You are quite right about the miscues in TQNT, GNSS, TXCC, and ASYT. To that list I can add a few more. I am more than willing to openly admit to the losers, but you do me a great injustice by overlooking the huge successes that more than made up for these losses.
The newsletter, currently on hiatus, due to my engaging in some personal activities in the January through April timeframe, will come off hiatus soon. I would like to point out that despite the miscues you listed, the documented portfolio was up much more than 200% for 2002. All of this was clearly documented on a daily basis in the newsletter.
And for those people like you who can do nothing more than make negative comments, you can easily pay for last year's complete set of newsletters ($1000), rip them apart, and pro-rate the trades a day later than they were documented as being executed. Even by delaying the trades by 24 hours and using the most unfavorable bid or ask (depedning if we are buying or selling), will still find that the portfolio clearly increased in value more than 200%.
So for all of the negativity you so justly have pointed out, I never said I was 100% perfect on the trades. As a matter of fact, we did poorly in two companies that you did not mention, as a result of the companies' share values being significantly depressed and then subsequently taken over by other companies.
You do not lose anything until you sell or are called on margin. I have consistently warned against using margin, short-selling, or using options. Owning stocks allows you to ride out the storm. And as an extremely heavy investor in WFR as it collapsed in 2002, we are now looking at monumental gains.
And if you were a subscriber in 2002, you know that we made ungodly and extremely significant profits on a group of 24 stocks (or less) that we consolidated on and rode the price roller coaster numerous times. Those readers that followed me on the roller coaster in companies like AMAT and CYMI, to name just two, were richly rewarded.
Congratulations on your own investment style and strategies, since that is the purpose of my newsletter. At no point in time do we make "buy recommendations" but rather present information worth considering. Ultimately it is up to the reader to make their own informed decisions. The final decision is up to the reader.
And from the looks of things, it appears you were burnt on a few of the stocks in your message. Well, if you were a reader, you would clearly know that we strongly discuss cutting our losses in the 5-10% range and licking our wounds. I can tell you that the most significant losses of 2002 occurred when I did not follow that discipline.
And when those losses occurred, i was the first to admit my stupidity at not rigidly following my own precepts.
I wish you the best of luck in 2003 but would ask you not to cast stones into something you chose not to fully participate in. You have no idea what we discussed in the newsletter relative to the stocks you mentioned. But for the record, TQNT and TXCC were major tax losses for 2002, while we more than made up for the initial losses in GNSS, as it made numerous significant swings in price. From mid October to early December GNSS tripled in value, more than wiping out our losses in the three other stocks you mentioned, since we loaded up with shares.
Timing is everything and our readers were given enough timing opportunities in companies they felt comfortable with. And for the record, we did exit GNSS and are already up $1 on our February entry, helped in part by Friday's pop.
You have every right to demean the work I was doing, but keep in mind, I kept the the areas that I had the most expertise, and was able to navigate through one of the worst market environments in decades, showing a huge profit when most of the experts lost their shirts. I also did not have anything to do with the AOLs, Tycos, Enrons, and other internet bomb type companies or fraudulently run companies. How much money did you lose in those type investments? We lost absolutely nothing. Nor did we lose our shirts in the airline industry.
And finally, you do point out an absolutely correct situation. I did promise to reward past subscribers with a mini-letter during the hiatus, which I have failed to do. for this I am both apologetic and embarrassed that I did not come through on that commitment. My outside activity (new venture) has consumed more time that I thought and I am unable to provide the mini-newsletter.
HOWEVER, I read email every day and have answered hundreds of emails from past readers, and have kept in contact with more than half of them on a one to one basis.
Keep in mind, my rewards to past subscribers has been paid before every renewal since I do not want anyone to feel they had to subscribe to get a reward. Most of the people that renewed last year were given close to 2 months of Radarview AFTER their subscription expired, before I sent out the renewal notice to them.
And as far as the lack of the mini-letter that was promised is concerned, I will be sending the prior subscribers many weeks of Radarview (when we re-start) before sending out a renewal notice. They will also get a preferred rate, as we have done in the past. This is the current plan to make up for the mini letter not being sent out, and to reward their past support before asking them to subscribe once again.
When I am wrong, I do not side step the issue. And since you have pointed out a glaring problem, I admit to it and will make the proper restitution in my own way and own time.
BTW - of the 100s of emails I have responded to, a good chunk of them have been from people that have never held a subscription to Radarview.
Andrew Vance |
