Examples demonstrating non-optimal & inefficient trade constructs

[jamesbp]

Lol, I recall Karen the Supertrader...I did not think she was banned from ET though...Can't remember the exact details of why she stopped posting.

LOL ... no, I was banned from ET for a couple of years for calling her out as a Fraud ... as Sosnoff/TastyTrade who were shilling her as a retail options guru were not happy (and had some editorial influence at ET) ... probably get banned again now :-}}

 

[Overnight]

LOL ... no, I was banned from ET for a couple of years for calling her out as a Fraud ... as Sosnoff/TastyTrade who were shilling her as a retail options guru were not happy (and had some editorial influence at ET) ... probably get banned again now :-}}

Well, she was a fraud. No bans here. Welcome back.

 

[destriero]

Stating the obvious that the guts of the box-arbitrage is inefficient is pointless. RegT will require the strike width in addition to the strangle debit. Wow. What a discovery.

But yes, @earth_imperator, you'll be able to trade more of the outside strangles in your $300 CashAccunt.

An analog would be a collar + long shares when the synthetic is best practice (long vertical spread). To author a thread on this is surreal. Too stupid for (any more) words.

 

[Quanto]

@destriero once again demonstrated his cluelessness about options trading when he said

Stating the obvious that the guts of the box-arbitrage is inefficient is pointless.
RegT will require the strike width in addition to the strangle debit. Wow. What a discovery.

A LongStrangle, as used in the OP, does not use any ShortOption, so RegT does not apply at all!
Man, you get dumber every passing day, Mr. Senileovich Destriero!...

The discussion is not only about this single trade example, but asks the readership for posting also other such inefficient trades, when it stated in the OP:

Anybody know of other such non-optimal / inefficient constructs? Just post it here.

 

[destriero]

I referred to RegT as a PM-account would not require a larger debit to manage the inside strangle vs the outside.

This fcking idiot quanto is why we can't have nice things. He discovered the inside strangle of the box arbitrage... AKA, why not to use your dick as a hammer.

 

[destriero]

Mor0n, the utility of the inside strangle (more costly!) is as the long combo of the long box arb. The reason you're taking so much sht here is bc 1) you don't know this and 2), your assurance that it's inferior ignores the utility in arbitrage.

Like when you recommended a conversion in shares as a hedge against property.