Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/17/1999 8:53:00 PM
From: Jack Jackson	Respond to of 152472

One could be the American exchange. Jack

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/17/1999 9:09:00 PM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Options confusion - after a "grueling" 683K download of the whole mess of QCOM options ... I do not see what you are seeing. Are you using the CBOE's list of closing bid / ask prices, or someone else's ? Jon.

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/17/1999 9:36:00 PM
From: RoseCampion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

JG: I have a mess of ZLUAX; the symbol disappeared from my screen today but is still "in" my account portfolio listing. I talked to Fido and near as we can guess CBOE changed it last night for ZLUAF, which is selling for the correct theoretical price (about 85) according to Messrs Black and Scholes. I am trying not to worry and am assured that my former ZLUAX position will be "journaled in" under the new/correct symbol ZLUAF tonight or tomorrow night. I assume the same is true with all of the other pairs you mention. They're all about 7pts different, which would be about right for a .70 delta and our ten point rise today, correct? optionally yours, -Rose-

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/17/1999 9:57:00 PM
From: jmac	Respond to of 152472

I don't have time to explain right now, but the confusion with the symbols occurs when a a stock splits. Only of one of each of those strike prices is actually trading. There is no arbitarge possiblity. Gotta go. Goooo Q!

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/17/1999 11:01:00 PM
From: MileHigh	Respond to of 152472

John, Also, it probably is due to the fact that the same Q option is traded on different exchanges, i.e., Pacific, Chicago, etc.. and they are denoted as such by different symbols. The different prices are simply the fact that each market mechanism prices the option accordingly, but the price spreads are minimal and an arbritrage opportunity usually brings the spreads back to parity very quickly. JMTC's, MileHigh

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/18/1999 12:17:00 AM
From: JohnKouba	Respond to of 152472

John G: The exchanges have changed some of the option symbols. Probably to make the series more orderly. The older symbols show yesterday's prices. Your account should show the new symbol soon. Lotusjohn

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/18/1999 12:30:00 AM
From: PAL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

John: Look at the Open Interest. The option with zero OI is not trading anymore. They should have removed them from the list. Try this site, it loads faster: tradepbs.com From my experience with QCOM, selling naked puts is more profitable than buying calls. Paul

To: JohnG who wrote (41729)	9/18/1999 2:32:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Respond to of 152472

JohnG - Re option discrepancy. Whoever said it is due to the fact that some of the options aren't actually trading (zero Open Interest), is correct. There are several possible reasons for this, one of which is that they are in the process of cleaning out one series by moving it to another (and you shouldn't lose any money in the swap - if you do it is their screw up and they will fix it - eventually.). But, in any case the prices on an option with no OI is suspect and not cause for concern. (If both series were trading the arb's would never let the discrepancy get even remotely that big for effectively the same contract.) Clark