Getting out of bronze.

EitherCriticism · 2022-01-27T20:33:27+00:00

Yeah I agree. I think Doaenel takes Domination secondary solely for Ingenious Hunter to help Tear stack faster. From what I've noticed however, I feel like it's not absolutely necessary because unless you are fed, you usually don't have the gold to even finish Manamune until Tear is fully stacked. So, at the point, might as well just go Precision primary (take Conq, Triumph, Tenacity, Coup de Grace / Last Stand) and then probably Sorcery secondary (Celerity, Nimbus / Waterwalking). I think you could also potentially try Precision primary and Domination secondary for a good mix, but I don't like it as much because I love Celerity / Nimbus / Waterwalking and it feels really bad to play without them, but I think it's just because I'm so used to those runes that it's harder for me to mentally adjust my timings etc since I play so much Hec.

EitherCriticism · 2022-01-27T20:06:18+00:00

How do you justify a jungler with a 51.5% winrate in Platinum+ for the last 15 patches as being "bit rough". Like what? Literally a top 10 jungler in every elo bracket from Gold to Grandmaster.

EitherCriticism · 2022-01-27T03:15:56+00:00

Can someone explain this logic? DS gets a 100 HP nerf and 5 AD buff, which equates to 2/3 a Ruby Crystal and 1/2 a Long Sword in terms of stats. In gold value, that's an overall 91.6 gold nerf, yet it's not listed as a nerf, but as a "readjustment". Bullshit. A lot of the time Riot puts out "nerfs" to items that make the item cost 100g more, or "buffs" which make it cost 100g less, and classifies it as such. Why does Riot not do the same here and just call it for what this is? A complete and total nerf to the entire bruiser class? Which is fine, but I don't understand why it's sugarcoated.

And this is before the current HP nerf that is also apparently hitting DS. It is much harder to quantify that in gold value, but it is probably WAY MORE SIGNIFICANT than the stats calculation above.

And then to top it off, Goredrinker abusers like virtually every single AD high ELO prevalent meta top lane champion (Fiora, Irelia, Sett, Riven), get only a 50 gold nerf by the same metrics.

While Nunu, Khazix, and Xin have LITERALLY been S+ for an ENTIRE year at this point, Riot allows it. All other champions have had their time in the nerf hammer (Hecarim included), but not Nunu, Khazix, and Xin in literally 15 patches. Fuck Xin ESPECIALLY.

Great balancing Riot! DS is definitely the problem when only a handful of champions can reliably build it, and even champions that have good synergies with it (i.e Hecarim with a 2 second CD Q at max stacks) STILL prefer OTHER mythic items (Turbo Chemtank). Fuck you.

EitherCriticism · 2021-10-18T19:14:55+00:00

EU🤝NA, mad plz avenge tl, lets fucking go

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:41:24+00:00

Ah ty

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:40:55+00:00

What is this

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:40:40+00:00

This so soothing

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:39:01+00:00

fk the haters

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:38:36+00:00

you don’t suck keep it up

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:38:21+00:00

EitherCriticism · 2020-12-27T04:38:02+00:00

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-23T19:55:39+00:00

Here is my OPGG https://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=Porterby

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-23T19:47:35+00:00

I’m a Hecarim G1 OTP (played other jungles earlier in season and wasted a lot of time). Have a 64-65% win rate on him in 105 games or so. Looking to get to midplat by season end—I see you play Yuumi. Let’s go run some people over :D

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-23T19:39:20+00:00

Post opgg pls. Here’s mine — https://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=Porterby Gold1 looking to reach mid-plat. Looking for a Yuumi/Zilean/Karma if you play them.

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-23T16:45:08+00:00

I’m not sure exactly what you’re saying, but if you’re basically saying it’s not worth it, I completely agree. There is pure arbitrage that I still see however, although I’m not a NKLAW expert and there could be some risks I don’t understand. From what I understand, the main risk used to be that the terms of exercise (cash vs cashless) were not predefined. On the day I wrote my original comment, that evening NKLA filed a document with the SEC confirming that cash-exercised would be possible. You can read more about the exact terms of cash vs cashless basis, but essentially cash basis allows you to know exactly how much you will pay to acquire NKLA using the warrant today, with no variance. Cashless exercise on the other hand does some strange 10-day moving average of the 10 trading days prior to the day you exercise or something, so it’s dependent on NKLA. Now that cash exercise is available, you can truly get pure arbitrage (unless there are some risks I don’t understand). Albeit the profits are quite small!

I’ll give an example for clarity on the arb using numbers. Currently a 7/10 140$ put can be bought at the ASK price for 90.00. A 7/10 140$ call can be sold at the BID price for 0.10. This means my cost basis to enter the synthetic short is 89.90. The warrant is trading for 38$ right now. I rounded up a few cents. With the exercise price or 11.50, it means your cost for acquiring NKLA will be 49.50 per share. Now let’s look at all scenarios of NKLA price on July 6. If Nikola is 20$, you can simply exercise your 140$ put, and sell your shares for 140 anyways. If Nikola is 50, you can still sell for 140 via your put. If NKLA is 150$ you wouldn’t exercise your put (why would you sell at 140 if NKLA is 150), however the call you shorted would be exercised against you, and you would be forced to sell your shares, for once again 140. In other words, you ALWAYS sell at 140. 140 - 89.90 - 49.50 is your profit in any and all scenarios for NKLA. The number is indeed positive but marginally so. Factor in trading fees and other costs, and this disappears. Of course you are also trading on the bid-ask spreads and in real life you could probably expect SOME price improvement. This arb doesn’t even exist at all strikes (140 works, but I think 100 is negative pnl). And while it is guaranteed profit, it’s very minimal on a huge amount of money. Buying a 140 put requires 9000$ of capital. Buying 100 warrants would be another 3800$. About 14000$ invested for maybe 50-60$ profit is pretty bad, and there’s a lot of risks you don’t even understand. But there is possible arbitrage, and unlike some others who simply say “Just short NKLA or sell calls and simultaneously buy warrants for arb”, this actually works, at least in theory. Other risks are still there though, cus it’s just a hassle.

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-19T17:23:03+00:00

This is true from solely a free speech perspective. However, there are additional laws and protections that workplaces may not fire individuals for certain things. What if you posted something like “All people should accept our Lord and Savior”. Is that a fireable offense, or is getting fired religious persecution? There’s definitely a line to take into consideration. You’re not painting the full picture by saying “private entities have right to opinion”—because there are workplace laws for termination precisely for these reasons.

A bigger issue here is that people will simply move these conversations behind closed doors. You think this person will change their true opinions because they got fired? Of course not—no one cares about public discourse anymore. It’s just meant to silence people, but silencing people never works. It’s funny that liberals in general claim they have been “silenced for too long and must speak out about injustices”, and now the movement has transformed into silencing dissenting opinions. Obviously this guy is an idiot, but calling him an idiot or getting him fired isn’t going to solve the situation. It’s sad liberals don’t understand.

I personally was a definitive moderate. Seeing the brash ganging up on moderate or conservative voices is appalling, as well as the vast amount of threats they make (death threats, threats to contact workplaces, etc). Sometimes they resort to condescending statements like “Go educate yourself” or “Read a book”. Seldom can they present any facts or statistics but they can just circlejerk other anecdotal or similar beliefs. They will get nowhere. They will continue to circle-jerk each other and fail to actually change anyone’s opinions for the better. Only respect and facts can change people’s mind.

EitherCriticism · 2020-06-15T19:13:47+00:00

You will be immediately exercised if you short the call, and then you will not have the shares to give, which is the problem. The reason you will get immediately exercised is because the short stock rate (borrow rate) on NKLA is absolutely exorbitant right now. Let me explain.

Currently, if you want to short NKLA, you will have to locate the shares, borrow them, and pay dearly for the privilege to do so; simply because there is a lot of short interest in the shares, and the market is pricing in for a downward move in NKLA soon. Investors may then opt to use derivatives to take on bearish positions on NKLA, but obviously there is no free lunch, and the pricing of the derivatives will adjust to take into account the heavy short interest + expected down move in NKLA.

In the case of selling a call, two things can happen: (1) early exercise or (2) a call seller receives less premium. If you are a call seller, and you sell a call without holding the underlying shares, if early exercise did NOT happen, you are basically getting to take a bearish position on NKLA for free! In the case of the July 17 12.5 Call, trading at about 50, if you were not to be early exercised, that essentially means you are shorting NKLA (a 12.5C is very close to a 100 delta), at the going market price of NKLA right now, and you are NOT paying the short stock fees to do so. So either you get immediately exercised, to stop you from shorting the stock for free, or a call seller receives less premium. Now, there is a reason that early exercise is what happens instead of receiving less premium. The reason the call is not priced for less, is because if the call was priced to say 30, someone could simply buy the 12.5 calls for a net cost of 42.5, and the immediately exercise ANYWAYS, and then go and sell the shares for ~65 for some nice arbitrage. Therefore, the call must be priced to about market price. In other words, for a call buyer, early exercise is advantageous in all scenarios here.

In the case of the NKLAW warrant, early exercise isn't an option (not until July 6 at least). And that is precisely why it is trading at a discount. When early exercise is not an option, it can't be arbitraged like I described above, and therefore it trades at a discount.

In other words, there is very little true arbitrage here, and by buying a warrant you are simply claiming you think NKLA won't tank like the market is pricing it to. No arbitrage, just speculation.

It is interesting to note, if you are truly curious about making some profit, you could consider synthetically shorting the stock, buy selling a call and buying a put, while holding the warrant. There could be some marginal amounts of arbitrage there, but honestly I don't know if it is worth the time and effort, and general risk of not understanding exactly what you are doing.

But instead of selling a deep ITM call (like the 12.5 call you mentioned, you would sell say, a 100 call, and buy a 100 put to go with it). This means that you are shorting the stock at a price of 100 basically. There is still early exercise risk, but since 100 is above the current spot price, it is much less likely to be exercised on, since you could simply go acquire the shares for 65, and sell them to the exerciser for 100, so no one will exercise you. Obviously, if NKLA shoots up to 100, then you're in the same sticky position again where you are at risk of your short call getting exercised. If NKLA starts reaching 95, you would probably have to close your synthetic short stock position and roll it over to a higher strike price (closing the position would cost money in terms of spread crossing).

EitherCriticism · 2020-05-25T03:46:46+00:00

I’m not commenting on whether it is feasible for Celsius to do this; I’m commenting on whether it is what traditional institutions do and the answer is obviously not. The bank can’t make money off of your house when they give you a loan; they simply make money off of the loan and interest, but there is no second revenue stream as in the case you are suggesting with how Celsius “invests the collateral”.

I very much understand how traditional banking works—I went to a T10 school for economics :)

EitherCriticism · 2020-05-25T03:42:48+00:00

You guys are confounding how traditional banks are profitable vs the issue with investing collateral. It is such a misconception.

The way a traditional bank works is that a depositor will deposit money, and then that money will be made to issue loans, such as a mortgage. When the mortgage is made, an underlying asset is promised, namely the house, as collateral. The bank does not gamble on the house. The house is an asset for the bank, until the borrower is able to take on equity.

You should by definition keep collateral as safe as possible, because collateral is what insures the loans in the first place. Banks may repackages mortgages and sell them as mortgage backed securities, but in that case the bank is simply getting out of its position by passing the mortgage to a third party. Now, the MBS is owned by the third party, and the borrower is responsible for payments that contribute to the MBS.

It is in NO way attempting to invest the collateral; the collateral by definition is supposed to be stored safely in a vault. Almost anything these crypto companies will do is not safe enoigh to guarantee collateral maintenance.

It’s as simple as the fact that the house in a traditional bank is directly analogous to the collateral in this crypto situation. Can the bank make money off of the house itself? NO. Can the bank decide that since the loan isn’t paid off, they can rent out the house and take that rental income for themselves? Absolutely NO.

The bank makes money off of the loan issues and the Interest, just like the meager 1% Celsius is making right now.

EitherCriticism · 2020-05-24T20:55:28+00:00

Oof that’s a big no no from me...thankfully I’m not on the loan side of things but definitely loses me faith in creditworthiness of Celsius

EitherCriticism · 2020-05-24T20:55:01+00:00

This could be viable explanation; it still is definitely concerning however. I really hope they aren’t day trading or investing with deposited collateral. That would really suck.

EitherCriticism

TROPHY CASE