This years it's easy to check my place on the list, I just look at the bottom. It was kind of aggravating trying to find my name in the middle of the list last year..........
@ Elite CNC Routing & Woodworks on Facebook. Check out my work. Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
It's been a wild first quarter, huge sector rotation, metals did very well, the biotechs which grew in early 2015 peaked spectacularly last summer corrected in the fall, and sold off hard in winter, finding some strength today, spring is here again..
Whoa Nelly, I'm back to where I was at week one. Of course, week one wasn't all that great. ;~
I've really had to grind in my real portfolio, many trades buying and selling around my small bio positions. Don't really like trading that much, but the market kinda forced my hand. Now I've got more shares in many of those names now, maybe a mistake? Time will tell
Nice pic, Baley. The market? As usual the market seems to have a mind of it's own, although it hasn't been too bad for precious metal accumulation lately.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
In response to Baley's questions a few posts up, the previous weekly record high was $24,389 by DrBuster back in March 2014. Two weeks later, he held the greatest spread between 1st and 2nd place with a margin of about $8,700.
I believe that was on just one of my usual 50/50 splits for most all of the action. All in should have been like high 30s if memory serves before the bounce back down on cdti, was almost a quad.
Originally posted by: jmski52 Awesome! Keep it goin' Joe!
Would love too Jerry, same pick as last year, but Brian didn't tag along this time. The other day when it topped 50K, I had the thought of five monster boxes showing up at my door
BST references: jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack; jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
Hey I know the initial post in this thread says "no naked puts"...But if somebody starts out with $9,000 and simply sells...(suppose this is next year) a DEC '17 put at a strike price of 110 and collects a premium of 20 for the option (on each unit, since they trade in units of 100)...and the company goes belly up and the stock is delisted, but the writer of the put is legally obligated to buy 100 shares of that company and 110 per share even though it's now worth $0 per share...it technically wouldn't be naked. The most you can lose in a put is the strike price minus the premium. So if the company went belly up, they would lose 110 per share, but make 20 in premium on each one...so they just lose 90 per...and that comes to a loss of...$9,000! In which case the investor would have a return of -100% for the year! As long as they have enough in equity/cash to cover a put's maximum loss (strike price - premium), it isn't naked. Now, if you write an uncovered call, the potential for loss is infinite.
Positive BST transactions with Timbuk3, coindeuce, charlottedude.
Originally posted by: hopsin Hey I know the initial post in this thread says "no naked puts"...But if somebody starts out with $9,000 and simply sells...(suppose this is next year) a DEC '17 put at a strike price of 110 and collects a premium of 20 for the option (on each unit, since they trade in units of 100)...and the company goes belly up and the stock is delisted, but the writer of the put is legally obligated to buy 100 shares of that company and 110 per share even though it's now worth $0 per share...it technically wouldn't be naked. The most you can lose in a put is the strike price minus the premium. So if the company went belly up, they would lose 110 per share, but make 20 in premium on each one...so they just lose 90 per...and that comes to a loss of...$9,000! In which case the investor would have a return of -100% for the year! As long as they have enough in equity/cash to cover a put's maximum loss (strike price - premium), it isn't naked. Now, if you write an uncovered call, the potential for loss is infinite.
Just trying to follow your naked put example probably explains why the initial thread says "no naked puts."
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Originally posted by: hopsin Hey I know the initial post in this thread says "no naked puts"...But if somebody starts out with $9,000 and simply sells...(suppose this is next year) a DEC '17 put at a strike price of 110 and collects a premium of 20 for the option (on each unit, since they trade in units of 100)...and the company goes belly up and the stock is delisted, but the writer of the put is legally obligated to buy 100 shares of that company and 110 per share even though it's now worth $0 per share...it technically wouldn't be naked. The most you can lose in a put is the strike price minus the premium. So if the company went belly up, they would lose 110 per share, but make 20 in premium on each one...so they just lose 90 per...and that comes to a loss of...$9,000! In which case the investor would have a return of -100% for the year! As long as they have enough in equity/cash to cover a put's maximum loss (strike price - premium), it isn't naked. Now, if you write an uncovered call, the potential for loss is infinite.
Just trying to follow your naked put example probably explains why the initial thread says "no naked puts."
It's not naked. If you have a greater than or equal amount of cash to the strike price minus the premium of the put you sell multiplied by 100...it's covered. Theoretically, a trader could sell puts all year with short expirations, they could expire worthless (the trader would collect the premium as straight profit), and this could just add to somebody's initial $9,000, allowing them to take greater risks when selling puts.
Positive BST transactions with Timbuk3, coindeuce, charlottedude.
If you set aside the amount of cash needed to cover the short, it's not a naked short. Of course, then you can't go off and commit that amount to another trade either. That being the case, there is no advantage that the arbitrage spreads won't eat up anyway unless you are good at active trading.
There's no way to reduce the risk of leverage and there's no way to magnify an obviously good trade without it. Unless you have a good HFT program and the infrastructure to go along with it.
There is no magic bullet.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Comments
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
Don't you mean "almost" at the bottom?
More like "down down down, in a burning ring of fire...."
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Happy April Fools Day
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Is column 1 (rank) correct?
Obviously NOT
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I've really had to grind in my real portfolio, many trades buying and selling around my small bio positions. Don't really like trading that much, but the market kinda forced my hand.
Now I've got more shares in many of those names now, maybe a mistake? Time will tell
I knew it would happen.
oh ho! +1! Look out boys, he's starting making his move
PWS: Post Winner Syndrome.
The other 38 participants gained a TOTAL of $18K in the same period.
Today 04/15/16
Rank Prev Rank Rank Chg Total YTD % Chg
1 1 0 pragmaticgoat 32,330 259.22
2 2 0 s4ny 15,223 69.14
3 3 0 derryb 13,569 50.77
4 5 1 botanist 11,188 24.31
5 6 1 djm 11,047 22.74
6 7 1 OPA 11,046 22.73
7 11 4 SmallTownCoins 10,551 17.23
8 8 0 Musky1011 10,509 16.77
9 4 -5 aj2525r 10,426 15.84
10 9 -1 Overdate 10,154 12.82
11 10 -1 Hopsin 9,914 10.16
12 12 0 TwoSides2aCoin 9,853 9.48
13 18 5 Barndog 9,757 8.41
14 17 3 bronco2078 9,741 8.23
15 16 1 Coulport 9,682 7.58
16 13 -3 mhammerman 9,585 6.50
17 15 -2 KISHUI 9,557 6.19
18 21 3 jmski52 9,537 5.97
19 19 0 mariner67 9,353 3.92
20 14 -6 AUandAG 9,335 3.72
21 24 3 Mesquite 9,304 3.38
22 22 0 DrBuster 9,276 3.07
23 20 -3 hchcoin 9,219 2.43
24 27 3 bluelobster 9,160 1.78
25 23 -2 3stars 9,000 0.00
26 26 0 SurfinxHI 8,831 -1.88
27 25 -2 DeepCoin 8,630 -4.11
28 28 0 CuKevin 8,386 -6.82
29 29 0 Bochiman 7,934 -11.84
30 31 1 renman95 7,811 -13.21
31 30 -1 msterling21 7,610 -15.44
32 33 1 joefro 7,033 -21.86
33 35 2 Baley 6,881 -23.54
34 34 0 Justacommeman 5,867 -34.81
35 32 -3 EagleEye 5,592 -37.87
36 38 2 OperationButter 5,550 -38.33
37 37 0 guitarwes 5,096 -43.38
38 36 -2 JohnnyCache 4,534 -49.62
39 39 0 Wingsrule 1,465 -83.72
Average 9,475 5.28
Platinum 989.00 10.50
Silver 16.33 17.23
Gold 1,235.10 16.30
Crude Oil 40.40 8.98
Rhodium 815.00 8.67
Palladium 573.00 1.42
Obviously, metals being up, is a big factor on this forum.
pragmaticgoat gained $10K since the last update two weeks ago.
The other 38 participants gained a TOTAL of $18K in the same period.
Today 04/15/16
Rank Prev Rank Rank Chg Total YTD % Chg
1 1 0 pragmaticgoat 32,330 259.22
2 2 0 s4ny 15,223 69.14
3 3 0 derryb 13,569 50.77
That's got to be a record, +259% highest YTD % ever recorded in these annual contest threads?
And largest gap between #1 and 2?
Anyone recall higher?
Well done sir!
(double congrats if you actually invested in your best idea, triple if you cashed out any at that level)
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
*almost a quad
I knew it would happen.
Awesome! Keep it goin' Joe!
Would love too Jerry, same pick as last year, but Brian didn't tag along this time. The other day when it topped 50K, I had the thought of five monster boxes showing up at my door
jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack;
jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
2016 has not been the best year ever in Baleyville!
It could be worse just look at Wingsrule!!
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Hey I know the initial post in this thread says "no naked puts"...But if somebody starts out with $9,000 and simply sells...(suppose this is next year) a DEC '17 put at a strike price of 110 and collects a premium of 20 for the option (on each unit, since they trade in units of 100)...and the company goes belly up and the stock is delisted, but the writer of the put is legally obligated to buy 100 shares of that company and 110 per share even though it's now worth $0 per share...it technically wouldn't be naked. The most you can lose in a put is the strike price minus the premium. So if the company went belly up, they would lose 110 per share, but make 20 in premium on each one...so they just lose 90 per...and that comes to a loss of...$9,000! In which case the investor would have a return of -100% for the year! As long as they have enough in equity/cash to cover a put's maximum loss (strike price - premium), it isn't naked. Now, if you write an uncovered call, the potential for loss is infinite.
Just trying to follow your naked put example probably explains why the initial thread says "no naked puts."
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Hey I know the initial post in this thread says "no naked puts"...But if somebody starts out with $9,000 and simply sells...(suppose this is next year) a DEC '17 put at a strike price of 110 and collects a premium of 20 for the option (on each unit, since they trade in units of 100)...and the company goes belly up and the stock is delisted, but the writer of the put is legally obligated to buy 100 shares of that company and 110 per share even though it's now worth $0 per share...it technically wouldn't be naked. The most you can lose in a put is the strike price minus the premium. So if the company went belly up, they would lose 110 per share, but make 20 in premium on each one...so they just lose 90 per...and that comes to a loss of...$9,000! In which case the investor would have a return of -100% for the year! As long as they have enough in equity/cash to cover a put's maximum loss (strike price - premium), it isn't naked. Now, if you write an uncovered call, the potential for loss is infinite.
Just trying to follow your naked put example probably explains why the initial thread says "no naked puts."
Lol. I had to read it 3x also.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
There's no way to reduce the risk of leverage and there's no way to magnify an obviously good trade without it. Unless you have a good HFT program and the infrastructure to go along with it.
There is no magic bullet.
I knew it would happen.
There is no magic bullet.
Knowledge is pretty magical.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
fify
I knew it would happen.
We'll see smoe big pops today.
Pops? Or, drops?
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Too bad the rest of my portfolio didn't fair as well, (