To: Zach E. who wrote (7213 ) 4/2/1998 5:28:00 PM From: EJ Respond to of 14162
Zach, the Barron's article was basically a very negative article about claims made on the www.coveredcalls.com web site. For instance, the article states in reference to www.coveredcalls.com: "Turn $3,000 into $1 million in five years or so, promises one cheery Web site, simply by selling expensive covered call options every month and reinvesting the gaudy profits." * * * * "Dick Cancelmo, president of West University Fund, a covered- call mutual fund, dismisses the coveredcalls.com approach as "very humorous." * * * * "By the looks of the gushing testimonials on the site, its devotees often hail from the Wade Cook school of blind, mechanistic option strategies. Perhaps they should keep their day jobs." The article also had the following to say about my website (CoveredCall.Com): "Another site, this one named coveredcall.com, preaches a similar approach to that of coveredcalls.com, but is a bit more modest in its profit promises and adds an element of stockpicking to the mix. This site is not free." I was offended of his use of the word "preaches" and even more so of his reference to "profit promises". My site in no way preaches nor does it promise profits. (I have practiced law for over 13 years, I know better than to make any such claims.) I designed my site as a tool for those investors that utilize covered call writing as part of their overall investment strategy. While the article was overall a negative piece, and the reference to my site was at best a neutral statement, I can say that I now understand the phrase "there is no such thing as bad press." (The article helped many investors find my site.) Probably more than you wanted to know on this... EJA