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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Systems, Strategies and Resources for Trading Futures -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (36159)	10/12/1999 12:17:00 PM
From: John Pitera	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44573

~~just short both puts and calls and pray the market stays in a trading range.. ~~ yes but those days like oct 19th 1987 can blow you up with that type of strategy.... in fact Victor Neiderhoffer, the barefoot trading guru who wrote that book on trading wiped out his accounts on OCt 27th of 1997 doing something along those lines. A variation of that would be to be long the DM and short the CHF (Swiss Franc) as those two do not have the cross rate between the two move very rapidly and the write an at the money call on the DM long (DMz9) and write an at the money put on the CHF short.(SFZ9) as I say those currencies move in near tandem. I was just doing a comparison chart of the two currencies and they has been very little movement in the spread for the past 4 months. why do you think more retail people are not doing these types of strategies?? John

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (36159)	10/12/1999 10:07:00 PM
From: Patrick Slevin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 44573

< I think taking both sides of the same trade in two separate accounts in illegal.> I don't think so, I probably could look it up but I wouldn't know where to start. The only restriction I can recall about something like that is the amount of contracts an entity may control in a given market, both Long and Short combined. Even there, I don't think any of us could violate that particular rule. But then Bill Gates might be in this contest, who knows. I think you might be thinking of a 2 dollar broker, who may be selling the floor but buying through an off floor account? I would think it's legal, as I wouldn't be in the least surprised if a Player was letting it out that s/he was Selling through XYZ while it wasn't known that s/he was Accumulating through ABC, DEF, and assorted others. Sure seems like a strategy that would have been employed from time to time by Real Money. Exchange Officials are more concerned with the people they can easily catch, not the Smart ones. For example, by the way, I read in the WSJ on Monday that if you sprinkle catch-phrases like "no-risk returns" you can drive the S.E.C. nuts. They actually use Search Engines to find such posts on the Internet and comb through them in a search for the bad guys. That has to be a waste of 6 figure man-hours a year at least. No, I don't think anyone would ever go after you. They are far too busy doing really senseless stuff.