http://www.suntimes.com/output/terror/cst-fin-fbi19.html No profiteering on terror attacks September 19, 2003 BY DAVID ROEDER Business Reporter Somewhere out there are hedge funds or individual investors who profited from the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. But they had no foreknowledge of the catastrophes, an FBI spokesman said Thursday. Spokesman Ed Cogswell said the FBI has closed its investigation of stock and option trading that took place days before the attacks. He said the investigation turned up "absolutely no evidence'' of anyone with inside knowledge of what would happen. After the attacks, in which terrorists commandeered planes owned by the two biggest airlines, United and American, traders in the Chicago options market noticed suspicious pre-Sept. 11 spikes in volume. Put options for stocks in the airlines' parent companies, UAL Corp. and AMR Corp., registered huge trading increases in the week before the attacks. Investors can use puts, which confer the right to sell a stock at a pre-determined price, to make money when the underlying share price falls, similar to shorting a stock. The terrorist attacks and their effect on the travel industry caused shares of UAL and AMR to fall dramatically when the markets reopened Sept. 17. Cogswell said most of the options trading was carried out by hedge funds with bearish outlooks. He did not name any of the funds, which pursue risky investment strategies on behalf of wealthy clients. Market regulators in other countries opened similar investigations after the attacks, but Cogswell said he believes all have been concluded with no evidence that allies of Osama bin Laden were involved. He said the FBI interviewed trading professionals and other witnesses, sharing its findings with the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission. On Sept. 10, 2001, put options on AMR were 17 times their average volume of 269 contracts. On Sept. 6, 2001, UAL put options were traded at more than four times their average volume of 711 contracts. At the same time, some experts cautioned that because of the light volume in most option contracts, an increase can seem eye-popping. London regulators thought they had something in the short-selling of big airline stocks before Sept. 11, but traced the activity to one of their small competitors. :eek:
On Sept. 10, 2001, put options on AMR were 17 times their average volume of 269 contracts. On Sept. 6, 2001, UAL put options were traded at more than four times their average volume of 711 contracts. Now, that is more like it. 269X quoted in the first post would surely forced IV to go through the roof.
Trader5287!!!! hahaha what a timing!! DAVID ROEDER must be reading ET That settles it. Western front all is quite. Don't get worked up over nothing. Spike smike. DAL didn't move, UAL a small move, big deal. All in a option daytrading. FBI says it the way it is, very specific and from credible experts How dare the "other" sources quote Bloomy with such detail Preposterous. How dare they? SEC can now go back enforcing the all important PDT rule, smoke out them kids pumping internet stocks.
Agreed, BUT ONLY and ONLY if these numbers on either set of links, can be confirmed from the source i.e, Bloomy, CBOE, OCC... 4x vs 280x are way too far apart Till then brother marketsurfer it is not a myth or is it?. Until then we don't know. You could be right and it's myth, or yer dead wrong and it's reality. :eek:
what happened to marketsurfers critical mind. the first article that skews his way he accepts without questioning the source. what a JOKE!!!!!
one does not need to question the source when it is in line with marketSURFER............lol lol lol lol.......
Trader556 called CBOE and asked for the 2001 data CD. They were out I think he said in his post above. So unless one of you guys can come up with the data, nobody can get anywhere.
no....i don't want to believe...i am dissappointed that i haven't gotten any answers.....and you haven't done anything to prove your bias.