this set of expectations that you had, in one of the interpretations, and i guess i will ask miss chapman this question. this of this lack of precedent, there is no case law that talks about the interpretation meaning that if an investor told the broker to purchase pacific securities, that seems to be very clear case where we could come in, but if you did not have that line of securities requested, and most of us don't. that does not seem to be covered. do you have a thought? >> the first i learned was when i saw the written testimony and i have to tell this body that there is no authority in the statute for the fcc's position. nowhere does it say that the full protections of the statute are reserved for customers who make their own investment decisions, but not for customers who rely upon financial advisers. if you analyze the economics of what they are suggesting, instead of protecting investors, which is what we found them to do, they are protecting the industry funded insurance company because the vast majority of americans do not make their own investment decisions. my clients are in