I only make directional bets, as you know, atticus. The stock would have to move many orders of magnitude greater before volatility would double, and unless you actually know what the implied volatility is after that change, it is still indeterminable, and depends on the options prices after and only after the change in volatility.
This is so ridiculously misguided and patently false that I don't know where to begin. You can't possibly believe this to be true. Beau, do not trade options.
All right. You got me. I don't typically trade options. That's right. I can't stand non-linearity because it is a method of CBOE manipulation. I don't see why I couldn't believe that not knowing the options prices after the volatility change could not be true. Do you know what implied vol would be if you doubled it? I don't think you can really calculate the value of a theoretical option that used to be reality.
I ASKED FOR THE DELTA OF THE $5 CALL WITH THE SHARES AT $5 AND A 70% VOL-INPUT. WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU?
I've already calculated the delta for the q's option, and that much was obvious I already know how to do that. I don't care about FTR, or about what happens to delta when you double the volatility of the underlying for those options.
The problem really is that I haven't slipped anywhere in options pricing consistency, and you've tried to show I don't know what an option that is $1 in the money should minimally be worth, or whether somebody that entered data for a living would know how to change an input parameter to double the value. Which part do you think I wouldn't get? That I need to input that part or that I'd be unable to double the volatility?
Sorry Atticus, You are getting your ass kicked in the shear entertainment department. Bwolinsky,stand your ground and keep it coming..