It is the writer’s opinion, founded on the experience set forth above, that it is much better to effect transactions in the ordinary manner, than to depend on privileges. If “puts and calls” are dealt in at all, they should be sold, not purchased. The insurance companies make more money than is paid out in losses; so do the sellers of privileges. It may be well to add, however, that the man who runs an insurance company is in danger if he does not understand his business and his risks, or if he enters the field without sufficient capital to provide for possible initial losses. All this applies to the seller of privileges. VII The Question of Dividends It is a certainty that the short seller of dividend-paying stocks suffers a drawback from dividends, except in the rare cases where interest is allowed on short stocks. If we sell short a 6% stock at par and at the end of a year find the stock still selling at par, we have lost 6% without adverse market action. This onus cannot be escaped by short-time commitments; it is merely a matter of degree. The chronic short seller is swimming constantly against the current. There is one point about dividends which is widely misunderstood by ordinary traders. It appears impossible to make a great many individuals understand that short sales may be as intelligently made the day before a stock sells “ex-dividend” as at any other time. Even when good reasons for a decline exist, traders fight shy of “swallowing the dividend,” or retire commitments just before dividend payment for no other reason than that such distribution is to be made, which is, in fact, no reason at all. The disadvantage to the seller of stocks through the earning capacity or increment is the same on the day or the week preceding a disbursement as at any other time. The earnings of the company are a steady day to day affair, and are, as they accrue, constantly considered in the price of the stock. In other words, the prices of listed shares are at all times “flat.” At a point midway between two dividend days, the stock reflects in its current price half the amount of the undistributed dividend, or other increment. For example, if a certain stock sells normally at par and pays 6% per annum (3 per cent. in January and 3 per cent. in July) the price of the stock in March, eliminating speculative influences, would be 101½ and in July 103. When on July 1st, the 3 per cent. is distributed, the amount is simply taken away from the company and from the price of the stock also. It now returns to its normal price, 100, and whether it will go up or down from that point is a question for speculation. The factor which made the price 103 has been eliminated and it remains for the corporation in question to again earn 3% available for distribution before the next dividend day.