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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ira Player who wrote (64375)	8/7/2003 6:48:34 AM
From: rkral	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77398

OT .. Ira, re "anyone doing covered calls on an equity they would not own otherwise is making an error." Your most important statement, IMHO, in a very good post. Maybe you would provide your opinion on something else about options .. well, option theory. I've read the phrase "options is a zero-sum game" (ignoring commissions and taxes). I've also read "time-value accrues to the seller". Of course, both only apply in the aggregate .. over a large number of options on many companies in different markets. In the proper context, I believe both phrases are true. But they are conflicting statements, at least on the surface. "Zero-sum game" implies that both writers and buyers can expect to end up with $0 gain/(loss). "Time-value accrues to the seller" implies the option buyers lose what writers gain, i.e., the time-value of the options. I resolved the conflict by believing that "options is a zero-sum game" *after* "accruing time-value to the seller". Do you agree? Regards, Ron