Jump to content

usurpers26

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    916

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by usurpers26

  1. Posted

    1 minute ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

    I dont know what this means or how to do this. I had 300 shares. I have sold 200 total. Im holding the rest to see if I can get close to even 

    Trading options (in your case it would be selling CCs) is relatively straightforward once you get over the initial learning curve.  Check out youtube for "selling covered calls basics" etc. there's a lot of good info on there.  There's a guy "in the money" who does a very nice job explaining the basics.

    Option contracts are in lots of 100 shares.  So, super quick.  Your current cost basis is $16.  If you SELL a covered call at a "strike price" - this means whomever buys that contract from you has the right to BUY those 100 shares at the "strike" if the underlying stock is trading at or above the strike price by the expiration date. 

    So there's four basics here, type of option (calls/puts), strike price, expiration date and premium.  Put it to work...

    You SELL a CC on AMC at a $16 strike price.  Let's say the premium for this contract, expiring April 1st is $0.80 (premiums go up and down just like a stock).  Since options are always in lots of 100.  Your premium is $80 - this is yours to keep, no matter what as long as you hold this contract to expiration (you can close the contract early but lets keep it basic).

    Two things can happen:
    1 - On April 1st, AMC is trading > $16 (your strike price) - the 100 shares of AMC you own get called away and you are paid the strike price for them ($16/sh = $1600).  You "made" money, cause don't forget about that premium.  Total = $1680
    2 - On April 1st, AMC is trading < $16 (your strike price) - you KEEP your 100 shares of AMC and the premium of $80.

    Now you just lowered your cost basis to $15.20 a share.  Rinse and repeat until you shares get called away or you lower your cost basis enough to where you want to hold them (you can still write CCs even if you are long on a stock - just push out your premium to a price you would be genuinely happy to sell at, etc.).

  2. Posted

    11 hours ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

    I will admit to getting burned on amc. My buddy, who is usually pretty spot on, was convinced it was going to rocket. I bought it above $16 only to see the bottom fall out immediately. I am slowly selling as the price goes up. If I come out with a loss of less than $1k I will be happy

    Don't sell the shares...if you have 100+ shares, just start selling covered calls on them and lower your cost basis.  

  3. Posted

    48 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

    I dont know..a Million?

    This is what their website tells me

    Internet Plan: Extreme Internet
    Download Speed: 400Mbps
    Upload Speed: 20Mbps

    Ok, you don't need a top of the line modem then. 

    If you have gigabit (1000Mbps) it's advantageous to get a docsis 3.1 modem.  In your case a docsis 3.0 modem is just fine, look for it to have either 24x8 or 32x8 channels. 

  5. Posted

    1 minute ago, supermike80 said:

    I mean I'm not totally technically inept.  But I would label myself as more a beginner than anything.

    We don't need a lot.  I don't game online, we stream netflix and amazon through our cable modem(Xfniity)  So my PS4, couple phones and wife's ipad are about all we really use.  Not a lot at all.

    Honestly then, I'd go with any of Eero, Amplifi, Google (Nest), Netgear (Orbi) - you will be splitting hairs on performance, etc. if that's all you have connected.  At 1500 sqft, I would be shocked if you would need more than the main router/mesh access point and one satellite.

    If you have gigabit internet, just make sure whatever modem you buy is "DOCSIS 3.1".

  6. Posted

    11 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

    1700 Sq ft colonial.  Not a huge space to cover

    Do you have gigabit internet?

    I agree with Ed and the others, mesh is totally the way to go. I am partial to Ubiquiti (they have two trim lines, their Amplifi line is consumer and would be comparable to Eero).  Eero is probably the most user friendly for those that are not technical and/or have no desire to be.

  8. Posted

    13 hours ago, fandandy said:

    Imagine the embarrassment of your mom walking in on you beating off with a VR mask on.  

    I go out for a quart of milk, I come home and find my son treating his body like it was an amusement park!

    You have nothing better to do at 3:00 in the afternoon?

  9. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

    We could do the Russia investigation for two years on behalf of a handful of elites who needed to CYA. Why not one on behalf of millions of voters? What’s the harm? 

    Because two wrongs don't make a right?

    And because the most likely outcome is the same as we have now and it would probably, at best, change a tiny percentage of people's minds.

    Have Trump's lawyers ever answered as to why they said they had no evidence of fraud and/or why or what they did with all the evidence everyone continues to point to?  I mean, they should have been keenly aware as to what was available to help their client.  I am curious at why this is being glossed over (I know you don't have the answers, meaning in general). 

    I understand it still doesn't pass the smell test for those in the "tons of fraud" camp but you have to also see it from those that are skeptical and not conspiracy laden people as well.  It surely doesn't bode well when, in court, your lawyer says they don't have evidence for the thing they are claiming.

  10. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

    He easily could have lost fairly. Maybe he did. But until there is a real investigation base on the evidence, I’m not going to say there wasn’t fraud when I know there was. At least show there want enough, which is a real, he’ll maybe likely truth. 

    That's what loses me.  Isn't the burden of proof on Team Trump?  We all see the mountains of links, etc. that get posted here and all over social media - shouldn't they have done their job and presented that?  Or maybe they did actually vet it and found it was BS?  Again, I surely don't know...but I do know they said they had no evidence of fraud.

    I suppose what I am saying is even after Trump's lawyers failed we should have another investigation?  Wasn't that most of, if not at least some of what these 60+ lawsuits were about?  It appears the majority of the claims had explanations - of course no one can make anyone believe those explanations but you really think *another* investigation is going to produce different results?

    It seems like this will always be a "plus one" situation.  Let's say you define what a "real investigation" is, it happens, same results.  Now maybe that satisfies you but it wouldn't be long before the next person in line, says "yeah but now we need this or that".  It never ends unless the results are in favor of what you* think the results should be (*not directly inferring you).



     

  11. Posted

    22 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

    He couldn’t have pushed that many people away. 

    Not only could he, he did.  Listen, you supported his policies - I think everyone gets that.  His personality didn't and doesn't matter to you and a lot of folks.  But unfortunately that mindset isn't true for every person.

    You can call fraud all you want, you can point to all this "evidence", etc. because in your mind, there is no way he could have lost "fairly".  If all this "evidence" was valid why didn't any of Trump's lawyers pursue it and/or bring it up in court?  In fact, why did they say the opposite that they had no evidence in court?  Weren't they privy to the same, endless Twitter videos, etc.?

  17. Posted

    7 hours ago, Voltaire said:

     

    You know what would really work? Not this. But you smelled the trap. These cases are getting thrown out on technical grounds. They aren't looking at the evidence.

    The evidence is testimonial which can be countered by counter testimonial. It was circumstantial, it was based on statistical improbabilities which I do concede 99.999%, or whatever, isn't 100%. While, the Dominon voting system testimony seemed damning, the guy knew what he was talking about, I can't argue it because I simply don't understand it. The math I can follow; once upon a time I got an A in probability and statistics. But explanations of how the programming can be altered.... shoot me. Besides, these are case by case things, they aren't arguing about Dominion machine tampering in the Georgia case, as they are in Michigan. Presumably, that means that Georgia is within a standard deviation or two of the norm.

    Look, this is what would work: to audit the ballots and the security envelopes they came in. Compare them to voter registration, do a signature verification. These ballots were -allegedly- smuggled in and shuffled in with the legitimate ones. So you go through and see if there's evidence to support that. Sunlight disinfects.And so long as election officials, the very same people we see on camera harassing and bullying observers and preventing them form doing their job, are hiding those ballots from scrutiny or inspection, I don't trust the results for sh*t. It doesn't matter what a court says.

    There are hundreds/thousands of people making sworn testimony of dubious practices that what went on in the precincts and counting centers and we're being denies a chance to look at those ballots. They're far more likely to get shredded than to ever be audited. Without an audit, I don't trust the results. Period.

    Seriously?  The courts have to look for evidence?  Shouldn't the Trump all-stars be presenting the evidence to the court?  Why didn't they present any evidence, ever?  Because they know Twitter videos and hearsay isn't evidence, its a ruse.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Patriotsfatboy1 said:

    What are you doing for NESN content? I want to watch the Bruins and Red Sox at some point.

    I gave up on all sports during Covid...I just have literally no desire to follow anything right now it seems so contrived.

    Anyhow, I would still go back to Fubo. 

    My other complaint is all the streamers keep raising their prices which is unfortunately getting very close to cable prices.  When I had Fubo with the add-on for Redzone I was paying $65 all in.  Same package now is up to $76 (and it looks like they dropped their service to two concurrent streams, that may or may not be an issue for you).  Of course you can pay ANOTHER 6 bucks for 3 concurrent streams...it was at 3 when I had it...sigh).

     

  23. Posted

    Fubo was very solid (I have used PSVue, now defunct and YTTV, they cancelled NESN)  Had it for over a year.  At the time my requirements were NESN for Sox/Bs games and RedZone.  A nice perk is at that time they were the only streamer that had NFL games in 4k HDR which was sweet.

    Then covid hit, then sports sucked, then I cancelled Fubo...

  25. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

    I only started this thread to watch the majority of the atheists crack and fall apart and rail on the religious folks while not providing any evidence of their own for their own beliefs. Mission accomplished.

    I'm the winner.

    Atheists, particularly the secular left, have used violence and oppression to promote atheism.

    Historically, atheism has generally been an integral part of communist ideology (see: Atheism and communism). According to the University of Cambridge, historically, the "most notable spread of atheism was achieved through the success of the 1917 Russian Revolution, which brought the Marxist-Leninists to power."[1] Under atheistic communism tens of millions of people were killed and many people were tortured (see: Atheism and mass murder and Atheistic communism and torture)

    /thread.

     

    Please show me where I cracked and/or fell apart and/or railed on religious folks?

    That's awesome that you want to make a link to atheists and communism, I couldn't care less.

×