19709

50 Four-Day September Expiration Option Ideas

The article was published on 9/15 as indicated at the top and confirmed by the author's statement that there were 4 days left to options expiration which was on 9/18.


On Sep 15 09:42 PM S2009 wrote:

> The table is incomplete, no price at the time of publication or no
> bid/ask for options. So if you do not see this table exactly at the
> moment of publication (which is not shown, is it Sep 2009 or Jan
> 2007 - nobody knows) it is basically useless.

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

Let's see. I bought the stock on 8/11 for $3.72. Today (8/13) I sold August $4 calls @ $0.21 and expect to be called at expiration. Before commissions, that would be a return of 13%+ in 11 days. After commissions, the 11 day return would be 12%+. If C closes below $4 at expiration, I will have lowered my per share cost to $3.53 after commissions and will write calls again.


On Aug 12 07:44 PM Ricard wrote:

> One clarification, when he writes his covered calls, instead of being
> 'forced to cover' he is instead forced to eat the losses garnered
> through holding C. Like I already mentioned, for a stock this volatile,
> losses over 11 days can easily get into the high teens, if not 30-40%,
> without any news, or any rhyme or reason causing the swings in price.
> So, he keeps his 6% premium and loses the farm. This will probably
> happen 50% of the time if he chooses to 'annualize'.
>
> The odds are not in favor of making the trade Marco suggests, unless
> you have a crystal ball that can predict daily/weekly movements of
> any stock. I'm sorry, but mine broke last week, so I'm using LEAPs
> instead, and buying calls, not writing them.

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

For further justification of Marco's suggestions, I refer you to. . .
seekingalpha.com/artic...
. . . your own article in which you state the reasons for the "not faint of heart" to trade options on C.




On Aug 12 11:02 AM Ricard wrote:

> That high volatility kills his strategies as well. High volatility
> equates to fat premiums, but you STILL must be correct in direction
> if you use either of Marco's strategies. For a 5% gain, his strategies
> are far too risky for the infinitesimal returns he is suggesting
> you accept.

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

Let's see - 6% gain in 11 days equates to an annualized gain of 199%. Doesn't sound infinitesimal to me. And don't forget, good old Uncle Sam isn't going to let this company fail and throw away $45 Billion in the process.


On Aug 12 11:02 AM Ricard wrote:

> That high volatility kills his strategies as well. High volatility
> equates to fat premiums, but you STILL must be correct in direction
> if you use either of Marco's strategies. For a 5% gain, his strategies
> are far too risky for the infinitesimal returns he is suggesting
> you accept.

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

The uncertainty engulfing Citi's management and the extent of its credit problems adds to the stock's volatility. The extreme volatility is the basis for Marco's suggested option trades.


On Aug 11 08:53 AM john s. gordon wrote:

> if citi has been left in the dust compared to the others, there is
> probably a reason.....

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

You are ignoring the downside protection afforded by the option premium. Unless the stock price at option expiration falls below the premium adjusted stock cost, selling the option has in fact generated income.


On Aug 11 08:53 AM jamo59 wrote:

> calvin has it spot on correctly~~
> thanks for expanding on it thoroughly......
>
> On Aug 11 08:49 AM jamo59 wrote:

Two Citigroup Income Generating Option Strategies

Marco's point in using C is its high volatility. Coupled with the fact that the U.S. Government is more than a > 30% owner of C and consequently cannot afford to let it fail, generating a 6%+ "dividend" in 11 days is extremely enticing. Also remember than Marco is trying to educate individuals who may never have traded options.


On Aug 11 08:49 AM jamo59 wrote:

> agree with acttang...rather amateurish........if you want those buy/write
> returns, do it with dozens of much more enticing stks.....