I've always maintained that I'm a horrible stock picker. There are times, and I'm always receiving snapshot performance, versus my historical, that the "conglomeration" of holdings has been worse than at other times.
What's fascinating though, is that the only time that I've trailed the index of my preference, the S&P 500, was during the first three months of this year and the first three months following the market bottom in March 2009. I rarely will sell at a loss, not because I'm good, but because I'm stubborn, patient and don't get scared from seeong paper losses. AS the year comes to an end, I do look for strategic losses for tax purposes, but I really feel like a loser when I do that,despite knowing that it's the right thing to do.
Both of those times when I under-performed saw fairly straight and unrestrained gains, which is a bad time to be selling calls.
As I get closer to really getting ready to hang it up, I will likely move to some of the sectors that you suggest, as well as going out a bit more long term on my option writing.
But part of the truth is that I really like the excitement and the need to make decisions, such as multiple occasions to trade things like VXX, FAS, ZSL or AGQ derivatives. Even though they represent a small piece of my total, sometimes they give me the luxury of being patient with the losers.
There does come a time though that you trade in your crack pipe for some hot cocoa.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
There is rarely a situation where you can singularly assign blame or credit. This was just another case of competing sides seeking advantage.
That is the case on every single trade that's made. There is bid and there is ask.
This was no different, other than the fact that there were no historical parameters, neither for the bid nor for the ask. So human nature kicked in on both sides seeking to satisfy their needs at the expense of someone else (personal, corporate. You name it)
No credible, first tier underwriter wants to see IPO recipients lose money. There is tremendous collateral damage that comes back to haunt the underwriter. In this case, it was greatly magnified due to the altered ownership dynamics and some extremely unfortunate issues regarding trade execution.
This was no BATS. It was far too large and far too important to in any way delay or cancel the offering. Remember, the first transactions that took place and for about the first 40 minutes, were well in excess of the IPO price. SOmething consequential occurred to alter that path. It just remains to adequately identify what that or what combination of factors it was.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
Thanks, no I never got to the Yahoo boards, but i do know of their past reputation.
I also don't read anything (with the exception of comments), so the memo is likely sitting there someplace.
At the very least, the previous commenter has learned after several attempts at its use in commenting to some of my other musings, that the word "idiopathetic" is gibberish.
One of my peeves, is precisely what you've pointed out. There are so many "Talking Heads," and certainly much more high profile than those that can toil with some degree of anonymity, who never seem to acknowledge the past.
About 4 or 5 years ago, Joe Kernen of CNBC did the unthinkable. Michael Metz, of Oppenheim, who has since passed away, made a comment that Kernen knew to be diametrically opposite a previously stated and high profile position by Metz and he called him on it. Metz arrogantly denied it and Kernen simply asked "Would you like me to get the video?"
It's too bad that so many can conveniently overlook their past or nuance their opinions so that there's lots of wiggle room.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
Of course you're right, but in the world of instant gratification, high frequency trading, instant messaging, etc... that time frame may be very, very short for very, very many.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
You make the assumption that the two are mutually exclusive. You can certainly not place the shareholders high on your list of priorities and still see the share price perform beautifully, just as you could have a CEO who feels the pain of his shareholders, yet can do nothing to help shares appreciate in value.
The comment that Cramer made was in discussing the direction that Tim Cook appears to be taking the company, with regard to being more responsive to shareholder's priorities, which may go beyond simply share price.
I don't believe that Cramer's comment was meant to be critical of Jobs. In fact, it may very well be that Jobs' singular focus was what enhanced share price. Without that focus it's likely that Apple could have been no different from the myriad of computer/electronics/c... companies that have come and gone over the years.
However, there will be very few people that would come forward and suggest that Jobs took specific actions in an effort to enhance that price.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
You're absolutely right that we have no idea where the company currently stands, hence my exaggerated comment regarding VXX and FAS. No one ever really has an idea of what market value may really be until that point that the restraint on trading, due to the lock-up period, is lofted.
I don't believe that this could all be placed at the feet of the under-writers. Prior to deciding to make retail shares available, there was an outcry not only by individual investors, but also by charitable organizations, clamoring for a piece of the IPO.
In fact, a representative of a large charity (which routinely have equity investments) was on NBC national news making a case for why organizations such as his should be given a chance to get IPO shares.
There was lots of avarice to go around. My personal belief, which I spelled out in a previous article, "Promoting Equality Cheapens Us All" ( http://seekingalpha.co... ) is that the process of enfranchisement turned buyer wannabes at the opening of trading to seller wannabes.
The model was completely turned on its head, at least as far as popular IPOs go. We've made a lot of Morgan Stanley's and NASDAQ's role in the debacle, but let's face it, the human factor contained in the hearts and minds of investors has to assume some of the "credit" for what transpired.
Thank you. Did you mean as in "Crack rock" bottom?
Addicts usually have enablers, as well.. It's a global marketplace and global financial network. Hopefully they'll get it together and spare the world some of the ripples and trickles.
You really have me lost on your equation. The two, covered call and naked put couldn't be any further different from one another. One is reckless the other cautious.
"Perhaps if your wrote Covered Call = Naked Put, imo" Then we copuld say, yes that is your opinion and you are entitled to it despite it being based upon a false premise.
You might consider reading a bit about the basic definitions. That may or may not help better define your opinions.
Will be interesting to see spin on this week's WWCD, which was where iCloud was announced last year. No doubt new enhancements to exisiting laptop line are wonderful engineering feats, but people do always have expectations for much more when it comes to Apple.
Still plenty of time to to wow people, but they may be a bit winded from that wall.
I believe that it's an "L" on the forehead, but that may be a bit to far in the alphabet. Start at "zero" and work your way up. Amazingly, you would think that "New Superhuman" whould have surpassed a three year old, although zero can be an advanced concept.
Thanks. I think you're the second person that's recommended something on NLY and AGNC.
NLY was one of the first stocks that I purchased when I went out on my own about 5 or 6 years ago, but only held for a short period. At the time, I felt fairly fortunate to get out. Never had the pleasure with AGNC.
I tend to write only about positions that I've been following for a long time and have owned in and off for a long time, but it may be worthwhile if it stirs the up.
Besides, it might finally justify that "666" I got branded in my forehead.
Everyone can develop their own criteria that balance Rate of return versus likelihood of being assigned.
If you have a stock that is a core long term holding then why not write a longer term option and collect premium and dividends, as well as potential for capital gains?
I tend to not look at holdings as long term positions, so therefore I use weekly and monthly options, but your approach is a very reasonable one and requires little maintenance, Again, how can you wrong with that?
Europe Likes Crack [View article]
I've always maintained that I'm a horrible stock picker. There are times, and I'm always receiving snapshot performance, versus my historical, that the "conglomeration" of holdings has been worse than at other times.
What's fascinating though, is that the only time that I've trailed the index of my preference, the S&P 500, was during the first three months of this year and the first three months following the market bottom in March 2009. I rarely will sell at a loss, not because I'm good, but because I'm stubborn, patient and don't get scared from seeong paper losses. AS the year comes to an end, I do look for strategic losses for tax purposes, but I really feel like a loser when I do that,despite knowing that it's the right thing to do.
Both of those times when I under-performed saw fairly straight and unrestrained gains, which is a bad time to be selling calls.
As I get closer to really getting ready to hang it up, I will likely move to some of the sectors that you suggest, as well as going out a bit more long term on my option writing.
But part of the truth is that I really like the excitement and the need to make decisions, such as multiple occasions to trade things like VXX, FAS, ZSL or AGQ derivatives. Even though they represent a small piece of my total, sometimes they give me the luxury of being patient with the losers.
There does come a time though that you trade in your crack pipe for some hot cocoa.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
That is the case on every single trade that's made. There is bid and there is ask.
This was no different, other than the fact that there were no historical parameters, neither for the bid nor for the ask. So human nature kicked in on both sides seeking to satisfy their needs at the expense of someone else (personal, corporate. You name it)
No credible, first tier underwriter wants to see IPO recipients lose money. There is tremendous collateral damage that comes back to haunt the underwriter. In this case, it was greatly magnified due to the altered ownership dynamics and some extremely unfortunate issues regarding trade execution.
This was no BATS. It was far too large and far too important to in any way delay or cancel the offering. Remember, the first transactions that took place and for about the first 40 minutes, were well in excess of the IPO price. SOmething consequential occurred to alter that path. It just remains to adequately identify what that or what combination of factors it was.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
I also don't read anything (with the exception of comments), so the memo is likely sitting there someplace.
At the very least, the previous commenter has learned after several attempts at its use in commenting to some of my other musings, that the word "idiopathetic" is gibberish.
One of my peeves, is precisely what you've pointed out. There are so many "Talking Heads," and certainly much more high profile than those that can toil with some degree of anonymity, who never seem to acknowledge the past.
About 4 or 5 years ago, Joe Kernen of CNBC did the unthinkable. Michael Metz, of Oppenheim, who has since passed away, made a comment that Kernen knew to be diametrically opposite a previously stated and high profile position by Metz and he called him on it. Metz arrogantly denied it and Kernen simply asked "Would you like me to get the video?"
It's too bad that so many can conveniently overlook their past or nuance their opinions so that there's lots of wiggle room.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
May I ask, is there anythiing that you do that isn't remarkably successful?
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
The comment that Cramer made was in discussing the direction that Tim Cook appears to be taking the company, with regard to being more responsive to shareholder's priorities, which may go beyond simply share price.
I don't believe that Cramer's comment was meant to be critical of Jobs. In fact, it may very well be that Jobs' singular focus was what enhanced share price. Without that focus it's likely that Apple could have been no different from the myriad of computer/electronics/c... companies that have come and gone over the years.
However, there will be very few people that would come forward and suggest that Jobs took specific actions in an effort to enhance that price.
While Zuckerberg Fiddled, Facebook Burned [View article]
I don't believe that this could all be placed at the feet of the under-writers. Prior to deciding to make retail shares available, there was an outcry not only by individual investors, but also by charitable organizations, clamoring for a piece of the IPO.
In fact, a representative of a large charity (which routinely have equity investments) was on NBC national news making a case for why organizations such as his should be given a chance to get IPO shares.
There was lots of avarice to go around. My personal belief, which I spelled out in a previous article, "Promoting Equality Cheapens Us All" ( http://seekingalpha.co... ) is that the process of enfranchisement turned buyer wannabes at the opening of trading to seller wannabes.
The model was completely turned on its head, at least as far as popular IPOs go. We've made a lot of Morgan Stanley's and NASDAQ's role in the debacle, but let's face it, the human factor contained in the hearts and minds of investors has to assume some of the "credit" for what transpired.
Europe Likes Crack [View article]
Addicts usually have enablers, as well.. It's a global marketplace and global financial network. Hopefully they'll get it together and spare the world some of the ripples and trickles.
When Did Apple Hit The Wall? [View article]
"Perhaps if your wrote Covered Call = Naked Put, imo" Then we copuld say, yes that is your opinion and you are entitled to it despite it being based upon a false premise.
You might consider reading a bit about the basic definitions. That may or may not help better define your opinions.
When Did Apple Hit The Wall? [View article]
Still plenty of time to to wow people, but they may be a bit winded from that wall.
When Did Apple Hit The Wall? [View article]
When Did Apple Hit The Wall? [View article]
When Did Apple Hit The Wall? [View article]
NLY was one of the first stocks that I purchased when I went out on my own about 5 or 6 years ago, but only held for a short period. At the time, I felt fairly fortunate to get out. Never had the pleasure with AGNC.
I tend to write only about positions that I've been following for a long time and have owned in and off for a long time, but it may be worthwhile if it stirs the up.
Besides, it might finally justify that "666" I got branded in my forehead.
Dividends? Forget DRIP And Go PRIP [View article]
Everyone can develop their own criteria that balance Rate of return versus likelihood of being assigned.
If you have a stock that is a core long term holding then why not write a longer term option and collect premium and dividends, as well as potential for capital gains?
I tend to not look at holdings as long term positions, so therefore I use weekly and monthly options, but your approach is a very reasonable one and requires little maintenance, Again, how can you wrong with that?
I See Patterns [View article]
No, pretty much only what you will see on these pages, as I enjoy no longer having to come up with something on a daily basis,