SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: davidk555 who wrote (12538)2/28/2001 11:35:01 PM
From: Math Junkie  Read Replies (1) of 42834
 
David,

1. If you re-read what I wrote, you will see that I was NOT accusing you of sinister motives, but was instead making a point about why it is a bad idea to do that.

2. In the article you linked, dated October 20th, Task inexplicably admitted to something he did not do. If you follow the link to the ORIGINAL article dated October 11th, which I linked, you will find the following:

"Brinker's proprietary (of course) market-timing model has remained bearish since January, save for brief trading rally recommendations. In his show which aired May 27-28, he recommended buying the Nasdaq 100 Trust (QQQ:AMEX - news) (a call that caught the attention of a noted trader). The QQQs closed at 77 3/4 the Friday before the recommendation was made on his weekend radio show. Brinker later suggested the QQQs would reach $100, which they did on July 17. The QQQs declined thereafter and on July 29-30 he recommended investors take profits at 84. They have since rallied back to as high as $103 33/64 on Sept. 1, but closed at $77 1/16 on Wednesday." [emphasis added]

The only thing Task got wrong in the October 11th article were the details of the buy recommendation, not the sell price.

So now who is it who "didn't research the issue fully"?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext