BGonline.org Forums

Hedge Controversy Resolution

Posted By: Joe Russell
Date: Wednesday, 26 October 2011, at 12:11 p.m.

In Response To: Hedge Controversy Resolution (David Kettler)

“ In all decisions that matter, when shades of gray exist, black and white are almost always wrong.”

I like Kettler's dictum.

I think your solution is very reasonable. I would have opted for the 350/average equity of qualifiers * (net winnings-expenses), even if 'it keeps the damn thing hanging around like a dead fish'. It: (1)is the highest road you could have taken, other than just paying the $350, which would have been unfair to you, if you consider yourself a below average qualifier; (2) would not have cost you anything, unless you cashed, and it would have cost you very little more in equity than the $175 you paid, if you are in fact a below average qualifier.

I am curious as to the exact conversation that took place at the time of the hedge.

Messages In This Thread

• Hedge Controversy Resolution
  David Kettler -- Tuesday, 25 October 2011, at 9:53 p.m.
  • Hedge Controversy Resolution
    Casper van der Tak -- Tuesday, 25 October 2011, at 10:26 p.m.
  • Hedge Controversy Resolution
    Joe Russell -- Wednesday, 26 October 2011, at 12:11 p.m.
  • Hedge Controversy Resolution
    christian munk-christensen -- Wednesday, 26 October 2011, at 3:18 p.m.
  • Hedge Controversy Resolution
    Chuck Bower -- Thursday, 27 October 2011, at 3:39 p.m.