Jack Haddad

Jack Haddad
Contributor since: 2006
17.50 is correct
I may sustain shorterm paper loss, but it's notjhing new. I want to get head of the crowd.
On Oct 06 01:41 PM Macro_Man wrote:
> However good your reasons are mate, don't get short yet and don't
> add on to DOG just yet. If you are early can be very painful even
> if you are right eventually
I'm keeping a close on 9810. If we close above again, it will prove a consolidation to propel the maket to a new high.
On Oct 06 10:55 AM Macro_Man wrote:
> The pattern has been the same...kiss the 20 or 50dma and bounce.
> The trend is still up and it wasnt a bear trap...the trend had not
> signalled a short.
>
> Now, wouldnt be surprised to see 1100 or 1120 and then drop from
> there. watching 3 month libor...that is the key i think
The data later this might be bad... and these retailers havehad a tremndous run. M, for example has rallied from 6/share. I'm locking profits until proven otherwise.
On Oct 05 10:47 AM Macro_Man wrote:
> Don't know mate. If we are bouncing off the 50dma on S&P, then
> the rising tide would lift all boats, including the leaky ones. So,
> why sell now....why not after stocks have run up to 1100 or 1120?
> IF, indeed we are going to see dip buying lift stocks up from here
Agreed... This pullback is healthy and intermediate uptrend is stil intact until shown otherwise.
It's a great accumulate at these levels... I would buy shares and hedge by writing Nov strike 60 calls which are paying a premium of 1.45/contract. This is a great premium. Oct strike 60 calls are also juicy at .80, considering that there is only 2 weeks remaining for options to expire.
It does not have any consequences whatsoever.
On Sep 01 11:45 AM Plant the seeds wrote:
> How does the failure of cap and trade (Pekins plan) have on Nat Gas
> outlook?
I don't short much, especially in an uptrend. I like shorting on weakness. I use a prime broker serivce at Schwab.
On Aug 18 09:53 AM Macro_Man wrote:
> did you sell short? if so, which brokerage do you use. Fidelity doesnt
> seem to enable shorting of many ETFs as far as I can see
Just becuase the market is generally selling, it does not mean that you cannot be selecitve in going long or short certain ETFs or stocks. for example, I have both long and short postions on M hedged with different call strikes.
On Aug 17 11:11 AM Macro_Man wrote:
> agreed, but then why are you buying DIG and M? shouldn't we be going
> the other way
it's okay, I'm a patient short... I have built many short pyramids in the past
On Aug 06 03:24 PM Alice4321us wrote:
> okay.. so the sales are down 10% and the stock goes Nuts... Don't
> fight the trend my friend...
Good suggestion.
On Aug 05 02:18 AM Danny Devito wrote:
> UNG macd bullish, rsi bullish, I suggest to take a look to the spread
> UNG/USO even in a better opportunity
i never set stop losses... I'm always hedged with either calls or opposing ETFs. It works like a charm...
Alice, even 15.20, it's a good entry. I truly don't understand the selling. It's overdone.
On Jul 30 11:11 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> I mistimed my entry on this one yesterday at 15.20 and it's hurting
> today.... I don't trade options so, no downside protection...
Not interest in penny stocks that can be easily manipulated.
On Jul 30 11:07 AM User 449980 wrote:
> Look at Lucas Energy (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) they have
> 26 wells producing 150 barrels of oil per day at $60.00 pre barrel
> cash flow positive. See their new research report at lucasenergy.com
I didn't expect a buyout... But I earned the mximum premium on strike 8 calls.
On Jul 23 10:02 PM Alice4321us wrote:
> Looks like this one worked out very well for you :)

Not at all strong.... it's a good hedge if you consider rolling that strike month after month...
On Jul 23 03:24 PM mwfall wrote:
> guess 'very well' was a little too strong
Well, earnings is what drive markets up... And earnings have been blowing out estimates. So, market is rallying. It will be interesting to see how much of the rally we sustain thereafter. The trend is very bullish, evident by a very positive MACD.
On Jul 23 11:22 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> Do times like these, when the market gets bloated on sentiments rather
> than fundamentals defy the TA logic? People are still getting laid
> off, foreclosures on the rise, more savings, less spending, still
> market keeps going UP... without taking a breather...
Rich,
I'm sorry that this reply is rather late... At times i get so busy that i can't check all messages...
I recoomend that you visit the site centralcoastnutrition.com. It's owned by Herbal Products & Developments. The nme of the owner is Paul Gaylon. He has devoted a lifetime of research on natural products from herbs to nutraceuticals. I have conducted at least 9 clinical research trials on his products. Once you go to the site, click on clinical trials and you'll see my name and research.
Jack
jackmd1@aol.com
On Jul 10 11:19 PM Moonmanx wrote:
> Jack,
> I know this request may be a bit out of your realm. But here goes..Can
> you help me find some good market data regarding the domestic and
> international dietary supplement markets and or industry data? I
> am particurly interested in finding anything as it pertains to male
> enhancement or energy supplements?
> I think PFE is worth watching right now. Not sure what to think right
> at this moment. A short maybe..Also I just found out that another
> player is making a move into the chinese market with a natural supplement.
> Supposedly working a deal to set up distribution to over 3 million
> chinese locations...We'll see..But i definately want to do my homework
> on this one , just in case it is the real thing. Thank you in advance
> for any help you can provide..Rich Pedersen ...rich_pedersen@cox.net.
Not anytime soon... I see SP 500 at 1000 very soon.
On Jul 14 10:17 AM Macro_Man wrote:
> we are near the top of the price channel...905 is top resistance.
> we are going down from here mate.
Sure is... this rally from the recent lows of 8135 is too much... Just because earnings are beating expectations does not mean that market fundamentals are good. It just means that analysts have been all wrong and too conservative in their assessment.
On Jul 17 02:34 PM Alice4321us wrote:
> I bought QID this morning at 30.15. It's due for a bounce...
I didn't....
You are forgetting that I not only have a call hedge against DIG shares but also own DUG.
On Jul 04 10:02 PM Macro_Man wrote:
> This is a risky trade. I think DIG is going down. You want to do
> this trade when the underlying stock is either very stable or going
> up haltingly, so by selling an out of the money call, one gets a
> 1% or 2% return in a few weeks in addition to any small appreciation
> in the stock.
>
> You wouldnt want to do that if the stock could go down or up a lot.
> I think stocks are going down, oil is going down and energy is going
> to get clobbered. This would be a better trade in a few weeks time.
> If the market corrects 5 to 10%, energy sector could correct even
> more...which would hurt DIG by anywhere from 18% to 25%.
>
> I hope I am wrong, but I fear this is a time to stay more on the
> sidelines or for nimble traders, perhaps to have a short bias. I
> am playing this correction mostly by shorting silver, a little gold
> and perhaps oil. Also, selling some uncovered calls carefully. If
> the market goes up, I will have to buy the underlying quickly or
> lose money. This is also a risky trade.
Arnold, it depends on the stock itself. For example, if I'm trading M in access of 3 blocks (30,000 shares) per trade. Then, yes, the specialist will try to trade against it. However, in larger cap stock like INTC, 3 blocks are insignificant. It would take 10 blocks or more for INTC to finch.
Alice, I made an error... the intrinsic time value is the entire premium of the call-- which is 1.40/contract. The strike 26 is slightly "out of the money" call. I made a mistake thinking that it was strike 25 calls. In other words, had it been strike 25, the intrinsic time value would have been .83/contract.
Suppose it was really strike 25 calls... You take the price of the purchased shares (25.58) and subtract it from the call premium of 1.40/contract. This yileds an intrinsic time value of .82 cents. However, I mrant to say strike 26. Therefore, since the strike is above the price of the purchased shares, the intrinsic time value is the entire call premium.
I hope this helps.
I recommend Lawrence McMillan, the grandmaster of option strategies!!!! He has 4th addition out. I forgot the exact title of the book. He has 2 books. It's the 700 plus page one that i recommend.
On Jul 03 11:08 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> Hi Jack - If you get a moment, please explain the rationale behind
> the intrinsic value of 83/contract. The way I am trying to understand
> this trade is that you are banking on the possiblity that DIG will
> hit $26 level by writing the calls. But you went long DIG as well
> by buying the shares, so where is the downside protection? Isn't
> buying calls equivalent to going long on shares?
> Can you recommend some good reading material to understand this hedging
> philosophy. I am intrigued by your methodology that more often than
> not is always successful and consistent in making <NOBR _extended="true">#
> </NOBR> regardless of market conditions.
Alice, there is isn't any news out on AMLN today... I couldn't find a single link. I have ben contacting my sources, but to no avail... That is what prompted me to lock profits quickly.
On Jun 26 11:28 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> On Monday FDA decides on some Drug approvals. May be insiders know
> something and are buying the shares ahead of it. Volume is pretty
> good so far.
> Excellent trade.
I had bought these shares at 25.85 and written the calls at 1.50/contract. the Gain on the shares is .63/share and the loss on the calls are .20/contract. So the net gain is a .43/share.
On Jun 25 02:54 PM Alice4321us wrote:
> Jack - Can you explain reasoning behind this trade. I thought you
> had bought these shares at a higher price and higher /contract price.
> Did you make/lose money on this? I am novice to hedging so may be
> I do not understand how this trade worked out.
True
On Jun 23 10:56 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> I work for DELL and don't any stock. DELL has kept very tight leash
> on operating expenses since Michael came back. They are not making
> great money but keep reducing expenses quarter after quarter.
A trade is a trade. I got nearly 1 dollar out of it thismorning.
Alice, it's both... I role options against underlying shares month after month.
Thanks for your vote of confidence; it's 90% psychology and 10% skill.
As to RIMM, it's grossly overvalued relative to the run it had since March of 2009. Back then, shares were 37, i believe. That is a nice premium. Shares have definitely got ahead of themselves. I will not be a buyer yet because it's hard to hedge the shares with any option combination due to time decay.
On Jun 19 12:44 PM Macro_Man wrote:
> you are quite the trader arent you mate. What are your thoughts on
> putting the hurt on RIMM and GOOG.
:)
A profit is a profit, Alice.
On Jun 19 11:11 AM Alice4321us wrote:
> You sold too early :)