Get a 3-Bedroom Duplex Up in the Shadow of Wrigley Field: 3822 N. Clark
This 3-bedroom duplex up at 3822 N. Clark in the Wrigleyville neighborhood of Lakeview has more space than many single family homes in the neighborhood.
At 2800 square feet, two of the bedrooms are on the main level with the third on the second level along with a family room.
The kitchen has granite counter tops and upgraded stainless steel appliances.
The unit also has a 2-story dining room and a private rooftop deck that runs the length of the building.
It has central air, washer/dryer in the unit, one car parking and marble baths.
Originally listed in September 2010 for $785,000, it has been reduced $135,000.
It is now listed $75,000 under the 2005 purchase price.
What’s the market for a large duplex up unit?
James Flanders at Alliance Properties has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #3: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2800 square feet, 1 car parking
- Sold in February 2002 for $575,000
- Sold in May 2005 for $725,000
- Originally listed in September 2010 for $785,000
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed at $650,000
- Assessments of $325 a month
- Taxes of $10,136
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 16×12 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 16×12 (main floor)
- Bedroom #3: 10×10 (main floor)
- Family room: 16×19 (second floor)
this almost seems unnecessarily big. what does one do with two master bedrooms? plus its right on clark which i can imagine would be a major drawback to many buyers in this price range.
This options trader took a put for $75,000 but unfortunately, unlike a real put, the loss on this property is looking to be far more than the cost of the original option. But as the says, “One Minute You’re Up Half a Million in Soybeans…”
Building footprint is 1400+/- sf. Once you deduct for the dual stairs and the two-story dining room, can’t imagine more than ~2200 sf of usable indoor space.
why anyone over the age of 26 would choose to live in wrigleyville is beyond my comprehension
Only one parking spot with this $650,000 home.
Thank goodness the street parking in the neighborhood is permitted…*snark*
For lack of better words. That is the most fucked up kitchen I have ever seen.
Oh it’s well within your comprehension. It’s because you’re over 26 and want to meet a mate under 26. If you want to meet a mate over 26 you visit the Viagra Triangle for lunch, ladies and lounging.
“Groove77 on June 9th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
why anyone over the age of 26 would choose to live in wrigleyville is beyond my comprehension”
“Groove77 on June 9th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
why anyone over the age of 26 would choose to live in wrigleyville is beyond my comprehension”
Couldn’t have said it better myself….I would buy anything over 300K in this neighborhood b/c the next crew of 26 year olds are going to be so far in debt from school loans and unemployed or underemployed.
gringo: awkward, poorly designed, and stupid come to mind.
Here’s a picture of a ridiculous kitchen with quite a bit of storage space.
http://media.cdn-redfin.com/photo/68/bigphoto/086/07769086_3_0.jpg
“This options trader took a put for $75,000 but unfortunately, unlike a real put, the loss on this property is looking to be far more than the cost of the original option. But as the says, “One Minute You’re Up Half a Million in Soybeans…””
If only options were available on residential real estate. Unfortunately he doesn’t have the right to sell at a specific strike price on this property if it continues to go down in value.
“If only options were available on residential real estate. ”
They sort of are for the zero down judgment proof one paycheck away from insolvency. But for high income earners, not so much.
“This options trader took a put for $75,000 but unfortunately, unlike a real put, the loss on this property is looking to be far more than the cost of the original option”
Actually, he sold a put for 75k. The more it goes down, the more he loses.
Except he never received the premium for selling the put…
“Oh it’s well within your comprehension. It’s because you’re over 26 and want to meet a mate under 26. If you want to meet a mate over 26 you visit the Viagra Triangle for lunch, ladies and lounging”
hahaha funny you mention that i met a friend of the family over in the “triangle” last week and forget why the running joke is what it is. but on a nice day i was was passing through the joke is so dang vivid you giggle to yourself the whole time
the kitchen should have been regulated to the larger side and the dining room on the other and a nice sitting room by the winodws.
Well hi diddiliy ho good neighbor, What a snoozi-diddily-iddily-tascic mc-crappididily-box
“Here’s a picture of a ridiculous kitchen with quite a bit of storage space.
http://media.cdn-redfin.com/photo/68/bigphoto/086/07769086_3_0.jpg”
Terrible too! I literally am laughing. But at least your guy kept the sink on the same side as the fridge and cooktop. This kitchen has very funny accident waiting to happen.
“Except he never received the premium for selling the put…”
Well, he sold a deep ITM put. Not much premium there….
That kitchen is AWEFUL.
oy vey you guys don’t know options for shit
1) if you short an option you get the premium up front
2) deep in the money options have far more premium then out of the money ones
Technically correct, since you keep going on with this, is…. he OWNS the underlying at 725k and he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.
question being, would/could he even exercise the put?
Wrigleyville has really gone to crap. Went to smart bar for some unknown reason the other night and the place looked worse than I have ever seen it.
“Wrigleyville has really gone to crap. ”
There are just entirely too many bars in LV/LP and especially Wrigleyville to make $. Not enough recent college grads have jobs anymore and while they’re staying at home with their parents they don’t often go out on the town like they used to when they were gainfully employed. It’s great for cheapskates like me as many of these bars offer killer deals on the way out.
Definitely an older crowd these days. Outside of the Barleycorns I don’t see nearly as many 22-25 year olds as in years past.
“Wrigleyville has really gone to crap. Went to smart bar for some unknown reason the other night and the place looked worse than I have ever seen it.”
I’m not sure it was really all that great, once you get past the age of about 25 or 26, it’s going to start looking like more and more of a sh*tshow…
This place, listed for 650k, at this location, is another great example of how much farther down the market has to go.
“oy vey you guys don’t know options for shit
1) if you short an option you get the premium up front
2) deep in the money options have far more premium then out of the money ones”
Try again.
1) Yes, but with deep ITM puts, there is no premium. Take for example AMZN. Stock is trading at around 190. 230 puts Are around 40. No premium. If you sell the 40 put, and AMZN goes to 100, you lose 90 (have to buy the put back for 130).
2) Wrong
I’ve sold millions of dollars of puts and calls. I assure you what I wrote is true.
“Technically correct, since you keep going on with this, is…. he OWNS the underlying at 725k and he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.”
Nope. Not at all correct.
If you OWN a put, and the price of the underlying goes down, you MAKE money. If this house went to 1mil, he would have MADE money.
More like the most random collection of gang members, drug dealers, teenage suburan kids, potential prostitues, and bar employees. ANd that’s when there is no show at the Metro or a Cubs game. Seriously way worse than any improving area west of the expressway.
“Nope. Not at all correct.”
I suggest you re-read
Maybe all of you picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue, but to me, this place is not the disaster others are calling it (though I agree the price is way too high).
It’s huge, the deck has a great view and overall the living space has a nice look. Maybe the kitchen appliances aren’t perfectly planned out, but I don’t see huge issues.
No – I wouldn’t want to live on Clark Street, but that’s me. To some it wouldn’t be an issue. I grew up in Wrigleyville and like the neighborhood, but agree there are too many bars. This place, however, is just a few blocks from Southport, which is much nicer than Clark.
I thought you were talking about just straight premium, which in the money options will net you more I gues you could say gross ‘premium’ than something out of the money
didn’t realize you were talking about intrinsic value, time, and volatility premiums which obviously are different than what I was talking about
I also have sold millions of dollars in options too, i’m so cool!
“I suggest you re-read”
I did. And it’s easy to see where it is wrong. Just plug in some values. What if place went to 500k? What if place went to 1mil?
ok chuck.. teach me.. what if it goes to a million.
“I also have sold millions of dollars in options too, i’m so cool!”
No offense, but I don’t believe that. If you’ve traded that much in options you would need to have millions (selling naked options requires significant capital).
and Sonies.. your assumption is fair to have made (other being premium over parity) and you are correct.
Long time reader of cribchatter and first time poster. You guys are all wrong with the option analogy. The owners down payment was essentially him buying an option on the property. He bought at 725k. So anything over that is obviously upside. As the place goes
Down under 725k he loses money, but this is different than a covered call scenario because he essentially bought a call option on the place and owns it along with the bank. So using the stock analogy he owns a 100 shares of IBM (house)and bought a call option on IBM ( with his down payment) as well. If he put no money down and is just on his way to sticking the bank with the loss he would have made a good deal because he paid nothing for the option and is sticking bank with the other loss on property itself
Buying a house is more like a bull spread strategy where you buy the call (down payment) and realize any upside appreciation through appreciation in your call (down payment) whereas the loan you receive is like a short put where you receive the premium up front to buy something at X price (loan amount) and if there is any appreciation it reduces the amount of the put price you have to pay back upon sale.
“ok chuck.. teach me.. what if it goes to a million.”
OK, I will.
” he OWNS the underlying at 725k and he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.””
If he OWNED the put, and the property went to 1mil, the put would expire worthless. He is not losing his down payment if this place goes to 1 mil.
He does not own the put. He has sold a covered put with no premium. Completely different.
End of lesson.
well chuck, the book I work with is a little over 100mm and my current short options are worth -610k which roll over usually every 3-6 months so actually we do about 2 million in short options a year
” he OWNS the underlying at 725k”
Is there fucking KRYPTONITE around this part of the sentence, or something?
he OWNS the underlying at 725k
AND AND AND AND AND…
he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.
question being, would/could he even exercise the put?
“He has sold a covered put with no premium”
That would not give him a positive P+L to the upside. so just wrong also.
“he OWNS the underlying at 725k
AND AND AND AND AND…
he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.”
He OWNS the underlying.
He SOLD the put. Therefore it is a COVERED put.
He does not OWN the put.
Question:
What would the value of the put he owns be at 1mil?
might i say linear p+l consistent with the p+l of the asset to the upside. of course he would get the premium from the original sale, never more.
0
“That would not give him a positive P+L to the upside. so just wrong also.”
Of course it would. You seem to not understand what SELLING a put means.
Question: What happens if own AAPL at 330 and you sell an AAPL 400 put and AAPL goes to 450? What if it goes to 300?
“0”
In other words, he does not OWN the put.
chuck.. every time i think what you say can’t get any dumber, you prove me wrong.
You guys realize you’re arguing about an analogy, right?
“chuck.. every time i think what you say can’t get any dumber, you prove me wrong.”
How can you possibly say he OWNS a put? If he paid 75k for the put, and the house went UP, he would LOSE the 75k? Jesus H. Christ.
if I own a put.. and it is worthless (or very little), I don’t own it?
“You guys realize you’re arguing about an analogy, right?”
Well, and the analogy isn’t a perfect fit either, so there is no real right answer. But there sure are some stupid ones…
“if I own a put.. and it is worthless (or very little), I don’t own it?”.
No dummy. If he paid 75k for a put, and the house went up to 1 mil, he would make 275k on the underlying, and LOSE 75k on the put. Net gain of 200k. If you can do basic math, you will see that is not the case.
He SOLD the put. Period.
HE DIDNT PAY 75 K FOR IT!!!!
his risk TECHNICALLY is his down payment. and this comment I hedged when i said
question being, would/could he even exercise the put?
“HE DIDNT PAY 75 K FOR IT!!!!”
Except the quote I was debating said this:
“This options trader took a put for $75,000 but unfortunately, unlike a real put, the loss on this property is looking to be far more than the cost of the original option.”
ok.. teacher.. what strike is this put he sold?
And no this is not an analogy. this is a near exact synthetic structure.
Yes because HD has no idea what he is saying when he is saying this. But he knows that.
“He does not own the put.”
What if the value went to $400k?
It’s just a bad analogy.
Just showed this to the former CBOE guys I work with and they labeled it a synthetic long call. They agreed with gringozecarioca.
Sonies, the bull spread analogy isn’t applicable because, hypothetically, there’s no profit limit with the house.
If he sold a put and collected a 75k premium then there has to be some point where he gains an extra 75k in this transaction if prices do not move, or go up.
Please show me this.
“Just showed this to the former CBOE guys I work with and they labeled it a synthetic long call. They agreed with gringozecarioca.”
tell them not exactly… see my final sentence.. can you exercise it!!
Non-recourse..exactly!
chuk… you got bested by a farmer.. ROFLMAO!!!
Only on CC could a post about an oversized piece of crap turn into a discussion about the intricacies of options trading..
chris there isnt a limit with my bull spread analogy either.. Its spot on actually. When i get some time ill show the math on the upside & dsownside
I freely admit I was not technically correct on the analogy. I was trying to be dramatic because the owner is an options trader who took a leveraged bet and is going to lose his down payment and more.
“Only on CC could a post about an oversized piece of crap turn into a discussion about the intricacies of options trading..”
Won by a farmer.. I might add! Chuk – Trader.. Ze- Farmer.. how embarrassing chuk. The CBOE spoke!
Sonies… My definition is more accurate. Much simpler. run it.
“I freely admit I was not technically correct on the analogy. I was trying to be dramatic because the owner is an options trader”
But it was so cute.. I said nothing at the time. btw how do you know the owners profession???
…one misplaced drug comment 2 yrs ago and you picked up the whole thing.. some seem slower.
“Yes because HD has no idea what he is saying when he is saying this. But he knows that.”
Well, that is the real problem. What HD really meant to say was that he bought a call for 75k. But since the buyer could lose more than he paid for the option, the only way to do that is to sell an option.
If you are buying ANY option (put or call), you can not lose more than what you pay for the option.
If you are selling an option, you can lose more than the value of the option.
And if he sold a call, and the house went down, he would make money.
Therefore, the only way HD’s analogy would even come close to making any sense, would be if the buyer sold a put.
Period.
“Just showed this to the former CBOE guys I work with and they labeled it a synthetic long call.”
Well, they’re wrong.
http://www.theoptionsguide.com/synthetic-long-call.aspx
“Max Loss Occurs When Price of Underlying
and by slow remember Jim Ignatowski asking…
Q: “what does a yellow light mean”
A: SLOW DOWN….
Q: WHHHAAATTT DDOOOEEESS AAAA YYEEEELLLOOOOWWWW LIIIGGGHT MEEEEAAANN.
“Won by a farmer.. I might add! Chuk – Trader.. Ze- Farmer.. how embarrassing chuk. The CBOE spoke!”
Then please tell me how his loss is limited (a defining characteristic of synthetic long call) … I eagerly await your answer Old McDonald.
I already answered that. Open excel and look.
“Whoever did write this doesn’t know the first thing about Kurt Vonnegut.”
And actually, the CBOE guys are close to right, but that isn’t what you said. What you described is not a synthetic long call. You said they owned the underling at 725k. Huge difference.
I am having trouble following but I think the confusion between gringo and chuck is that gringo is selling covered and chuck is selling naked.
sonies – curious to see your example. a bull spread has a max gain/max loss in every definition I can think of.
Example using aapl saying you have ~$10k to lose and you are very bullish on appl:
Bull Put Spread
Buy 12 appl Jul11 325 Put @ $1.69 for $2,028.00
Sell 12 aapl Jun11 345 Put @ $13.75 for ($16,500.00)
Max Risk = $9,528.00
Max Gain = $14,472.00
If appl is = $345 you gain $14,472.00
So if appl is at $345 you gain $14,472.00, if aapl is at $1,000 you still gain $14,472.00.
“I already answered that. Open excel and look.”
In other words, it’s back to plowing the fields for you.
“I am having trouble following but I think the confusion between gringo and chuck is that gringo is selling covered ”
Well, that’s just it. Gringo isn’t SELLING at all! Gringo OWNS the put. I am not selling naked either. I was describing a covered put. Which isn’t a perfect analogy either. Synthetic long call is closest so far. And gringo’s is just plain wrong.
“Then please tell me how his loss is limited ”
Um, jingle mail?
Max loss it DP (ignoring principal reduction), assuming that Lender follows Illinois custom and does not pursue deficiency.
Re-jigger a little, using the stuff from chuk’s link:
Underlying carried at $650.
Option premium = $75.
Breakeven = $725.
Max loss = $75k + aggregate repaid principal (+credit rating).
Max gain = uncapped.
Still a crap analogy, imo.
Crap – I had more details in my example but I forgot that CC hates less than and greater than symbols so it ate a lot of my example. But basically in my example if aapl is less than $332.94 you lose until aapl hits $325 than you hit your max loss of $9,528.00. If aapl is greater than $332.94 you gain until $345 where max your profit at $14,472.00 no matter how much higher than $345 aapl goes to.
“Synthetic long call is closest so far. And gringo’s is just plain wrong.”
long underlying PLUS long put IS synthetic long call.
Fuck this takes 2 columns on excel. go open it and figure it out. lazy ass. I broke this into 2 simple simple components. GO TO EXCEL!!
sheesh..who saw this coming.
“Max loss = $75k + aggregate repaid principal (+credit rating).”
But HD said:
“unlike a real put, the loss on this property is looking to be far more than the cost of the original option. ”
If you are not doing this as a short sale, then you are bringing money to the table to close the sale. If this sells for 400k, and you owe bank 650k, you need to cough up 250k.
Yes, I realize this doesn’t happen in real life. I was just addressing HD’s comment that he “lost” more than he “gambled”.
““Then please tell me how his loss is limited ”
Um, jingle mail?
Max loss it DP (ignoring principal reduction), assuming that Lender follows Illinois custom and does not pursue deficiency.”
and why I very carefully said initially “question being, would/could he even exercise the put?”
““Synthetic long call is closest so far. And gringo’s is just plain wrong.”
long underlying PLUS long put IS synthetic long call. ”
It’s funny b/c link sez:
‘A synthetic long call is created when long stock position is combined with a long put of the same series.’
“Fuck this takes 2 columns on excel. go open it and figure it out. lazy ass”
In other words, you can’t answer.
The problem lies in what is defined as “max loss”. If gringo defines “max loss” as 75k, then yes. But that wasn’t the question. In HD’s example, the person lost MORE than the amount of the put. In my example the max loss is 725k (the purchase price).
“and why I very carefully said initially “question being, would/could he even exercise the put?””
jeebus, of *course* that’s why you said that.
“But HD said:
…
I was just addressing HD’s comment that he “lost” more than he “gambled”.”
Well, *there’s* your problem.
now with that just said by anon.. once again tell me where these simple, simple, simple 2 formulas fail to capture the ENTIRE linear and instantaneous p+l of owning a home.(as in say assesment or tax or yada yada and you die)
he OWNS the underlying at 725k
he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price(725k) -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.
FIND ME 1 SPOT…. 2 simple formulas.
“In HD’s example, the person lost MORE than the amount of the put.”
We got deep in the weeds (or in Ze’s case, singular) *after* it had detached from HD’s original, flip, point.
I define max loss as dwn pmt. Premium is never transferred. there is none.
“he OWNS the put (strike being purchase price(725k) -dwn pmt) FROM the bank.”
Well, you are assuming he just walks away or does a short sale.
I was addressing how he could lose MORE than his down payment. (Bringing money to closing).
We are saying 2 different things.
anon.. i kept out of it until it kept going. thought it would end with 2 formulas… but I know you liked the Vonnegut quote…lol
“I define max loss as dwn pmt.”
I don’t. And the entire start of this discussion was how the buyer “lost more than the cost of his option”.
“I define max loss as dwn pmt. Premium is never transferred. there is none.”
yeah, yeah, but people don’t like mixed metaphors, which is why this is a bad analogy.
btw, at 4:53, I meant “the discussion” by “it”.
“I know you liked the Vonnegut quote”
Somehow, my mental pic of Robert Downey is always with that hair. It doesn’t really make any sense.
oh, and for some reason this whole discussion makes me think of rolling doughnuts and asterisks.
“It’s funny b/c link sez:
‘A synthetic long call is created when long stock position is combined with a long put of the same series.’”
Yep, and here it IS NOT same series, which causes max loss to be the difference in underlying until you get to the strike. If strike and underlying were same it would be perfect.
So lower principal into loan lowers risk and gives you a much more valuable put. Sound like a familiar theme?
I don’t think that “chukdotcom” understands the optionality of walking away from a mortgage. Both “gringozecarioca” and the referee from the CBOE are correct: Owning the underlying is the same thing as being long a call and short a put; thus owning the underlying and a put (as per gringo) is a synthetic long call (as per the CBOE guy). Gringo also correctly points out that there are external costs to walking away from a bank mortgage, so the option analogy requires an additional level of analysis in the case of a real estate transaction.
Chuk, if the owner walks away when his mortgage becomes worth more than his house he is out his downpayment and nothing more (leaving aside the “externalities” indicated by gringo). Otherwise he keeps 100% of the upside. sounds like a call option to me.
“yeah, yeah, but people don’t like mixed metaphors, which is why this is a bad analogy.”
It’s not an analogy, it’s what it really IS. It’s why that l;ast big drawn out one I kept saying I see it as purchasing “the right” = an option.
“It’s not an analogy, it’s what it really IS. It’s why that l;ast big drawn out one I kept saying I see it as purchasing “the right” = an option.”
Fair enough, but it’s more and less at the same time. Ignoring everything else is like assuming the can opener.
“long underlying PLUS long put IS synthetic long call.”
actually thats called a married put strategy, but nevermind…
Ok let me explain my bull spread analogy (I think i’m doin this right, kinda hard to think outside the box like this and relate something so complicated to something also complicated!)
lets do easy math say you are buying a place for 500k (400k loan with 100k down) and lets keep it simple and not bother with complicated strike prices and amoritization schedules (lets use an amoritization schedule as time decay) since you can’t exercise a house at a certain exact price its kinda stupid
buy call (aka downpayment) 100k
you are paying -100k for the right to buy said house for 500k
sell put (for the right to buy said house for 100k))
you take in +400k for ownership of the put and pay 100k for the call
ok so say the house goes down in value to 400k
your call or downpayment becomes practically worthless becaues you will use all the proceeds of the call sale + put buyback to pay off the loan(short put)
say the house goes up in value to 600k
your call becomes worth 200k because that is the difference between the overall value of the contract minus the amount needed to buy the put back(or pay off the loan)
say the house goes to 100k in value
your call is worth zero, and you need an additional 300k+ to pay off the 400k you borrowed to buy the 500k house… so you’re underwater
say the house goes to 1mm in value
your call is worth 600k and your short put would be worth zero since you could pay it back with any additional proceeds from the call sale
I think I explained this properly… or probably not… long fricking day today!
“Fair enough, but it’s more and less at the same time. Ignoring everything else is like assuming the can opener.”
that really depends how and where you wish to account for *more or less*. Think of the expenses as a dividend and just add an accrual column to remove it from how you calculate the underlying. didn’t think it thru but should work, does for equities.
Honestly, this is a simple structure.
“that really depends how and where you wish to account for *more or less*. Think of the expenses as a dividend and just add an accrual column to remove it from how you calculate the underlying. didn’t think it thru but should work, does for equities. ”
I was talking non-financial stuff, too. But you’ve (understandably) gone into the weeds.
Sonies. When you bought the call and sold the put you created a synthetic long future set at 500k. That was a lot of work. It works though but you still own a put, you are not accounting for. No one seems to. Whether you exercise it or not, you have one.
Oh you might call it a conversion or reversal or an I married my 13 yr old cousin, but nevermind.
“But you’ve (understandably) gone into the weeds.”
Actually the opposite, unfortunately. But i realized this evening that I miss throwing phone books at people.
This shit gives me a headache. And furthermore, the CME Group can go take a flying fuck and high tail it to Texas or whatever low tax paradise they can arrange.
I know that CME defenders will quote some amount of money that the trading floors bring to Chicago’s economy. But eff ’em if they think they deserve special tax breaks beyond everyone else.
I actually found this to be one of the more intriguing conversations in CC history.
you don’t own a put ze because if the value of the property goes down you aren’t better off (or the same if you own the underlying too)!
with my example you can be underwater, which is the case unless you pay all cash for the property
and whatever i’m done, and with all this thinking today I need a beer. Hd, your analogy sucked thanks for nothing!
“Actually the opposite, unfortunately. But i realized this evening that I miss throwing phone books at people.”
I think I’m thinking of a different idiom that the idiom you are thinking of.
The idiom I intend is one that gets responses like this:
“This shit gives me a headache.”
from people who aren’t very interested in the particular sorts of weeds being explored.
“you don’t own a put ze because if the value of the property goes down you aren’t better off”
But–assuming you hold the underlying–you *are* better off with the “put” than you would be without, because you have the right to dump the liability.
“you don’t own a put ze because if the value of the property goes down you aren’t better off (or the same if you own the underlying too)!”
you do, you can exercise your put by default. max loss becomes principal. non- recourse state and there is no further argument. Bank short put, thats why we are in this crisis. They wrote close to at the money puts.
Heh, beat you to it.
hm interesting way of looking at it
yes so put offsets loss in underlying. You bought house for 500.. 100 down… you walk away max loss 100. House goes to zero. Max loss 100.
I’ll say it again: “question being, would/could he even exercise the put?”
But nonetheless you have one.
“hm interesting way of looking at it”
Thanks.. btw.. you are 6’6″ I’ll keep the flying phonebooks to myself.
Go have a beer.. write about it in a snarky way too!
whats funny is once you grab onto the ‘unseen’ put, you can see how deep this goes to the mispricing of risk and what happened the past few years.
“Go have a beer.. write about it in a snarky way too!”
they aren’t cold yet 🙁
I do need to start writing about beer again!
Ze said last February (to Sonies!):
Banks are essentially short at the money puts on housing.
http://cribchatter.com/?p=10060#comment-132587
I think that’s a good way to think about the current situation.
huge price reduction…lol…well it is the minimum since the last sale was on top of the bubble.
The analogy doesn’t quite click for me, but it does seem that people think mortgages are the right, but not the obligation, to buy their home. Which, of course, is the definition of an option.
“huge price reduction…lol…well it is the minimum since the last sale was on top of the bubble.”
Baby yet?
yes, baby Deux Deux is here and he is either feeding or soiling his dipper, so I am running on 3-4 hours of sleep : )
Congrats miumiu
I rank this as a better CC thread even if its not about the property.
thank you so much chichow!
miu… The biggest of congrats. Glad to hear all are in good health. May all my best wishes follow your child through its life.
B. It’s complicated for most. Some, even extremely smart people, can’t get it at all. Starting with puts makes it worse. You deserve a pat on the back for even trying.
Now off to run many errands.. Enjoy the day… You don’t get it back.
miumiu, that’s wonderful!
Miumiu, congrats from another new parent (as of August 2010)! Sleep at every opportunity!
Congratulations miumiu! I was wondering if that’s where you were. And which nanny did you pick for babymiu?
Congrats Miumiu! So glad to hear you and your family are doing well. We all thought something was happening when you went silent for several days.
Finally some good news on CC. 🙂
congrats muimui,
the best advice i can give you is when the little one naps, you nap too. no ifs, ands, or buts doesnt matter what needs to get done. when little one naps, you nap.
this thread read like a script from ‘Big Bang Theory’ with econ students.
nice work miumiu!
I did visit the condo and I frankly loved it… well except for all the stairs. A big no no if you have a toddler. and forget the amount of stairs you have to climb from the garage to your kitchen. Could not imagine doing that with tons of groceries. The only thing missing in this building is an elevator. otherwise it is a very large and cozy space. I LOVED the huge open kitchen and dining area. The rooftop was great too.
Thanks a million everyone. Groove you are right. I am doing exactly that and baby Deux Deux even gave me a 3 hour continuous sleep. Now isn’t he wonderful? : )
Congratulations Miumiu! Welcome baby Deux Deux – you’re going to be busy with another kind of crib chatter now!
“Deux Deux”
Congrats, indeed.
And, while I know it requires an Americanized mispronunciation of “Deux Deux”, I remain about as juvenile as Ze about such things and enjoy the (possibly) triple entendre.
Funny all these parents commenting on a thread where the property is definitely not in the most family friendly of neighborhoods.
“Funny all these parents commenting on a thread where the property is definitely not in the most family friendly of neighborhoods.”
It’s in the Blaine attendance area, which alone makes it above average for family friendliness.
what is the triple entendre anon?
no triple entedre.. This can only be one way. Deux deux… I love it…. I can just imagine being the person taking that name on an order over the phone. And as an adult deux deux’s going to be seeing some funny mispellings on some of that mail.
lol..ze… you realize that it is a moniker not his real name : )
miu.. After 2 nights ago, i was not going to pass up the opportunity to relax and play with deux duex.
Ze what is deux deux? I checked urban dictionary and it seems to be an aspirin brand, but I get a feeling you are talking about something else?!
Any ways the moniker was chosen because the baby looks like sergeant Deux Deux from The Inspector carton 🙂
Moomoo made doodoo. Congrats.
oh miu… Americans do not push out air to finish our words the way the french do. They kinda fall out. D’ d’ becomes doo doo, a big poop joke. And if 40yr old men can’t resist. A room full of 5 yr olds might be *almost* as bad. You may want to think a new one through, with the suggestion that saying trois 2 times in a row, is even worse.
btw, Deux Deux is also a short form for edward. did you know that?
Thanks G. At least doodoo is in the urban dictionary and it is pronounced differently…that being said deux deux does quite a bit of doodoo : )
“what is the triple entendre anon?”
And the third is the same reference, a second way–#2.
And, Deux Deux, in the Americanized Inspector cartoons, was Doodoo, too.
did you guys watch those cartoons? i loved the whole pink panther series.
btw, i am nursing. what are you all doing 6 am on sunday? shouldn’t you be sleeping?
“what are you all doing 6 am on sunday? shouldn’t you be sleeping?”
Early sunrise is killing me this year. No one else is up.