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 : INTEL TRADER -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gersh Avery who wrote (9169)	3/4/2001 12:32:25 AM
From: Berney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11051

Gersh, That's why I posted at the time I sold the Cubes, that GE was not confirming the upward move in the Market. Might be silly, but that was enough for me to put the fish in the box. If you don't put the fish in the box in a bear Market, it really smells up the place. What is interesting is that there was some incredible volume on the Cubes the last couple of days, the importance of which I've yet to determine. However, I've always worried about these Black Fridays. One of these days it is going to lead to a really Black Tuesday. TB

To: Gersh Avery who wrote (9169)	3/5/2001 9:47:22 AM
From: Jurgen Trautmann	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11051

Gerh, I see a important misunderstanding here. When commercial firms sell calls it doesn't compensate their (previous or same-time-) buy of underlyings - that's a misunderstanding. In contrary, you will get increasing "open-interests" of calls !!! So the futures look bullish when banks are going short, vice versa the futures look bearish when the contract-owners close their contracts (taking loss, also normally when the underlying has come down) There's another, but IMO similar important misunderstanding from Steve. He pointed out that this strategy doesn't work if the underlying suffers more than the amount that is compensated by the written call. That's correct, but does not take into consideration that you can close the call when it's worth is lost. After that you can sell the next call using the same cover. So even great downward-movements of the underlying are "possible". However: I did not check whether fast or slow falling underlyings are more/less profitable. The more arguments the clearer the pic: This "classical" strategy together with a growing part of T/A-believers stabilizes bear-markets in a astonishing efficiency. When - what we see now - macroeconomical trends (partly generated by the bear-market!) press in the same direction, I have great difficulties to image a way how this could stop. Did you read about historical crashes? It's not amusing to me. Hope I'm wrong :) Jury