It would appear from these facts, that the purchasing of privileges is a poor business proposition, while the selling of privileges is a money making affair. This is true. We need only compare the kind of men who _buy_ “puts and calls” and those who sell them to have this truth made apparent. The late Russell Sage was a persistent writer of these instruments and made a great deal of money by the process. The late Edward Partridge also made a good deal of money in this manner in the Chicago Wheat Market. He also used privileges to aid his manipulative campaigns. On several occasions, he sold “calls” heavily through the day, then suddenly bid wheat up just at the close of the market, effecting a closing just above the call price. The scattered purchasers would call the wheat and put Mr. Partridge short several millions at a high price, which was just what he wanted. He could not have sold as much wheat in the open market without breaking the price several cents. On the same principle, he used sometimes to sell a great many “puts” when he wished to cover a line of short wheat and rush the price downward at the close, thus enabling him to purchase a great line without disturbing the market by bidding for it. The process only worked a few times, however. As soon as it was discovered it failed, as the call price, when reached, met with such a wave of selling that it was impossible to break through it, and the manipulator was “hoist with his own petard.” There is another drawback to the habit of buying privileges--a mental one. They are frequently made the basis of positive trading with disastrous results. The man who believes in an advance in certain shares or commodities, frequently purchases privileges instead of following out his own convictions by actual trading. Thus the man who had good reasons for expecting an advance in wheat at the time of the 20 cent advance mentioned above, and who used either “puts” or “calls” or both, as a means of operating on his opinions, would have reaped less than two cents a bushel during an advance of twenty cents. He might, of course, have called the wheat on the first day of the advance and remained long, but in that case he would merely have been speculating with equal chance of loss or profit in ensuing transactions. Aside from the initial two cent gain, he would have been in no different position than if he had purchased and held the cereal on margin.