Off Shore
Off Topic Member
I'm about to open the tap to support a project to take shape over the next few years. We're certainly looking at every way possible to delay the major capital expenses (i.e. sell shares) as long as possible.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Abbott was just on CNBC spouting about Elon moving there, sounded like a giddy moron.
Where do these fools think the tax revenue is gonna come from when the well literally dries up(or rather is capped for good) in 2 years? Texas will be a bankrupt wasteland on par with it's low budget neighbors LA, MS, AR within 10 years.
Where do these fools think the tax revenue is gonna come from when the well literally dries up(or rather is capped for good) in 2 years? Texas will be a bankrupt wasteland on par with it's low budget neighbors LA, MS, AR within 10 years.
Great job for nailing this down. Very impressed even if you might be just joking on this one.
I know you ain't a snP insider otherwise you would have been sitting on more than a million dollar Tesla portfolio.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Nope.
You:
Da fudge?!?!?
The dude bought $2.7 million in TSLA options, and you're gonna throw shade on him for cashing out 50% of those for a >5x profit? He is still holding an ~$8 million position!
Me:
Da fudge?!?!?
The dude bought $2.7 million in TSLA options, and you're gonna throw shade on him for cashing out 50% of those for a >5x profit? He is still holding an ~$8 million position!
Me:
You're glossing over the day (Aug 22) you called "Libel" on my prediction that certain retail brokers (those with extended naked short postions) WOULD NOT deliver their TSLA stock dividend until days after those shares began trading on Aug 31. Need links?
That is what happened. People who acted on this analysis benefited. People who didn't (or were unaware) got short shrift. That's how this game works, and it won't change soon.
Today is no different. We'll know in 2 weeks who was right, and who ends up poorer.
GLTA.
That is what happened. People who acted on this analysis benefited. People who didn't (or were unaware) got short shrift. That's how this game works, and it won't change soon.
Today is no different. We'll know in 2 weeks who was right, and who ends up poorer.
GLTA.
Disagree a bit here. If you have a margin account (as opposed to a portfolio margin account), the broker will hold on to your money as collateral for the put. You still have your money "locked away" just like with buying shares.
What i've done IS a "split strike synthetic long." You can take your definition for a synthetic long and then move the strikes to be split. Buying both otm is a "long strangle." Selling both out of the money is short strangle.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
What are you talking about and what about 2 years? TX is the fasting growing state in the nation, both in terms of population and in terms of revenue.
Hmmm, lots of us here comfy on very plush $1m+ $TSLA cushions - and we don't know *sugar* 'bout nothin'!
Runarbt
Active Member
I have a margin account at schwab- not defined as portfolio margin (I didnt apply for this at least). No cash to speak of, and no need to put any money up front when selling naked puts. As long as my margin will cover a potential buy of the shares, all is good.
(Or did I miss what you were talking about here?)
There is no free lunch. Yes, the broker will hold or reduce some of your available margin in this case. If it is a cash covered put, they will lock up the cash to cover, if it is a margin account, they will lock a certain percentage of margin. The risk is still all yours and you would need to have sufficient assets to cover. The point is, @Tyler34 did not actually pay money upfront with this strategy. He took a huge amount of risk - the broker can call your margin and liquidate assets to pay if things go bad.
This is riskier than just buying OTM calls - here the risk is limited to the premium paid. So, risk is capped to an upper limit - this is what I do all the time. With the synthetic long or split-strike synthetic long as @Bet TSLA correctly pointed out, the risk is on both, the premium on the call and the risk of assignment on the put
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
I doubled my position on June 4 under $37 (split adjusted) and I wasn't even that close to the low. The low must have been ~ $35.60!
I can wholeheartedly concur to this statement...my wife and kids remind me of this on a daily basis
the "don't know *sugar* 'bout nothin'! part of course.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
As a long term Californian - this makes me very sad
Not going to be the last one. You tax the most mobile group of people in history, they will move to protect their wealth (moral arguments are irrelevant).
I was just saying money in general, regardless of whether it is in cash or on margin. "No money put up" means you can get an unlimited number of positions initiated. In contrast, you can only open a finite number of synthetic long positions, dictated by your buying power/cash balance. If the call and put is opened ATM, that finite number should be the number of shares you can afford / 100 - so no different from buying shares. A spread synthetic long where you short an OTM put to buy an OTM call can get you more leverage but that characteristic is not unique to this strategy.
Bet TSLA
Active Member
I dunno. Call it whatever you like. What matters is its risk profile and how much money it ties up. But Investopedia calls it a bullish collar (Market Volatility Strategy: Collars):
The Bullish Collar at Work
The bullish collar involves the simultaneous purchase of an out-of-the-money call option and sale of an out-of-the-money put option. This is an appropriate strategy when a trader is bullish on the stock but expects a moderately lower stock price and wishes to purchase the shares at that lower price. Being long the call protects a trader from missing out on an unexpected increase in the stock price, with the sale of the put offsetting the cost of the call and possibly facilitating a purchase at the desired lower price.
I think you are confusing yourself by ignoring margin requirements. And even thinking I "just made 237k" is odd, as all I did was trade the cash for a $237K liability. The cash isn't mine to use as I want either, as the puts are cash backed. In any case, this side bet isn't intended to be aggressive, but rather relatively safe compared to the calls I already have. And as was pointed out elsewhere, since I have sold 690 puts and bought 690 calls I sort of have synthetic stock, but they're different expiration dates so I don't. Different amounts too.
If you like using collars or whatever you want to call them then that's great. Just try not to fool yourself as to the risk profile involved. And good luck at always betting on TSLA when it's going up like crazy.
Once again correct. The only reason I even brought this strategy up is because @Bet TSLA had posted a few times in the past couple of days about selling puts while still expecting the stock to go way higher and being bullish. Thought I could throw him an idea since IMO if you're going to take on the risk of put assignment in a stock that you think has huge upside, you should consider adding the benefit of a moonshot on top of it.
You are right about this - my Fidelity investment account allows me to do the same. No cash to be put up for naked puts as long as my margin can cover the potential assignment of shares. But they reduce some available margin for other purchases in this case. Currently doing this in my investment account, my 'Margin buying power" has been reduced by about 40% of cost of potential share purchase.
The important things here are (a) how many positions you can open using this strategy (can you get more leverage?) and (b) how your portfolio responds to movements in the underlying (What is your net delta?). I have already addressed (a) - you can't get more leverage if opened ATM, which most accurately tracks the performance of a conventional long position. (b) Your portfolio will perform very similarly to a conventional long position (ATM put -0.5 delta, ATM call +0.5 delta, you get a total of 1 delta to the underlying). If (a) and (b) are not distinguishable from a conventional long, then whether your money is held as collateral or transferred into shares is of little significance. The result is the same.
Last edited:
Mike Smith
Active Member
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-tax-hike-new-climate-plan-1.5837709
'Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today released the government's strategy to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 — and its centrepiece is a gradual hike in the federal carbon tax on fuels to $170 a tonne by that year.
The price of gas at the pump will increase by at least 37.57 cents a litre as a result
"Simply put, it would be much harder to cut pollution if it was free to pollute. The principle is straightforward: a carbon price establishes how much businesses and households need to pay for their pollution. The higher the price, the greater the incentive to pollute less, conserve energy and invest in low-carbon solutions," says the government's new climate plan, titled, "A Healthy Environment and A Healthy Economy."
Beyond the carbon tax hike, the government is promising $15 billion in new spending on climate initiatives over the next 10 years — money earmarked for improvements to the country's electric vehicle charging infrastructure, rebates and tax write-offs for zero-emissions vehicles and funding for home retrofits, among dozens of other proposed policies.'
'Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today released the government's strategy to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 — and its centrepiece is a gradual hike in the federal carbon tax on fuels to $170 a tonne by that year.
The price of gas at the pump will increase by at least 37.57 cents a litre as a result
"Simply put, it would be much harder to cut pollution if it was free to pollute. The principle is straightforward: a carbon price establishes how much businesses and households need to pay for their pollution. The higher the price, the greater the incentive to pollute less, conserve energy and invest in low-carbon solutions," says the government's new climate plan, titled, "A Healthy Environment and A Healthy Economy."
Beyond the carbon tax hike, the government is promising $15 billion in new spending on climate initiatives over the next 10 years — money earmarked for improvements to the country's electric vehicle charging infrastructure, rebates and tax write-offs for zero-emissions vehicles and funding for home retrofits, among dozens of other proposed policies.'
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
