SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Daniel Chisholm who wrote (869)4/28/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: Bill Wexler  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10293
 
I meant shorting with covered put. In the case of writing a naked call, a sudden spike in the stock price - let's say on the day of expiration - means you must take the loss. Shorting with a covered put means that you get to keep your short position, the put expires worthless and covers some or all of your paper loss on the aforementioned short, and you get to roll over into the next month's puts.

Therefore this strategy provides about the same safety as covered call writing, but also limits your potential profits if the stock collapses entirely. There is a *tad* more risk than covered call writing because the underlying short postion may be subject to a forced buy-in.



To: Daniel Chisholm who wrote (869)4/28/1999 7:16:00 PM
From: Cautious_Optimist  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10293
 
Based on this discussion of naked call writing, I don't understand why naked call writing isn't merely a substitute for shorting a security. Is there something about the liquidity of options vs. stock that presents risk? It seems to me that the premium and the expiration could benefit the seller, while the downside of being short stock or a short call is equal.