3 ms·
Couldn't you have written 6-month PUT options?
by teyc 15y ago
Couldn't you have written 6-month PUT options?
- beagle3 15y agoI probably could. The stock went down during the week I was trying to get clearance from my lawyer :( It used to be illegal to hedge against SEC rule 144; Apparently, it is now legal (but check with your lawyer before you hedge -- don't trust an anonymous person on the internet)
- teyc 15y agoSorry, I should have mentioned IANAL and not even a US citizen. It'd probably be seen as trying to circumvent laws wouldn't it? That'd be bad. On the other hand, the major investors would lose out even more wouldn't they? Didn't they build any protection into their sale clauses?
- kevinrpope 15y agoNit-Pick: 'Writing' == selling an option, and he would've wanted to buy puts (if it were legal).
- teyc 15y agoI actually agonized over "writing" vs "selling". In the end, writing seems more natural.
- kevinrpope 15y agoYeah, I like using 'writing' better as well. But my nitpick is that in a position where he owns the stock, writing puts would increase his downside, whereas buying puts would protect him.
- teyc 15y agoyou are right. I got that back to front didn't I?
- kevinrpope 15y agoYeah. I was concerned with even making my initial comment because I didn't want to sound like an ass. But I have a lot of experience with derivatives, so hoped I'd be looked at as a benevolent expert rather than a blowhard windbag. :-)
- teyc 15y agoKevin, be assured, it didn't come across like a blowhard windbag. Thanks again for the correction.