Dividend strat

[newwurldmn]

Opportunity cost would be more understandable, although I would agree that it doesn't fit the entirety of that paragraph, but then again neither does "chippy chip chip chop" which is the term I use to describe the same concept.

It's not really opportunity cost because everyone has a different financing structure.

There are people who pay 10% in margin expense and there are others who fund far better than the OCC. We don't know how this guy funds.

 

[nooby_mcnoob]

Ah, I understand. In that case, maybe you want to use "cost of funding".

 

[newwurldmn]

Ah, I understand. In that case, maybe you want to use "cost of funding".

Again, the market has a different cost of funding than the OP. And that defines the edge. He is only looking at premium (the discount implied in the options market) with no thought to his cost to hold the position.

 

[misterkel]

Again, the market has a different cost of funding than the OP. And that defines the edge. He is only looking at premium (the discount implied in the options market) with no thought to his cost to hold the position.

Actually, not so. I am considering the risk-free rate (opportunity cost) against the setups. Looking at margin costs, as well - 3.7% on IB.

 

[nooby_mcnoob]

Again, the market has a different cost of funding than the OP. And that defines the edge. He is only looking at premium (the discount implied in the options market) with no thought to his cost to hold the position.

So what you're saying is you'll keep using your own terms... OK.

 

[newwurldmn]

So what you're saying is you'll keep using your own terms... OK.

Sure as it describes the OP’s specific issue - which as you can see from the above post he still doesn’t get.

 

[misterkel]

Sure as it describes the OP’s specific issue - which as you can see from the above post he still doesn’t get.

Interested in why I don't get it. What I think you're saying is - the structures discount future capital by an approximate rate, based on opportunity cost, which is generally called the risk-free rate (usually T-Bill rate is the proxy). Further there is a cost of funding if one engages in margined funding (my rate is 3.7% from IB). Those costs should be taken into account when calculating any trade and subtracted from the rate of return to calculate excess real returns - real returns above the risk-free rate. I'm pretty sure this states clearly the 'cost to hold the position' as you said.

What am I missing or misconstruing?

 

[newwurldmn]

Interested in why I don't get it. What I think you're saying is - the structures discount future capital by an approximate rate, based on opportunity cost, which is generally called the risk-free rate (usually T-Bill rate is the proxy). Further there is a cost of funding if one engages in margined funding (my rate is 3.7% from IB). Those costs should be taken into account when calculating any trade and subtracted from the rate of return to calculate excess real returns - real returns above the risk-free rate. I'm pretty sure this states clearly the 'cost to hold the position' as you said.

What am I missing or misconstruing?

Perhaps we were talking in circles this whole thread.