Well:
Here are the calculations I originally presented:
Short put:
Sell Jun 17.25 put for a net credit of $60
Yield = 60/1665 = 3.6% in 105 days or 12.5% annualized
Prob = 68%
Expectation = .68(60) - .01(404) - .31(202) = 40.8 - 4.04 - 62.6 = -25.84
Move out and make a spread:
Sell Sept 17 put and buy Sept 14 put for a net credit of $60
Yield = 60/240 = 25% in 196 days or 47% annualized
Prob = 65%
Expectation = .65(60) - .10(240) - .25(120) = 39 - 24 - 30 = -15
Then this is what you call 'spot on':
Bottom line..... your assumptions are based on the unpredictability of more than 6 months exposure to the market,.... 2 earnings cycles,.... using massive amounts of fantasy leverage,.... an inability to consider buying 90% of your stock(s) , even if they're just slightly below your $17 strike(s),.... you risk a 100% loss of capital if the stock(s) drop 18% below your $17 strike,.... and most of your calculations are ridiculously "generic", thus having little to do with your actual specific stock.
Lets look at that:
1. Yes the calculation shows an additional time period ...3 months extra. Which is part of the point. I can make the same premium for a longer time frame and get a much higher annualized yield doing it if I use the equivalent spread. Nothing is free and I never said it was.
2. 'an inability to consider buying 90% of your stocks'
Where does that come from??? We are not talking about a portfolio, we are talking about a SINGLE TRADE. How that trade is incorporated into a portfolio is not at issue. PM is constantly talking about this... but it has nothing to do with the relative merits of two different trades.
YES: If I sell short a put the margin requirements will FORCE me to reserve the full amount required to buy the stock.
NO: If I sell the equivalent spread I am not FORCED to do this and may (for example) invest the required amount elsewhere (e.g. treasuries)where it can be drawn on to buy stock if that eventuality comes to be. The assumption that PM makes is that since we are all too stupid to intelligently manage a portfolio and its cash requirements we are better off using the more restrictive short put so that we force ourselves to have the cash available. Rediculous. It has been discussed a thousand times and PM keeps saying the same stupid thing.
NO: If my spread is violated I will NOT lose the amount of the entire spread. MY broker(I have asked) would SELL THE STOCK I WAS PUT FOR THE GOING RATE AS SOON AS I AM PUT...as long as I make that a parameter on my account.
Besides that... you are (outside of a disaster) not put at random times. If you are going to be put you are put at expiration and any option trader knows to get his house in order on the Friday before expiration.
What about a disaster? Well.... in a disaster would you rather have a naked short put or the hedged position of a spread?
No contest.
' your calculations are ridiculously "generic", thus having little to do with your actual specific stock.'
Generic? The calculations are based on the statistics of the behavior of THIS stock and are not at all 'generic'
'2 earnings cycles'
YES the alternate IS based on two earnings cycle, but so are the stats. i.e. the stats are drawn from the previous equivalent time period.
SO what makes us think that the future will be different from the past???
The most important issue is that this stock is in a long term decline:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IPI&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=
and PM has no rationale to suggest that that decline will not continue... other than technical support points:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IPI&t=5y&l=on&z=l&q=b&c=
I happen to think this is an idiotic trade. And I presented my reasons. PM can't stand that and goes ballistic... this time and every time. He's nuts besides being stupid.