InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

steelcitydog

05/03/06 6:16 PM

#3476 RE: bocxman #3474

bocxman, thank you...that is exactly what I wanted to know. That line of work is so damn interesting, maybe in my next life. Thanks again.
icon url

dakota

05/03/06 10:29 PM

#3481 RE: bocxman #3474

I am missing something here. You said "...clearly he found a bid down at the .70 - .80 range, which is why we hung out there so long while he unloaded to the buyer."

If he is unloading to the buyer, you surely do not mean he is selling short to the buyer. And if he shorted up higher, then he was selling there, and buying to cover at the .70-.80 range.

Please explain.
icon url

dkeller18

05/04/06 1:18 AM

#3489 RE: bocxman #3474

bocxman, I completely agree - however for clarification purposes, if the MM was short from higher prices (i.e. when we were north of $1.35/1.50) then he was covering at $.70 (buying) not "unloading to the buyer" (selling). I absolutely agree that the MM is (or was) long delta. I traded an options book myself for a few years! That being said, I have a have a funny feeling that next time we get "real news" they won't try to short so easily for fear of getting crushed!