JUst had the same glitch on the desktop – had to log off and log back in to see comments

Here it is:
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/896471865860186969

We know the drill but if you don’t: 1 PM EST tomorrow! Click that link and register, and you should receive an email for confirmation and a means to follow for attendance. We’ll be going through Bargain Hunting & Retirement Income, so make sure to tune in!

The Bounce Chart is WAY stronger than it was last week (and this is the sub-chart for the top of the major range):

So since Oct, the short $30s were at the money, $5 in the money, $10 in the money, $15 in the money, $20 in the money and $25 in the money and now, at $17 in the money – you finally think you should do something about them?

https://publish.finviz.com/021026/Bd153014368i.png

It’s really no big deal as you have 3/5 covered and a 9-month advantage but generally you want to roll BEFORE you are so deep in the money that the short calls have no premium. March $30s are $17.20 with B at $47.04 so a whipping 0.16 worth of premium left on them.

That means anything you want to roll to now has no premium too – that’s the problem with waiting- now you can’t sell premium.

Or can you?

Your Jan $13 calls are now $33.50 (also no premium) so 3 of them is $10,050 and you can roll those to 20 $40 ($14.50)/55 ($9.50) bull call spreads at $5 ($10,0000 and you can roll your 2 uncovered March $30 calls ($3,440) to 5 short April $47s at $4 ($2,000) and now you have 2 years to roll – but don’t wait for the premium to go to zero next time!

Also, Jan $20s are $27 so net $6.50 on the $7 spread means you should probably cash them all out and move to the spread that pays 3:1 (as opposed to 0.50/6.50) and is $7 in the money for the $5 spread.

Sold 5 March $30 calls for $9.16
Bought 20 Jan27 $13 Calls for $6.96
Sold 17 Jan 27 $20 Calls for $3.03

Thoughts on what to do with the March calls?

Retail sales: the consumer finally flinched

https://www.briefing.com/Common/Images/Content/PageContent/EcData/rtlyoy.gif

• December headline retail sales 0.0% m/m vs +0.4–0.5% expected, prior revised to +0.6%. Ex‑auto: 0.0% vs +0.3–0.5% expected.[bloomberg]​
• The control group that feeds into GDP actually fell ‑0.1% vs +0.4% expected, and November was revised down. That implies a meaningful trim to Q4 GDP from the “real economy” side. As Phil recently noted, you can’t trust the data.[neilsethi.substack]​

In Weekly Wrap‑Up terms: this is your Matrix economy showing a crack – consumer demand rolling over after an AI/capex/asset boom, exactly the kind of slowdown you’d expect when capital hegemony squeezes wage earners and rate‑sensitive sectors.

Employment Cost Index: wage pressure easing toward “2% world”

https://www.briefing.com/Common/Images/Content/PageContent/EcData/ecitot.gif

• Q4 ECI +0.7% q/q vs 0.7% forecast, 0.8% prior – slowest since early 2021, with wages and benefits both at 0.7%.[investinglive]​
• On a 12‑month basis, compensation growth has drifted down toward the mid‑3s, not far above the ~3% the Fed associates with 2% inflation.[thecreditbalance]​

That plugs directly into yesterday’s and today’s posts: labor is losing bargaining power, wage‑driven inflation is fading, and the Fed has more cover to cut rates to keep the asset‑machine running even as 100,000+ humans a month are displaced by AI and automation.

Import/export prices: external inflation pressure is muted

• December import prices +0.1% m/m, 0.0% y/y – essentially flat.[bls]​
• Export prices +0.3% m/m, +3.1% y/y – some price power on outbound goods, but not a runaway problem.[bls]​

In Phil’s “infrastructure war” frame, this says: global cost‑push inflation isn’t the enemy right now. The real fight is over who owns the pipes and power (chips, data centers, transmission, ports) – not imported price shocks.

Business inventories & NFIB: no panic, but no boom

• Business inventories +0.1% vs +0.2% expected, a touch softer – firms are not over‑stocking into a slowdown.[xtb]​
• NFIB small‑business optimism 99.3 vs 99.5 prior – basically flat; Main Street is meh, not euphoric.[bloomberg]​

That fits our Monday “China Syndrome” note: the big‑cap AI/infra names and sovereign capital are driving the tape, while small businesses are just grinding along, with little pricing power and growing tech pressure.

How it ties into our recent posts

1. Weekly Wrap‑Up (“Matrix economy / capital hegemony / infrastructure war”)

• Retail and wage data confirm the Matrix is extracting more from workers than it’s giving back: spending stalls, wage growth cools, but the Fed now has an excuse to cut and re‑inflate assets.[neilsethi.substack]​
• Import prices near 0% y/y underscore that inflation is no longer the main constraint; the real constraint is infrastructure – chips, power, water – and who controls it.[ainvest]​

1. Monday Morning Report (Dow 50K, Super Bowl hangover, China)

• Today’s flat retail and softer wages are your “hangover” data: after the party in AI, chips, and mega‑caps, the underlying consumer is clearly tiring.[seekingalpha]​
• It supports our point that defensive rotations (staples, bond‑proxies) and AI sell‑offs can coexist: macro is slowing just enough to scare people out of cyclicals and high‑multiple AI names at the same time.

1. Today’s “Tuesday Turmoil” (Matrix, capital hegemony, infra war)

• The ECI/retail combo is almost a textbook print for our thesis:
• Good for capital: weaker wage pressure, more room for rate cuts, easier financing for mega‑cap infra build‑outs.[tradingeconomics]​
• Bad for humans: flat real spending and slower wage growth mean the 99% feels poorer while the capital‑heavy AI/infrastructure oligopoly keeps compounding.[bloomberg]​

If you want a one‑liner for the chat room:

“Today’s data says the same thing our Weekly Wrap did: the real‑world consumer and wage earner are cooling off just enough to give the Fed cover to cut, which is great news for the Matrix (chips, infra, AI, capital hegemony) and lousy news if you’re on the wrong side of that infrastructure war.”

No, that’s bad. AMZN pretty much has trucks going everywhere every day at this point so it makes sense to fill the trucks up with more things to deliver.

The $30s are $11.50 with BTC at $3.50 and the $50s (60% out of the money) are at $4.30 so net $7.20 means your break-even is $37.20 (about 20% higher than we are now). That would be BTC back at $84,000 – not unreasonable but I guess with your restrictions. Of course, you could just buy a bitcoin for $70,000 and if it goes to $84,000 you make 20% – rather than breaking even and you wouldn’t have restrictions so you could sell at any time without the premium.

In the LTP?

QCOM is at $140 and $175 is about 25% out of the money so you want me to what? Pay $8.20 (and it’s only 10 shorts against 15 long) in PREMIUM that WILL ABSOLUTELY expire worthless in 12 months? Why??? Am I scared, angry, hungry of just childishly impatient with no concept of what our JOB is (hint: TO SELL PREMIUM!!!) as INVESTORS (we are NOT traders).

Did QCOM sell off for no reason? No, they are SUPPLY CONSTRAINED and that is NOT under their control to fix. So, assuming it was even a CONSIDERATION to pay $8,200 in premium to take 25% out of the money short calls off the table… Would I be better off doing that or rolling our 15 LONG 2027 $145 calls at $17.38 ($26,070) to 25 Long 2028 $125s at $36.50 ($91,250) and selling 15 short 2028 $160 calls at $22 ($33,000) for net net $32,180 and now we have another year to sell and $37,500 of intrinsic value and a $35 ($87,500).

The extra year gives us 4 more chances to sell our quarterly $14,300 ($57,200) which more than makes up for the outlay while buying back the short $175s accomplishes – buying back the short $175….

I let Maddie know.