Search results

A problem is too many sellers and too little buyers would artificially lift many options prices to be higher than normally needed. Higher options prices would discourage not only potential buyers for speculation but also buyers for hedging. Sellers competing each other would make the premium...

imo: Unfortunately, several ET threads about buying options didn't do quite well. I think obviously selling options would be much easier to make a living, while with proper and simple hedging. Not a secret about that, even without any special edge by the individuals. However, buying...

My idea is ET should have 3 forums for options. Trading Options as Sellers (aka: Options Professionals); Trading Options as Buyers (i.e. Dream Makers); and Using Options for Hedging (i.e. General Traders/Investors). Then we the buyers can have a better place and space to discuss our "nonsense"...

Looks like ET has not too many long options players, as far as my searching found.

We must pay for our insurance at certain cost. Isn't it?

Agree (as playing the underlying requires only picking its direction, relatively easier and much much cheaper hence closer for breakeven), but technically and practically where do the long calls and/or long puts coming from (as if every smart guy knows only shorting is the game)?

Since when for this lovely law to be effective?

Personally I don't think trading long options (probably except backspreads) is Not a viable way to Most traders for long- or short-term) directional plays. Perhaps just me. Due to such as: High premium, Time value, Precise timing, etc. Example...

So what do they use in general? and What do you mean "Directional", particularly in trading options? Of the underlying's price?

Thanks for the clarification!

The thread below about volume information reminds me the feeling of reading some options books about Greeks (i.e. Option-Sensitivities). "Volume analysis is to be discarded as it is "too much information"" http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=169124

Would you mind to explain why "No"? What do you mean "Precise"? Do you mean the word "equivalent" used in options is Not precise enough? Perhaps a synthetic call is equivalent to a call, but it is Not actually a call. Right?

OK, thanks!

On page 411 of McMillan on Options, it says about straddles, "Options lose time value premium as they become ITM options, and ITM puts lose their time value faster than ITM calls do. "

I'm not completely sure. However, for a value graph of straddle/ strangle options, the component values for call and put individually are quite different and of different shapes. Say, ITM puts lose their time value faster than ITM calls do, typically. I may be wrong.

Since currently there is only one single forum for options trading, I have been thinking for some time that ET should have at least two forums for options trading: One for Buyers; Another Sellers. Perhaps it would be not difficult to see the natural conflicts of interest to provide suitable...

Furthermore, a typical risk profile does not provide breakdowns of option values individually in terms of volatility, interest cost, and intrinsic value.

I was wondering only a risk graph alone is not good enough. In Cohen's Bible book, each strategy has 6 illustrations for Risk Profile, Delta, Gamma, Theta, Vega and Rho. Besides, I also would like to know Why the prices behave like that.

OK, Thanks anyway! http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=119166

Seems there are not too many traders here playing long options! For the UAL calls, why did you quit? Change of IM, or what?