No I can't leave it alone when this can happen when you do naked short put: https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...ped-out/090c57f7-fc75-4f02-9d22-585cf53c8548/
Nothing is cash secured if you are doing any naked shorting of options. I will post again the article that I posted in my response to @taowave's post above. What happened in this article happened to many many many option traders even experienced ones. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...ped-out/090c57f7-fc75-4f02-9d22-585cf53c8548/
OK, I've just got to ask. Since -P = S - C, they should be equivalent - but I know that there are some marginal differences prior to expiration (e.g., due to the vol smirk.) Is this about dynamic hedging - maybe on the call side prior to expiration?
So you think the buy writers cleaned up while the naked put sellers went belly up? Im guessing you are saying conversions are mispriced(ignoring interest rate risk)? Short puts are a riskier trade than covered calls/buy writes? Far more risk with a short put?
Buy writer??!! What's buy writers?? LOL And the conversions??? What conversions are you talking about?? Can you stop being so cryptic like your options idol? LOL Well from a payoff diagram, the short put would have the same payoff pattern as the covered call, yes so the risk is the same. Ah, nice try with the trick question. LOL But what I am saying is short put, even cash-secured is still risky because it's naked and not covered. At least with covered call, the short call is covered.
Please tell me you arent equating risk with having "the funds" in the account.. You don't know what a conversion is??? WTF
No I am an amateur retail trader, remember? I don't understand those "institution" talk. LOL. What's conversion? How does it apply to options? Please teach us, Professor Taowave. LOL
Well, this explains the replies with all the blank space in them. I blocked "The Dawn" ages ago for rampant, unrepentant cluelessness - and I'm guessing he's at it again. Looks like you folks are being quite well entertained...