these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item III [sic]
below, and is set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
Building on the success of its
NASDAQ Last Sale product, NASDAQ
has implemented a pilot to offer
NASDAQ Basic, real-time quotation
data in combination with last sale data
solely from the NASDAQ Market Center.
NASDAQ Basic is a ‘‘Level 1’’ product
containing two data elements: (1)
Quotation information from the
NASDAQ Market Center and (2) last sale
data from the NASDAQ Market Center.
NASDAQ Basic is available in three
forms, NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ,
NASDAQ Basic for NYSE, and
NASDAQ Basic for Alternext. NASDAQ
Basic is designed to meet the needs of
current and prospective subscribers that
do not need or are unwilling to pay for
the consolidated data provided by the
consolidated Level 1 products.
NASDAQ sought and received
approval to assess a monthly fee for
distributors of NASDAQ Basic in
addition to applicable monthly per user
fees. As approved, each Distributor of
NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ-listed
stocks was to pay a monthly fee of
$1,500 for either internal or external
distribution. Each Distributor of
NASDAQ Basic for NYSE-listed stocks
was to pay a monthly fee of $250 for
internal distribution or $625 external
distribution. Each Distributor of
NASDAQ Basic for Alternext-listed
stocks was to pay a monthly fee of $250
for internal distribution or $625 external
distribution. In addition, each
Distributor that receives Direct Access
to the NASDAQ Basic was also to pay
a monthly fee of $2,000 for NASDAQlisted stocks, $1,000 for NYSE-listed
stocks, and $1,000 for Alternext-listed
stocks.
NASDAQ developed the NASDAQ
Basic product proposals in consultation
with industry members and market data
vendors and, after further consultation;
NASDQ [sic] has determined to reduce
the distribution fees for the product.
First, NASDAQ proposes to make all
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:39 Apr 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
three feeds available for a single
monthly Distributor Fee of $1,500,
rather than add separate fees for NYSEand Alternext-listed securities. Second,
NASDAQ proposes to eliminate the fee
for Direct Access to NASDAQ Basic,
currently set forth in Rule 7047(b).
Finally, NASDAQ proposes to credit
each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic up to
$1,500 per month based upon that
Distributor’s monthly usage fees. In
other words, a Distributor that reports
$1,500 or more of monthly usage of
NASDAQ Basic will pay no net
Distributor Fee, whereas a Distributor
that reports $1,000 of monthly usage
will pay a net of $500 for the Distributor
Fee.
2. Statutory Basis
In its recent order approving the
NASDAQ Basic Pilot, it was determined
that the product and fees were
consistent with the provisions of
Section 6 of the Act,4 in general and
with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 as
stated above, in that it provides an
equitable allocation of reasonable fees
among users and recipients of NASDAQ
data. NASDAQ believes that the current
proposal to eliminate the distributor
fees for NASDAQ Basic is also
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act in that the remaining fees will be
assessed uniformly on similarly situated
users and that the fees for distribution
and usage of the product will be borne
by the ultimate end user of the product.
It was also determined that the
product and fees are consistent with
Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,6 [sic] which
requires that the rules of an exchange
not impose any burden on competition
not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Commission found that NASDAQ’s
ability to price NASDAQ Basic is
constrained by: (i) NASDAQ’s
compelling need to attract order flow
from market participants; and (ii) the
availability to market participants of
alternatives to purchasing NASDAQ ’s
data. Finally, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change is consistent
with Rule 603(a) of Regulation NMS,7
[sic] adopted under Section 11A(c)(1) of
the Act, which requires an exclusive
processor that distributes information
with respect to quotations for or
transactions in an NMS stock to do so
on terms that are fair and reasonable
and that are not unreasonably
discriminatory.
4 15
U.S.C. 78f.
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
7 17 CFR 242.603(a).
5 15
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NASDAQ believes that its proposal to
reduce distributor fees for NASDAQ
Basic is equally consistent with these
provisions of the Act. The market for
non-core data is competitive, due to (1)
competition between exchanges and
other trading platforms that compete
with each other in a variety of
dimensions; (2) the existence of
inexpensive real-time consolidated data
and free delayed consolidated data, and
(3) the inherent contestability of the
market for proprietary last sale data.
The market for proprietary data
products is currently competitive and
inherently contestable because there is
fierce competition for the inputs
necessary to the creation of proprietary
data and strict pricing discipline for the
proprietary products themselves.
Numerous exchanges compete with
each other for listings, trades, and
market data itself, providing virtually
limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs
who wish to produce and distribute
their own market data. This proprietary
data is produced by each individual
exchange, as well as other entities, in a
vigorously competitive market.
Broker-dealers currently have
numerous alternative venues for their
order flow, including eleven selfregulatory organization (‘‘SRO’’)
markets, as well as broker-dealers
(‘‘BDs’’) and aggregators such as the
Direct Edge and NexTrade electronic
communications network (‘‘ECN’’). Each
SRO market competes to produce
transaction reports via trade executions,
and an ever-increasing number of
FINRA-regulated Trade Reporting
Facilities (‘‘TRFs’’) compete to attract
internalized transaction reports. It is
common for BDs to further and exploit
this competition by sending their order
flow and transaction reports to multiple
markets, rather than providing them all
to a single market. Competitive markets
for order flow, executions, and
transaction reports provide pricing
discipline for the inputs of proprietary
data products.
The large number of SROs, TRFs, and
ECNs that currently produce proprietary
data or are currently capable of
producing it provides further pricing
discipline for proprietary data products.
Each SRO, TRF, ECN and BD is
currently permitted to produce
proprietary data products, and many
currently do or have announced plans to
do so, including NASDAQ, NYSE,
Alternext, NYSEArca, and BATS.
Any ECN or BD can combine with any
other ECN, broker-dealer, or multiple
ECNs or BDs to produce jointly
proprietary data products. Additionally,
non-broker-dealers such as order routers
like LAVA, as well as market data
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices
vendors can facilitate single or multiple
broker-dealers’ production of
proprietary data products. The potential
sources of proprietary products are
virtually limitless.
The fact that proprietary data from
ECNs, BDs, and vendors can by-pass
SROs is significant in two respects.
First, non-SROs can compete directly
with SROs for the production and
distribution of proprietary data
products, as Archipelago and BATS
Trading did prior to registering as SROs.
Second, because a single order or
transaction report can appear in an SRO
proprietary product, a non-SRO
proprietary product, or both, the data
available in proprietary products is
exponentially greater than the actual
number of orders and transaction
reports that exist in the marketplace
writ large.
Consolidated data provides two
additional measures of pricing
discipline for proprietary data products
that are a subset of the consolidated data
stream. First, the consolidated data is
widely available in real-time at $1 per
month for non-professional users.
Second, consolidated data is also
available at no cost with a 15- or 20minute delay. Because consolidated
data contains marketwide information,
it effectively places a cap on the fees
assessed for proprietary data (such as
last sale data) that is simply a subset of
the consolidated data. The mere
availability of low-cost or free
consolidated data provides a powerful
form of pricing discipline for
proprietary data products that contain
data elements that are a subset of the
consolidated data, by highlighting the
optional nature of proprietary products.
Market data vendors provide another
form of price discipline for proprietary
data products because they control the
primary means of access to end users.
Vendors impose price restraints based
upon their business models. For
example, vendors such as Bloomberg
and Reuters that assess a surcharge on
data they sell may refuse to offer
proprietary products that end users will
not purchase in sufficient numbers.
Internet portals, such as Google, impose
a discipline by providing only that data
which will enable them to attract
‘‘eyeballs’’ that contribute to their
advertising revenue. Retail brokerdealers, such as Schwab and Fidelity,
offer their customers proprietary data
only if it promotes trading and generates
sufficient commission revenue.
Although the business models may
differ, these vendors’ pricing discipline
is the same: they can simply refuse to
purchase any proprietary data product
that fails to provide sufficient value.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:39 Apr 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
NASDAQ and other producers of
proprietary data products must
understand and respond to these
varying business models and pricing
disciplines in order to successfully
market proprietary data products.
In addition to the competition and
price discipline described above, the
market for proprietary data products is
also highly contestable because market
entry is rapid, inexpensive, and
profitable. The history of electronic
trading is replete with examples of
entrants that swiftly grew into some of
the largest electronic trading platforms
and proprietary data producers:
Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook,
Island, RediBook, Attain, TracECN, and
BATS Trading. Today, BATS publishes
its data at no charge on its website in
order to attract order flow, and it uses
market data revenue rebates from the
resulting executions to maintain low
execution charges for its users. Several
ECNs have existed profitably for many
years with a minimal share of trading,
including Bloomberg Tradebook and
NexTrade.
Regulation NMS, by deregulating the
market for proprietary data, has
increased the contestability of that
market. While broker-dealers have
previously published their proprietary
data individually, Regulation NMS
encourages market data vendors and
broker-dealers to produce proprietary
products cooperatively in a manner
never before possible. Multiple market
data vendors already have the capability
to aggregate data and disseminate it on
a profitable scale, including Bloomberg,
Reuters and Thomson. New entrants are
already on the horizon, including
‘‘Project BOAT,’’ a consortium of
financial institutions that is assembling
a cooperative trade collection facility in
Europe. These institutions are active in
the United States and could rapidly and
profitably export the Project Boat
technology to exploit the opportunities
offered by Regulation NMS.
In light of the highly competitive
market for market data, NASDAQ
believes that it has considered all
relevant factors and has not considered
irrelevant factors in order to establish a
fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably
discriminatory fee and an equitable
allocation of fees among all users.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
NASDAQ does not believe that the
proposed rule change will result in any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
To the contrary, as set forth in detail
above, the market for the data elements
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17275
contained in NASDAQ Basic is already
competitive, with both real-time and
delayed consolidated data as well as the
ability for innumerable entities begin
rapidly and inexpensively to offer
competitive last sale data products.
The Commission has recently issued
an order firmly establishing that in
reviewing non-core data products such
as NASDAQ Basic, the Commission will
utilize a market-based approach that
relies primarily on competitive forces to
determine the terms on which non-core
data is made available to investors.8 The
Commission adopted a two-part test:
The first is to ask whether the exchange
was subject to significant competitive forces
in setting the terms of its proposal for noncore data, including the level of any fees. If
an exchange was subject to significant
competitive forces in setting the terms of a
proposal, the Commission will approve the
proposal unless it determines that there is a
substantial countervailing basis to find that
the terms nevertheless fail to meet an
applicable requirement of the Exchange Act
or the rules thereunder. If, however, the
exchange was not subject to significant
competitive forces in setting the terms of a
proposal for non-core data, the Commission
will require the exchange to provide a
substantial basis, other than competitive
forces, in its proposed rule change
demonstrating that the terms of the proposal
are equitable, fair, reasonable, and not
unreasonably discriminatory.9
This standard begins from the premise
that no Commission rule requires
exchanges or market participants either
to distribute non-core data to the public
or to display non-core data to
investors.10
In its NetCoalition Order the
Commission concluded that ‘‘at least
two broad types of significant
competitive forces applied to NYSE
Arca in setting the terms of its Proposal
to distribute the ArcaBook data: (1)
NYSE Arca’s compelling need to attract
order flow from market participants;
and (2) the availability to market
participants of alternatives to
purchasing the ArcaBook data. The
Commission conducted an exhaustive
14-page review of these two competitive
forces before concluding that the
availability of alternatives, as well as the
compelling need to attract order flow,
imposed significant competitive
pressure on the exchange’s need to act
equitably, fairly, and reasonably in
8 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57917 (Dec.
2, 2008) (NetCoalition Order’’ [sic] resolving File
No. SR–NYSEArca–2006–21).
9 Id. at 48–49.
10 Id. at 4.
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
17276
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices
setting the terms of the fees for its noncore data product.11
The market data provided in
NASDAQ Basic is non-core data that is
governed by the same analysis the
Commission set forth in the
NetCoalition Order. As with the NYSE
Arca depth-of-book product, no rule
requires NASDAQ or any other
exchange to offer its BBO and Last Sale
or vendors to display that data. Because
NASDAQ Basic data is merely a subset
of depth-of-book data, NASDAQ is
subject to the same competitive forces
that apply to depth-of-book data: Its
compelling need to attract order flow
from market participants; and the
availability to market participants of
alternatives to purchasing the NASDAQ
Basic data. Indeed, the Commission
invoked the same reasoning in
approving pilot programs for NASDAQ
Last Sale and NYSE Open Book which
provide non-core last sale data from
NASDAQ and the New York Stock
Exchange, one element of this
proposal.12
NASDAQ considerations in setting
the fees for NASDAQ Basic are virtually
identical to those the Commission
approved in the NetCoaltiion [sic]
Order. First, the proposed fees for
NASDAQ Basic data will apply equally
to all professional subscribers and
equally to all non-professional
subscribers. The fees therefore do not
unreasonably discriminate among types
of subscribers. Second, the proposed
fees for the NASDAQ Basic data are
substantially less than those charged by
the Network Processors for the
consolidated NBBO or last sale data.
Third, NASDAQ projects that the total
revenues generated by the fee for
NASDAQ Basic data initially will
amount to less than the $8 million per
year that NYSE Arca projected would be
generated by its ArcaBook data.13
Finally, as stated above, rapid
effectiveness of the proposed rule
change is in the public interest and
supports the protection of investors by
allowing data distributors to make
additional market data available to
investors that choose to purchase it.
Widespread availability of NASDAQ
Basic benefits investors by improving
access to real-time market data that
investors can choose to use. It also
enables member firms to reduce their
costs and to pass on those cost savings
11 Id. at 51–65. The Commission then spent an
additional 36 pages (65–101) analyzing and refuting
comments challenging the Commission’s
competition analysis.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:39 Apr 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
to their customers through reduced
commissions.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants or Others
Written comments were neither
solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 35 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period (i)
as the Commission may designate up to
90 days of such date if it finds such
longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii) as to which the self-regulatory
organization consents, the Commission
will:
(a) By order approve such proposed
rule change, or
(b) Institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–
NASDAQ–2009–028 and should be
submitted on or before May 5, 2009.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.14
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–8416 Filed 4–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–NASDAQ–2009–028 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NASDAQ–2009–028. This
file number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
12 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57966
(June 16, 2008), 73 FR 35182 (June 20, 2008) (File
No. SR–NYSE–2007–04) (NYSE Real-Time
Reference Prices); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 57965 (June 16, 2008), 73 FR 35178 (June 20,
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. USTR–2009–0011]
Initiation of Section 302 Investigation,
Determination of Action Under Section
301, and Request for Comments:
Canada–Compliance With Softwood
Lumber Agreement
Correction
In notice document E9–8232
beginning on page 16436 in the issue of
Friday, April 10, 2009 make the
following correction:
On page 16438, in the second column,
immediately following the signature
block, five photographed pages were
inadvertently deleted. They are
reprinted in full below:
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
2008) (SR–NASDAQ–2006–060) (NASDAQ Last
Sale Data Feeds).
13 Id. at 101–104.
14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17273-17276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8416]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-59712; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2009-028]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Reduce Fees for NASDAQ
Basic Data Feeds
April 6, 2009.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 27, 2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
NASDAQ is proposing a rule change to reduce fees for ``NASDAQ
Basic'' which is a real time data feed combining both NASDAQ's Best Bid
and Offer (``QBBO'') and the ``NASDAQ Last Sale. NASDAQ Basic was
approved on March 16, 2009,\3\ as a pilot program (``Basic Pilot'')
that included fees for usage and distribution of the data. NASDAQ has
determined to further promote the deployment and usage of NASDAQ Basic
by reducing the fee for its distribution. NASDAQ is seeking approval to
implement this change effective April 1, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59582 (March 16,
2009) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-102).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The text of the proposed rule change is available from NASDAQ's Web
site at https://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at NASDAQ's principal office,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
[[Page 17274]]
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III [sic] below, and is set forth in Sections A, B, and C below.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
Building on the success of its NASDAQ Last Sale product, NASDAQ has
implemented a pilot to offer NASDAQ Basic, real-time quotation data in
combination with last sale data solely from the NASDAQ Market Center.
NASDAQ Basic is a ``Level 1'' product containing two data elements: (1)
Quotation information from the NASDAQ Market Center and (2) last sale
data from the NASDAQ Market Center. NASDAQ Basic is available in three
forms, NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ, NASDAQ Basic for NYSE, and NASDAQ Basic
for Alternext. NASDAQ Basic is designed to meet the needs of current
and prospective subscribers that do not need or are unwilling to pay
for the consolidated data provided by the consolidated Level 1
products.
NASDAQ sought and received approval to assess a monthly fee for
distributors of NASDAQ Basic in addition to applicable monthly per user
fees. As approved, each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ-listed
stocks was to pay a monthly fee of $1,500 for either internal or
external distribution. Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for NYSE-listed
stocks was to pay a monthly fee of $250 for internal distribution or
$625 external distribution. Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for
Alternext-listed stocks was to pay a monthly fee of $250 for internal
distribution or $625 external distribution. In addition, each
Distributor that receives Direct Access to the NASDAQ Basic was also to
pay a monthly fee of $2,000 for NASDAQ-listed stocks, $1,000 for NYSE-
listed stocks, and $1,000 for Alternext-listed stocks.
NASDAQ developed the NASDAQ Basic product proposals in consultation
with industry members and market data vendors and, after further
consultation; NASDQ [sic] has determined to reduce the distribution
fees for the product. First, NASDAQ proposes to make all three feeds
available for a single monthly Distributor Fee of $1,500, rather than
add separate fees for NYSE- and Alternext-listed securities. Second,
NASDAQ proposes to eliminate the fee for Direct Access to NASDAQ Basic,
currently set forth in Rule 7047(b). Finally, NASDAQ proposes to credit
each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic up to $1,500 per month based upon that
Distributor's monthly usage fees. In other words, a Distributor that
reports $1,500 or more of monthly usage of NASDAQ Basic will pay no net
Distributor Fee, whereas a Distributor that reports $1,000 of monthly
usage will pay a net of $500 for the Distributor Fee.
2. Statutory Basis
In its recent order approving the NASDAQ Basic Pilot, it was
determined that the product and fees were consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\4\ in general and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\5\ as stated above, in that it provides an
equitable allocation of reasonable fees among users and recipients of
NASDAQ data. NASDAQ believes that the current proposal to eliminate the
distributor fees for NASDAQ Basic is also consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act in that the remaining fees will be assessed
uniformly on similarly situated users and that the fees for
distribution and usage of the product will be borne by the ultimate end
user of the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was also determined that the product and fees are consistent
with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\6\ [sic] which requires that the rules
of an exchange not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Commission
found that NASDAQ's ability to price NASDAQ Basic is constrained by:
(i) NASDAQ's compelling need to attract order flow from market
participants; and (ii) the availability to market participants of
alternatives to purchasing NASDAQ 's data. Finally, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 603(a) of
Regulation NMS,\7\ [sic] adopted under Section 11A(c)(1) of the Act,
which requires an exclusive processor that distributes information with
respect to quotations for or transactions in an NMS stock to do so on
terms that are fair and reasonable and that are not unreasonably
discriminatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
\7\ 17 CFR 242.603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASDAQ believes that its proposal to reduce distributor fees for
NASDAQ Basic is equally consistent with these provisions of the Act.
The market for non-core data is competitive, due to (1) competition
between exchanges and other trading platforms that compete with each
other in a variety of dimensions; (2) the existence of inexpensive
real-time consolidated data and free delayed consolidated data, and (3)
the inherent contestability of the market for proprietary last sale
data.
The market for proprietary data products is currently competitive
and inherently contestable because there is fierce competition for the
inputs necessary to the creation of proprietary data and strict pricing
discipline for the proprietary products themselves. Numerous exchanges
compete with each other for listings, trades, and market data itself,
providing virtually limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish
to produce and distribute their own market data. This proprietary data
is produced by each individual exchange, as well as other entities, in
a vigorously competitive market.
Broker-dealers currently have numerous alternative venues for their
order flow, including eleven self-regulatory organization (``SRO'')
markets, as well as broker-dealers (``BDs'') and aggregators such as
the Direct Edge and NexTrade electronic communications network
(``ECN''). Each SRO market competes to produce transaction reports via
trade executions, and an ever-increasing number of FINRA-regulated
Trade Reporting Facilities (``TRFs'') compete to attract internalized
transaction reports. It is common for BDs to further and exploit this
competition by sending their order flow and transaction reports to
multiple markets, rather than providing them all to a single market.
Competitive markets for order flow, executions, and transaction reports
provide pricing discipline for the inputs of proprietary data products.
The large number of SROs, TRFs, and ECNs that currently produce
proprietary data or are currently capable of producing it provides
further pricing discipline for proprietary data products. Each SRO,
TRF, ECN and BD is currently permitted to produce proprietary data
products, and many currently do or have announced plans to do so,
including NASDAQ, NYSE, Alternext, NYSEArca, and BATS.
Any ECN or BD can combine with any other ECN, broker-dealer, or
multiple ECNs or BDs to produce jointly proprietary data products.
Additionally, non-broker-dealers such as order routers like LAVA, as
well as market data
[[Page 17275]]
vendors can facilitate single or multiple broker-dealers' production of
proprietary data products. The potential sources of proprietary
products are virtually limitless.
The fact that proprietary data from ECNs, BDs, and vendors can by-
pass SROs is significant in two respects. First, non-SROs can compete
directly with SROs for the production and distribution of proprietary
data products, as Archipelago and BATS Trading did prior to registering
as SROs. Second, because a single order or transaction report can
appear in an SRO proprietary product, a non-SRO proprietary product, or
both, the data available in proprietary products is exponentially
greater than the actual number of orders and transaction reports that
exist in the marketplace writ large.
Consolidated data provides two additional measures of pricing
discipline for proprietary data products that are a subset of the
consolidated data stream. First, the consolidated data is widely
available in real-time at $1 per month for non-professional users.
Second, consolidated data is also available at no cost with a 15- or
20-minute delay. Because consolidated data contains marketwide
information, it effectively places a cap on the fees assessed for
proprietary data (such as last sale data) that is simply a subset of
the consolidated data. The mere availability of low-cost or free
consolidated data provides a powerful form of pricing discipline for
proprietary data products that contain data elements that are a subset
of the consolidated data, by highlighting the optional nature of
proprietary products.
Market data vendors provide another form of price discipline for
proprietary data products because they control the primary means of
access to end users. Vendors impose price restraints based upon their
business models. For example, vendors such as Bloomberg and Reuters
that assess a surcharge on data they sell may refuse to offer
proprietary products that end users will not purchase in sufficient
numbers. Internet portals, such as Google, impose a discipline by
providing only that data which will enable them to attract ``eyeballs''
that contribute to their advertising revenue. Retail broker-dealers,
such as Schwab and Fidelity, offer their customers proprietary data
only if it promotes trading and generates sufficient commission
revenue. Although the business models may differ, these vendors'
pricing discipline is the same: they can simply refuse to purchase any
proprietary data product that fails to provide sufficient value. NASDAQ
and other producers of proprietary data products must understand and
respond to these varying business models and pricing disciplines in
order to successfully market proprietary data products.
In addition to the competition and price discipline described
above, the market for proprietary data products is also highly
contestable because market entry is rapid, inexpensive, and profitable.
The history of electronic trading is replete with examples of entrants
that swiftly grew into some of the largest electronic trading platforms
and proprietary data producers: Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook,
Island, RediBook, Attain, TracECN, and BATS Trading. Today, BATS
publishes its data at no charge on its website in order to attract
order flow, and it uses market data revenue rebates from the resulting
executions to maintain low execution charges for its users. Several
ECNs have existed profitably for many years with a minimal share of
trading, including Bloomberg Tradebook and NexTrade.
Regulation NMS, by deregulating the market for proprietary data,
has increased the contestability of that market. While broker-dealers
have previously published their proprietary data individually,
Regulation NMS encourages market data vendors and broker-dealers to
produce proprietary products cooperatively in a manner never before
possible. Multiple market data vendors already have the capability to
aggregate data and disseminate it on a profitable scale, including
Bloomberg, Reuters and Thomson. New entrants are already on the
horizon, including ``Project BOAT,'' a consortium of financial
institutions that is assembling a cooperative trade collection facility
in Europe. These institutions are active in the United States and could
rapidly and profitably export the Project Boat technology to exploit
the opportunities offered by Regulation NMS.
In light of the highly competitive market for market data, NASDAQ
believes that it has considered all relevant factors and has not
considered irrelevant factors in order to establish a fair, reasonable,
and not unreasonably discriminatory fee and an equitable allocation of
fees among all users.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary, as
set forth in detail above, the market for the data elements contained
in NASDAQ Basic is already competitive, with both real-time and delayed
consolidated data as well as the ability for innumerable entities begin
rapidly and inexpensively to offer competitive last sale data products.
The Commission has recently issued an order firmly establishing
that in reviewing non-core data products such as NASDAQ Basic, the
Commission will utilize a market-based approach that relies primarily
on competitive forces to determine the terms on which non-core data is
made available to investors.\8\ The Commission adopted a two-part test:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57917 (Dec. 2, 2008)
(NetCoalition Order'' [sic] resolving File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
The first is to ask whether the exchange was subject to
significant competitive forces in setting the terms of its proposal
for non-core data, including the level of any fees. If an exchange
was subject to significant competitive forces in setting the terms
of a proposal, the Commission will approve the proposal unless it
determines that there is a substantial countervailing basis to find
that the terms nevertheless fail to meet an applicable requirement
of the Exchange Act or the rules thereunder. If, however, the
exchange was not subject to significant competitive forces in
setting the terms of a proposal for non-core data, the Commission
will require the exchange to provide a substantial basis, other than
competitive forces, in its proposed rule change demonstrating that
the terms of the proposal are equitable, fair, reasonable, and not
unreasonably discriminatory.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id. at 48-49.
This standard begins from the premise that no Commission rule
requires exchanges or market participants either to distribute non-core
data to the public or to display non-core data to investors.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its NetCoalition Order the Commission concluded that ``at least
two broad types of significant competitive forces applied to NYSE Arca
in setting the terms of its Proposal to distribute the ArcaBook data:
(1) NYSE Arca's compelling need to attract order flow from market
participants; and (2) the availability to market participants of
alternatives to purchasing the ArcaBook data. The Commission conducted
an exhaustive 14-page review of these two competitive forces before
concluding that the availability of alternatives, as well as the
compelling need to attract order flow, imposed significant competitive
pressure on the exchange's need to act equitably, fairly, and
reasonably in
[[Page 17276]]
setting the terms of the fees for its non-core data product.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id. at 51-65. The Commission then spent an additional 36
pages (65-101) analyzing and refuting comments challenging the
Commission's competition analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The market data provided in NASDAQ Basic is non-core data that is
governed by the same analysis the Commission set forth in the
NetCoalition Order. As with the NYSE Arca depth-of-book product, no
rule requires NASDAQ or any other exchange to offer its BBO and Last
Sale or vendors to display that data. Because NASDAQ Basic data is
merely a subset of depth-of-book data, NASDAQ is subject to the same
competitive forces that apply to depth-of-book data: Its compelling
need to attract order flow from market participants; and the
availability to market participants of alternatives to purchasing the
NASDAQ Basic data. Indeed, the Commission invoked the same reasoning in
approving pilot programs for NASDAQ Last Sale and NYSE Open Book which
provide non-core last sale data from NASDAQ and the New York Stock
Exchange, one element of this proposal.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57966 (June 16,
2008), 73 FR 35182 (June 20, 2008) (File No. SR-NYSE-2007-04) (NYSE
Real-Time Reference Prices); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
57965 (June 16, 2008), 73 FR 35178 (June 20, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-
060) (NASDAQ Last Sale Data Feeds).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASDAQ considerations in setting the fees for NASDAQ Basic are
virtually identical to those the Commission approved in the
NetCoaltiion [sic] Order. First, the proposed fees for NASDAQ Basic
data will apply equally to all professional subscribers and equally to
all non-professional subscribers. The fees therefore do not
unreasonably discriminate among types of subscribers. Second, the
proposed fees for the NASDAQ Basic data are substantially less than
those charged by the Network Processors for the consolidated NBBO or
last sale data. Third, NASDAQ projects that the total revenues
generated by the fee for NASDAQ Basic data initially will amount to
less than the $8 million per year that NYSE Arca projected would be
generated by its ArcaBook data.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. at 101-104.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, as stated above, rapid effectiveness of the proposed rule
change is in the public interest and supports the protection of
investors by allowing data distributors to make additional market data
available to investors that choose to purchase it. Widespread
availability of NASDAQ Basic benefits investors by improving access to
real-time market data that investors can choose to use. It also enables
member firms to reduce their costs and to pass on those cost savings to
their customers through reduced commissions.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(a) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
(b) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-028 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-028. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-028 and should be submitted on or before May
5, 2009.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8416 Filed 4-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P