A Put Primer

There was a lot of stress this week over the sale of puts on Abercrombie and Fitch.

Most of the stress was by me. Not because of the ridiculous price action, which is standard fare for these shares, but because I had to figure out how best to track the outcome of the trade when some people. including me had early assignment of the puts, while others did not and were heading toward assignment at the end of the day.

That also means different trading strategies because some would potentially have shares in hand upon which to sell calls today, while others would be faced with the decision to either roll over the puts or await assignment and hope to be able to sell calls on Monday.

The problem with that latter is that it’s hard to predicate anything on a hope, especially since today was an ideal day to rollover the puts as ANF had a large share gain intra-day. Who knows what Monday brings?

My guess, but that’s all it can ever be is that if the market is sound next week ANF will make up some more ground in advance of its earnings report on November 21, 2013.

Between the known fact that shares were stronger today and the unknowns awaiting next week, compounded by what ridiculous more news may come at earnings makes the gift horse especially appealing.

Later I’ll show you why improving price was important using some screenshots I took during the day while following shares looking for opportiunities.

But since this is a primer, let’s start at the beginning.

To start, a put is an option contract that when bought is a statement that the buyer expects the shares to go down in value, in which case the value of his option will increase.

The buyer typically wants to trade in and out of option positions, because their money is greatly leveraged. They don’t usually want to be assigned and have to take over ownership of shares.

The put seller is usually the more bullish participant in the trade. They think that the shares may go up or down, but if they go down they’re not likely to go below the strike price. The big caveat is that put sellers should be willing to own the shares just in case they are assigned and they end up owning them, as happened to me and a small number of other subscribers.

In the case of Abercrombie and Fitch its shares plummeted on the day before their planned Analysts’s Meeting, the first they had held in over two years.

On the evening before that meeting they presented revised guidance and it wasn’t very good news. I hate revised guidance, even when it’s good. There’s no way to prepare for it unless you have inside information.

I almost purchased shares in the after-hours, but decided to wait until the next day.

At first, when trading started I was upset for having waited as the price significantly improved but was still low enough to seem to warrant a position. However, just to hedge, I decided to use an out of the money put in anticipation of some continued price drop.

As an aside, but an appropriate one, I think the current market may be an appropriate one for the use of more put sales rather than initiating new positions and covered calls. That’s simply an expression of a bearish sentiment. Even though I’ve been cautious and have kept cash reserves, I’ve not used the SOS strategy as a further expression of bearishness, but I think there may be a greater role for put sales now.

Obviously, understanding them is requisite for their use.

But, back to Abercrombie and Fitch. Thanks to the utterings of the CEO, who is not terribly regarded as a person, due to his rather odd behavior and opinions,  shares suddenly went much lower during mid-day trading and then everyone on television just piled on. If you ever have any doubt about the power of basic cable television, just watch the ticker and price changes as specific stocks are discussed, especially when event driven. But even then, the continued drop surprised me, thinking that an additional 2% drop was enough of a cushion after an already 5% drop in shares.

So shares dropped even more. Normally, the escape strategy when having sold puts that are now in the money is to simply roll them over at the same strike price, assuming you continue to be reasonably bullish. Otherwise, you can roll down to a lower strike price, but that will cut into your net premium, perhaps even causing a “net debit” from the transaction.

However, Abercrombie and Fitch made any kind of transaction difficult because the more it was in the money the less became the time value of the contracts, being instead made up almost entirely of intrinsic value, that is the difference between the strike and the current value. To make it worse, there was a large gap between the bid and ask prices.

The net result was that at one point earlier in the day a rollover trade would have resulted in incurring a Net Debit.

You don’t want a net debit. You would prefer to make money, even if it’s not that much money.

In this scenario you would have still been obligated to buy shares for $35.50 a week later, but it would have cost you $0.20 of your earlier option premium profit.

As long time subscribers know, I have patience.

In this case the patience was measured in hours and not option cycles.

 

 



 

In the meantime, though the price of shares started recovering in the late morning, the Net Debit went only to break-even.

The differential between the expiring contract and that of the next week  saw naturally more erosion in the expiring contract as price moved in a direction toward the strike price. Obviously, that’s not something in your control. It’s just a measured risk, knowing that even if nothing is done you’ll end up with shares in your account on Monday morning and then just do with them as is done with every other holding.

But simply being at break-even is fine if the brokerage is your uncle. Otherwise, it’s not very satisfying.

 



Then it went to a Net Credit.

Bingo.

That’s what you want. In fact, you can see from the timestamp on this image and the previous one, that even though the price of shares was more favorable earlier, the premium differential actually improved as the clock was ticking, even though shares moved away from the strike.

 

 

 

  

The problem was that the bid-ask spread was still on the large side, leaving only a small net profit

Here’s where it’s helpful to look at the call side of things.

Even though pricing isn’t always rational, it’s reasonable to expect that whatever irrationality there is would be equally distributed between call buyers and put buyers.

Hard to prove, but equally hard to argue.

On the call side of things the equivalent trade, that is selling the November 16, 2013 $35.50 call was yielding a bid of $0.18 with a more normal differential between bid and ask.

So in placing a trade to rollover the puts, rather than using the bid on the sale and the ask on the purchase (as outlined here), for a Net Credit of $0.08, use an intermediate figure determined on the call side of the aisle.

For those that haven’t owned Abercrombie and Fitch in the past, it is a stock that can be very rewarding with a modicum of patience and has been ideally suited for a covered option strategy, but all in all I would much rather see put sales expire and simply decide whether I want to pursue the stock on my own terms the following week, as was recently done with Coach, another company that takes big price hits, but always seems to work its way back into good graces.

In general, if your put sale shares are just slightly in the money you are usually much better off simply rolling over the puts just as you would normally rollover a call position sold on shares that you own.

Unfortunately, I don’t have it documented with screenshots, but for my personal trades some of you may have noticed that I’ve been doing that with the ProShares Ultra Silver ETN (AGQ) speculative hedging position. In this case using a $20 strike price I haven’t really cared too much whether the price was above or below the strike. I just allowed events to dictate whether rolling over when expecting a price increase in silver or sitting on the sidelines when expecting price increases. As with stocks, it’s all about being able to do the trades on a serial basis and watching the premiums add up.

When history repeats itself it can be a beautiful thing.

If this is your first foray with Abercrombie and Fitch I believe that this is a good price at which to do it over and over again, whether through the sale of puts of through the use of covered calls.

I’ll leave the personal feelings about the CEO to others, as long as there is a way to milk some dividends from this pig.

Implied Price Moves

On rare occasion I actually get some indication that someone is reading these articles.

In this case I was recently asked a question about “implied moves,” citing the fact that I refer to that concept with some frequency in articles. For me, that implied someone actually having read at least one article. The use of the word “frequency” further implied that I did so either on multiple occasions in a single article or perhaps in many articles.

That which is implied isn’t necessarily precise.

There are lots and lots of different metrics and measures that are used in assessing stock charts and stock fundamentals. I have long maintained doubts about the validity of many of those measures, at  least the ones most frequently cited and presented. It always appears that for every expert’s interpretation of data there is another equally esteemed expert who takes an opposing position.

For someone who had spent about 20 years in academic environments and who respects the “scientific method,” I prefer common sense approaches to investing.

You can be certain that for the widely used tools and measures everyone under the sun has already applied the tools and the chances of an eye popping discovery that flies below the radar is not likely. So why bother?

The same may or may not be true of more closely held metrics or proprietary tools. Presumably the PhDs in statistics, physics and applied mathematics are being paid princely sums for their algorithms because they produce results at the margins.

If you followed the announcement of this year’s Nobel Prize in Economics you may have thought it to be ironic that the prize was shared by Eugene Fama and Robert Schiller. The ironic part is that one was recognized for his work supporting rational markets, while the other was awarded on the basis of endorsing irrational markets.

So clearly black and white can be the same.

While I only passingly glance at charts and various measures and completely ignore the traditional measures used to characterize options, better known as “The Greeks,” I do consider the option market equivalent of crowd sourcing, better known as a measure of a stock’s  “implied price move.”

While I believe that the option market usually gets it wrong, which is a good thing, because those are the people that are buying the goods that you’re selling, the crowd does provide some guidance. As in real life, it’s often good to stay away from the crowd, despite the fact that crowds can create a sense of comfort or security.

Or frenzy.

In this case the guidance provided by option market participants is an estimation of how much the option market believes a stock’s price will move during the period in question by looking at both the bull and the bear perspective as based on the most fundamental of all criterion.

What is considered is the price that someone is willing to pay to either buy a call option or a put option at a specific strike price.

I only use “implied movement” when a known event is coming, such as earnings being released. I want to get an idea of just how much the option market believes that the stock is likely to move based on the event that is going to occur.

In articles I refer to the phenomenon of “Premiums Enhanced by Earnings” or “PEE.” During such times the uncertain way in which stocks may respond to earnings news drives option premiums higher. It’s all a case of risk and reward.

But because earnings introduces additional risk I look for a measure that may suggest to me that I have an advantage over the crowd.

The calculation of the “implied move” is very simple, but is most accurate for a weekly contract, because that minimizes the impact of time on option premium.

To begin, you just need to identify the strike price that is most close to the current share price and then find the respective call and put bid premiums. By adding those together and dividing by the strike price you arrive at the “implied move.” which tells you that the option market is anticipating a move in either direction of that magnitude.

IMPLIED PRICE MOVE = (Call bid + put bid)/Strike price,  where Strike price is that closest to current share price

The implied move is expressed as a percentage.

Using Facebook as an example, the graphic below was from the day prior to the announcement of earnings and with approximately 3 1/2 days left to expiration.

Facebook was trading at $49.53 and the $49.50 November 1, 2013 call option bid was $3.10, while the corresponding put option bid was $3.05



At a point that shares were trading at $49.53 and using the $49.50 strike level, the combined call and put premium of $6.20 would result in an implied move of approximately 12.5%. That would mean that the stock market was anticipating an earnings related trading range from approximately $43 to $56.

Great, but how do we capitalize on that bit of information, which may or may not have validity, especially since it is based on prices that in part are determined by option buyers, who frequently get it wrong?

I use my personal objective, which is a 1% ROI for each new trade.

In the case of Facebook, whether buying shares accompanied by the sale of calls or simply selling puts, the ROI is based upon the premiums received, plus or minus capital gains or losses from the underlying shares and of course, trading costs.

In general, there is a slight advantage in earnings related trades to the sale of puts rather than using a covered call strategy. Doing so also tends to reduce transaction costs.

In the case of Facebook, the first strike price that would yield a 1% ROI is at $42, because the bid premium at that strike is $0.44 and the amount of cash put at risk is $42.

The key question then is whether that 1% ROI could be achieved by a position that is outside of the implied range. The further outside that range the more appealing the trade becomes.

Again, in this case, with shares trading at $49.53, it would require a 15.2% decline in price to trigger the possibility of assignment. That is outside the range that the crowd believes will be the case.

In this case, I’m currently undecided as to whether to make this trade because of other factors.

There are almost always other factors.

First, the positive factor is that I prefer to sell puts on shares that have already started showing weakness in advance of earnings. That increases the put premiums available and perhaps gets some of that weakness out of its system, as the more squeamish share holders are heading for the exits in a more orderly fashion, rather than doing it as part of a rushing crowd.

The negative factor is that tomorrow is another event that may impact the overall market. That is the release of the FOMC minutes. Although I don’t expect much of a reaction in the event of a surprise or nuanced language the market could drag Facebook along with it, possibly compounding any earnings related downdraft.

So in this case I’m likely to wait until after 2 PM tomorrow to make a decision.

By that time the likelihood of any FOMC related influence will be known, but there will also need to be a recalculation of implied move as premiums will change both related to any changes in share price, as well as to decreased option value related to the loss of an additional day of premium.

In general, everything else being equal, waiting to make such a trade reduces the ROI or increases the risk associated with the trade.

Aren’t you glad you don’t read these articles?

I Love Caterpillr

That may be a bit of an over-statement. There’s probably a psychiatric diagnosis for someone who professes deep emotional attachment to inanimate objects.

But when it comes to being a poster child for a covered option strategy, not too many can do a better job of demonstrating what is possible than Caterpillar (CAT).

Caterpillar reported earnings this morning and by noon its shares were about 5% lower. Its earnings and its reduced guidance were not the sort of things that inspire confidence. It’s CEO, Douglas Oberhelman, has been vilified, pilloried and himself been used as a poster child of an “out of touch” CEO in the past. Today’s news confirms that feeling for many. If there is such a thing as a “rational market,” today’s response is reflective of that kind of market.

Even objective people, such as Herb Greenberg of TheStreet.com described Oberhelman’s appearance on CNBC this morning as seeming or sounding “distraught.” That’s not a terribly good image to present if one’s objective is to inspire confidence in leadership and offer support for share price.

Caterpillar has long been the stock that everyone loves to hate. Down almost 6% year to date, essentially all of it coming today, it has certainly lagged the broader market and has had very tangible opportunity costs, even prior to today’s disappointments.

The smart money bid shares up quite strongly yesterday, approaching $90, a level not seen in 7 months. Presumably, it was the smart money, because it seems unlikely that individual investors would commit with such urgency in advance of a scheduled risk factor.

Certainly, the very high profile position taken by famed short seller, Jim Chanos, calling a short of Caterpillar as his best trade idea of 2014 and pointing out that Oberhelman “routinely misses forecasts,” hasn’t done much to propel shares forward.

But that’s the point.

What has made Caterpillar such a wonderful covered option stock, whether owning shares and selling calls or selling puts, is its mediocrity. It has simply traded in a narrow price range alternating between disappointment and hope. That creates the perfect environment in which to put a stock to work, not be capital appreciation of shares, but rather through production of premium income and dividends.

In the example illustrated below, representing Trading Alerts sent to subscribers during a 15 month period, there were 14 different occasions initiating new positions or selling puts. The average share price was slightly above today’s noon time price of Caterpillar shares. In essence indicating no movement in price over that time. Including dividends, however, Caterpillar shares would have shown a 2.4% ROI during that period.

By contrast, the approach of serial purchase of shares or sale of puts, awaiting assignment or rolling over option contracts when possible, as expiration occurs or is likely to occur has had an ROI of 47%, assuming equal lots of shares purchased in all transactions. During that same time period the S&P 500 appreciated 30.8%

In the example above very little of the gain can be attributed to capital appreciation of shares. In fact, most of the share purchases was coupled with the sale of in the money or near the money options in an effort to optimize option premiums at the expense of capital gains.

Over the course of the time period evaluated Caterpillar shares did reach a high of $99 on February 1, 2013. Perhaps not coincidentally, that occurred during a period of time that I didn’t own shares, having had shares assigned in early January 2013 and not finding a comfortable re-entry point until March.

For the buy and hold investor with perfect timing who had purchased shares on July 2, 2013 and sold them on February 1, 2013, the ROI including dividends would have been 18.9% for the 7 month period.

I’m one usually loathe to annualize, because I believe it tends to inflate returns, but assuming the 18.9% return could be maintained for an entire year, the annual ROI would have been 32.4%

Not shabby, but remember, that required perfect timing and the ability, discipline and foresight to sell at the top and further assumed that performance could be replicated.

Compare that to sticking with the mediocrity exhibited by Caterpillar and using it as a tool of convenience. Trading in and out of positions as its price indicated, rather than based on technical or fundamental factors. That can be left to the smart money.

With shares taking today’s hit I’m likely to consider adding shares, with already two open lots in hand, one of which is set to expire next week at $84 and the other at the end of the November 2013 cycle with an $87.50 strike price.

If not now, the one thing that I feel fairly certain about is that Caterpillar will present other opportunities and price points at which to find entry and capitalize on its inability to thrive in a thriving market.

Thank you, Doug Oberhelman. We need more CEOs who can walk that share price tight wire and stay within narrow confines. It would take the strain of thought and luck out of the investing process.

 

Double Dipping Demystified

I’ve had a number of people ask about the concept behind “Double Dip Dividends”

A good place to begin, is here.

In a nutshell some stocks have a little bit of a disconnect between the option premium and share price during the period of time that they’re going ex-dividend. What happens is that a portion of the dividend reduction in the share price is actually incorporated into the premium, when by all rights it really shouldn’t be. In effect the premium is enriched by an amount that partially offsets the reduction in share price as a result of paying the dividend.

People that refer to efficient pricing in markets conveniently overlook the particular advantages that can be had with regular dividend payments.

Note that I said “regular” dividends. The concept does not apply to special dividends that are greater than $0.125/share. In those cases the strike prices are adjusted downward to reflect the distribution of a special dividend, while such adjustment isn’t made in strike prices for regular dividends.

When stocks go ex-dividend there are some guidelines that can tell you whether your shares are likely to be assigned early if they are in the money as trading closes prior to going ex-dividend.

 How far in the money are the shares?

The further in the money after deducting the amount of the dividend, the more likely they will be assigned.

 How much time is still remaining on the contract?

The more time remaining the less likely you will see early assignment.

 

Obviously there are less clear cut combinations, such as being deeply in the money, but having lots of time remaining.

For example, a handful of people reported early assignment of all or some of their Cisco shares this morning which closed at $23.43 Monday evening and was paying a $0.17 dividend.

After deducting the dividend shares were still $0.26 in the money, although there was risk that shares could have traded lower today. On the other hand there were 4 days remaining on the contract.

Beyond those factors are individual considerations, such as how much the individual holding contracts paid for the contracts and whether that person could make more money by simply selling his contracts versus exercising the contract, collecting the dividend and then either selling or holding the underlying shares.

Let’s look at JP Morgan, which is trading ex-dividend tomorrow (October 2, 2013).

For those watching such things you may have noticed that in the final minute of trading on Tuesday, JPM shares went up $0.09 to end the day at $51.95. If you had sold the $51.50 option expiring on Friday, the critical share price would be $51.88, since the dividend was for $0.38.

Everything else being equal, you might see early assignments at JPM prices as low as $51.88.

But let’s dissect the situation further.

Since the October 4, 2013 $51.50 call option has been trading the lowest price anyone paid for it was $0.39, while the high price was $1.20

With shares closing at $51.96 on the day prior to going ex-dividend it’s price will be re-set $0.38 lower to $51.58 as trading opens on Wednesday October 2, 2013. That $0.38 decrease from Tuesday’s close to Wednesday’s opening in the pre-market represents the dividend.

Currently, the $51.50 option bid at Tuesday’s close  is $0.47, which means that there is only $0.01 of time value, as the remainder is intrinsic value, as shares closed $0.46 in the money

Remember, just yesterday we sold calls at $0.52 when shares were trading at $51.65 ($0.15 intrinsic value, $0.37 time value). A portion of that time value was due to the dividend of $0.38, however at a share price of $51.65 no rational person would exercise early to get the dividend and end up holding shares the following morning priced at $51.27 that he had to pay $51.50 to obtain and also paid a premium to purchase the options.

So from an option holder’s perspective when would it make sense to exercise the option early?

Assuming you can sell the shares for $51.58 tomorrow morning that represents an $0.08 profit from the $51.50 strike price that they paid when exercising. Add to that the $0.38 dividend to get a total of $0.46 profit.

But the lowest anyone paid for the right to do any of this was the $0.39 option premium meaning that there would be a potential for only $0.07 profit for those that timed it just perfectly.

But that profit margin, available only to some of those having bought options assumes that shares will open at least at $51.58 or higher. What the person considering the early exercise thinks about is also what is the chance that once I take hold of shares it will go down in value before I have a chance to sell the shares? Is it worth the $0.07 profit or even less?

The closer the opening price will be to the strike price the greater is that likelihood, which means taking a loss on the shares in which they just took ownership. On top of that is the cost incurred in having to purchase shares. Remember that option buyers typically  find great appeal in leveraging their investment, perhaps by 10 times or more. They don’t get much delight in buying stocks, even if only for minutes, if it means introducing portfolio risk and only getting 2x leverage.

So while JP Morgan essentially closed $0.08 in the money that makes it a risk factor for early assignment.

But there are still 3 days left on the contract. That argues against assignment.

After that it becomes luck of the draw. How much did your contract holder pay for his contracts? Anyone who paid  more than $0.46 for their options would have been better off closing their position by selling the contract for $0.47 than to exercise early.

The likelihood is that there are more options holders who purchased their options at prices greater than the low point of $0.39, so the number of individuals in a position to rationally act and exercise early would be relatively small.

My expectation is that most people will not be subject to early assignment, but I did find the last minute surge in share price very curious and made me wonder whether it was related to the ex-dividend date.

Occasionally you will also see early assignments that are completely irrational and less occasionally not see early assignments when they would have been completely rational. You can be certain that those were always products of an individual investor. While one is maddening, the other can be a nice surprise..

For those wondering about Cisco, the lowest price paid for the October 4, 2013 $23 options was $0.20. If selling shares at $23.26 that would have represented possibly a $0.26 profit (if shares didn’t head lower), plus $0.17 dividend, minus $0.20 option premium paid yielding a potential $0.23 profit per share. Of course the high price paid for option contracts was $1.18. For those paying anything more than $0.43 for their options they would have been better off simply trading out of their position and closing their option rather than trying to capture the dividend and assume the risk of ownership.

While having early assignment can sometimes be frustrating, especially when there is a last day surge in share price, as occurred with Dow Chemical last week, when able to capture both the dividend and a premium enhanced by the pricing inefficiency it is a thing of beauty.

 

Wednesday Morning Postscript:  The first thing I do on ex-dividend mornings is to check to see whether I still have all of my shares. In this case the JPM shares have stayed intact. For anyone who decided to exercise their options the pre-market is indicating a loss of $0.27 bringing shares to $51.31. Suddenly, the thin profit that a small portion of option buyers deciding to exercise thought they had last night has become a paper loss and they would find themselves regretting the decision to exercise for the sake of securing the dividend. Holding the security for a option buyer means that at least $2575 of his money is now tied up and possibly generating margin interest costs and is unable to be further leveraged in order to buy more option contracts.

Most rational contract holders would have considered that possibility very strongly before making the decision and would likely have opted to not exercise, as a result.

Ellison Fiddles While Oracle Burns

Maybe I belong to a different generation, but I have certain expectations regarding behavior and responsibility, especially when other’s are your subordinates and maybe even extending to your shareholders.

As a short term holding I’ve always looked to Oracle (ORCL) as a potential addition to my portfolio that relies on the use of a covered call strategy.

While I have often thought of buying Oracle shares, in 2013 I’ve only done so twice, this most recent occasion being in advance of its earnings report. In hindsight, however, I wish I had done so much more frequently because of how mediocre its price performance has been.

As a covered option trader I like mediocrity, at least when it comes to share price. That’s the perfect price behavior to be able to buy shares and sell calls or simply sell puts and collect premiums, sometimes dividends and sometimes small capital gains on shares with relatively little fear of large price swings downward. With little movement in underlying shares you can do so over and over again.

Oracle was truly perfect, that is of course, as long as you ignore the two earnings reports prior to Wednesday evening’s numbers being released.

Any company can see its shares tumble after releasing earnings or providing guidance. In fact, it doesn’t even take bad numbers to do so. All it takes is for disappointment or unmet expectations to permeate the crowd. After all, the saying “buy on the rumor and sell on the news” got its start in the aftermath of what would seem like paradoxical behavior from investors.

So I think a company can sometimes be excused for what happens to its shares after earnings.

What I have a harder time excusing is the excoriating finger pointing that came on that occasion six moths ago when Oracle shares plummeted in what appeared to be a company specific issue, as its competitors didn’t fair as poorly in their reports and didn’t suffer similar market misfortunes.

Larry Ellison, the CEO, blamed his salesforce for the quarter. He cited their lack of urgency which allowed third quarter sales to slip into the fourth quarter. I don’t really now how Oracle’s sales force is compensated, but deferring sales is not a typical strategy.

When the next earnings report was released this time Ellison blamed Oracle’s performance on the poor global economic environment, stating “It was clearly an economic issue, not a product, competitive issue,” during the ensuing conference call. That, of course, despite the fact, that once again the competition seemed to not experience the same issues. I guess those sales that previously had been said to slip into this quarter remained slipped.

Surely they would show up for the next earnings report.

AS CEO it’s probably easier pointing fingers at others. That’s certainly the strategy that ruling despots use when there’s a need to deflect criticism or place blame to account for the wheat crop shortage.

At the very least Ellison has at least been visible, perhaps too visible. The world learned of his purchase of 97% of the Hawaiian island, Lanai and wondered at that point whether his attention would be diverted from the job of running Oracle, notwithstanding the presence of its President, Mark Hurd.

He was all too visible recently when referring to Google (GOOG) CEO Larry Page as “acting evil” and questioned the ability of Apple (AAPL) to survive in the absence of Steve Jobs.

In a way, perhaps that kind of presence is preferable to the CEO that fails to make any statements following tragic events on one of his cruise liners, not once, but on two occasions. Maybe Ellison won some new customers over with his goodwill.

But here we were, on the day that Oracle was primed to report earnings yet again. For my money, and I did buy shares on Monday, it was inconceivable to me that someone with as much at stake, especially on a reputational level would allow a third successive disappointing report. Whether by slashing costs, financial optics or perhaps by virtue of those sales that slipped from one quarter to the next and then to this one, I was certain that there would be no repeat of the embarrassing price slides the last two times.

Funny thing, though.

Instead of being an integral part of the earnings report and guidance, Larry Ellison was cheering on the crew of Oracle Team USA in a losing effort at today’s America’s Cup race.

Again, call me old fashioned, but I like to see my CEOs involved in what may have a substantive effect on my fortunes.

The good news is that Oracle didn’t have a meltdown after reporting its earnings. In fact shares went higher until reversing the course when the conference call started and the new disappointments were made known, including guiding significantly lower growth than had been expected.

To give Ellison some benefit of the doubt, perhaps he knew that the initial response would be relatively muted and his presence was unnecessary. Besides, was he going to be able to have credibility going back to the well again and blaming macroeconomic business conditions?

Not with me, he wouldn’t.

With two days to go until expiration of the weekly options I had sold I expect to be able to extricate myself from the position relatively easily and show a profit for the effort.

In all likelihood I’ll also look for any other opportunity to purchase shares because sometimes mediocrity is the gift that just keeps giving. As long as Ellison will be fiddling and paying attention elsewhere, I don’t mind an Oracle that simply treads water and stays in place, although I’m sure that the Larry Ellison of old would never have accepted or allowed that kind of an existence.

Herb Greenberg, of TheStreet.com is once again soliciting nominations for the worst CEO of the year. As far as I know the rules don’t exclude absentee CEOs. While Oracle is only trailing the S&P 500 by approximately 19% YTD and is certainly performing better than other companies with less than capable management, the shame factor is worthy of your vote.