Ummm... yeah, we had this conversation in May, in a thread that was started by @earth_imperator https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/broker-silently-changed-the-conditions.374402/ That thread went off the rails, too. Why am I not surprised? In a more recent, unrelated thread, @destriero expressed the view that @Quanto is @earth_imperator
OMG!!! I thought the exact same thing when @Quanto was talking about the strike-cash premium. And I was not surprised when I saw the location of @Quanto was also from Germany, exactly the same as @earth_imperator. Oh well I put both of them on Ignore. I just don't understand why @earth_imperator is so obsessed with this cash-secured put.
Oh yes! I remember the theory of selling puts at 4$ on some meme like stocks on crazy IV, getting like 2$ credit and expecting to do that with 2$ in the account! And blaming the broker for not letting him do it in his cash account. If it's him, it means he didn't manage to sue the house for corrupt practice on paper cash accounts!
That's it, yes! It's mathematically true that only $2 is required by the trader, b/c MaxRisk is $4 (the Strike price), and the $2 of the trader plus the $2 credit received for the sale make up this $4. So, broker should not demand $4, but only $2, from the trader. Some other brokers (like Schwab and TradeStation) do it exactly that correct way. I just don't understand the ignorants here who do not understand this simple maths fact. Here's the proof that trader needs only $2 (his part of the MaxRisk of $4; the rest comes from the sale proceeds (the $2 credit received for the short sale); https://optioncreator.com/stzo016 ):
Thanks to this bug I still see your ridiculous posts even though I have you on "Ignore". Have you made any profit yet or are you still dwelling on this extra $2 that TDA charges?