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.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Trader who wrote (14362)	11/15/1997 6:08:00 PM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

TT- God bless you- I love you for showing what a serpent' IKE' is.Now that job is done and you have exposed him- bravo-Take a glass of Bourgon 1989 or 90 these are exceptional years they help remove tension and will make you relax also have therapeutic effect of avoiding a heart burn- keep it up - you are doing a great job. I will be back in Paris on Monday enjoying my weekend in Laussane, if you give me your e-mail I can DHL you some good vintage will help you overcome this weekend tension. Life is too short to worry about others. God bless you with great job of exposing my millions of faults. Thank you very much for every word- Let see what's next- I concede you are the greatest, I will look forward to your two sell signals and one buy signal post with amusement and a great laugh- even Ray and Karim my equity and bond trader had a great laugh on your post- but we enjoy every bit of it- i will be short but long. I am sharing your posts with top guys to give them how a great trader plans his strategy. This small menial small trader beg your forgiveness and hope you great trader will pardon his life for offence committed- but 1990 or 89 is a must and I have to DHL you. Please now that this poor guy has been throghly exposed have you any thing else to offer to this thread. Ofcourse I assure you as a 'host' that you will and are welcome from bottom of my heart. However Bourgone 1989 or 90 is a must. Love you for your time spent on researching my faults.

To: Tom Trader who wrote (14362)	11/16/1997 9:45:00 AM
From: Nayson Khoshnood	Respond to of 50167

I am waiting for your balance response, your intersting posts and trading details makes a great story baby TT. I will pay you 15,000 $ which I have made in my club if I can confirm your 'fictitious' 12th November after 5.00 clock trade, next morning you were planning to go long. What about OEX combo of calls and puts at the same time. Look back and read your mail, your contributions are like 'paper' trades in Bombay? Options futures is not your cup of tea baby, to leave a short and not to cover hurts. This trading is called as 'afterthought' trading but contract was not 500$ baby since 2nd Nov contract was 250$ why on earth you were eyeing a profit which you knew is not there Mr Civilised and Honest. You thought no is is watching your acrobatics. I was. Long short and long but short. Since you started provking Ike I asked Ike when Bart checked you the first time but Ike was adamant that I keep my e-mails on your anamolies secret however your yesterday attitude to usurp this thread brought the curtain down. Note it down you are on Ikes thread and and these whilt lies full 16 of them will follow you every where. Laughing stock the emperor has no clothes a trade which was never there. 75$ is not too much a price to change your sex or personality now. You asked me I was a man I showed you how much a man I am but I will not leave you until you post your broker tel number. I am ready to put the money 15,000 $ in any escrow from you I want 5$, I am prepared to bet 15,000$ and pay you if I am wrong about that S&P futures contracts but will only get 5$ in return.

To: Tom Trader who wrote (14362)	11/16/1997 2:20:00 PM
From: Tom Trader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

Now to NK's points-- ON THE SPLITTING OF THE S&P CONTRACT: NK is absolutely right that the contract was split -- as per the CME excerpt that I have already posted. I have made two trades since that date -- I went short the S&P futures once and closed out the position and went long once. I went long the S&P futures when I reversed my short position and I am still long. I have traded the S&P futures since 1984 on a regular basis--once in while before that date. The futures have been ALWAYS been worth $500 per point since its inception in 1982 (I think), until its recent split. As a result, I have been used to associating a point move with $500 and have posted this numerous times in the past, on the options thread. I did so again in my postings subsequent to the split. I was wrong about this and NK is right---but to state that because I made this mistake through force of habit, it therefore proves that I am a liar, deceitful, "a back-trader" and on and on, says more about the poster than about me, IMO. The impending split of the S&P futures was a somewhat publicised event -- though not as heralded as the introduction of the mini-S&P. I received information about it from my broker, it was in the WSJ, the IBD and I think I recall it being mentioned on CNBC, as well. So, the knowledge of the split occurring was hardly this event that only experienced futures traders would only know.