Comments by "fialee8" (@fialee8) on "The Plain Bagel" channel.

  1. If he owned the underlying stocks, he would've lost less due to CC since all those options expired worthless. CC did not amplify his losses, but rather muted it somewhat. However, if he continued to sell covered calls during the bounce-back, that would've muted his gains (recovery).
    3
  2. I think people who buy a covered call ETF is ok in giving up some % of upside for the monthly income of about 8%-12% per year, while also having some small upside growth in share price/NAV. That said, you raise an interesting idea of creating an ETF which contains the SP500, and disperses ~10% dividend per year by returning dividends, capital gains, and maybe NAV erosion in down/flat years. If there was an ETF that that... essentially uncap the upside, and distribute ~10% per year, then people would run to that product (as long as the fees were reasonable... <0.5%). As you prob know, most covered call ETF shareholders likely need the monthly income/revenue to fund retirement or supplement their daily living expenses (and hopefully, only have a set % of their investments in such funds... 10%-15%/20%). I guess it's cheaper than paying interest on a credit card (which would be an interesting analysis in itself).
    1
  3. LOL... pump and dump is all done via "friends and family". Of course they are not going to trade under their own name which is reported to the governmental agency. All they do is sell friends and family shares at $0.01 (par value) each... and if they are sold at $1-$2 a share, they make 100x-200x their money in a couple of months. So it's hugely profitable... and quite shady.
    1
  4. Pump and dump. Watch the movie "Broiler Room" to understand what they are doing. Instead of the old days of cold calling people, now they just pay "influencers" to drive up the stock price, so they can sell their positions.
    1