Does the revised definition of a qualifying system provide sufficient clarity?
We have reviewed the initial ATS consultation paper, the responses to the first consultation, and the current consultation paper and support CESR in its attempts to narrow the definition and to clarify what a qualifying system is. We understand that the new definition does not include bilateral trading systems such as OTC markets and trading between professional organizations. We believe that the proposed standard should clearly identify the parameters to be used in the application of the standard. We support the higher-level definition for establishing ATS standards development, however, we find that there is a need for additional clarification of the current definition and need to specify what is a qualifying system. It is not evident from reading the proposal that OTC, clearing systems, and bilateral systems for derivatives and swaps are not qualifying systems under the ATS rules. Question 2: Are there any specific areas in which it would be useful for CESR to add detail to the pres
