As uncomfortable as this discussion obviously has been for the participants, I am glad to see some of the true facts out in the open. It is easy to let our suspicions of each other lead us to jump to conclusions, just as people let their suspicions of Brinker lead them to jump to conclusions.
I think we can assume that when the BJ Group was setting up the UTEK 401(k) program, company management must have talked about what a great company they had, what great new products they had coming along, and why these products had a great future. The UTEK recommendation came out in the July, 1997 newsletter, in the midst of a decade of unprecedented expansion for the sector. Perhaps Brinker was impressed enough with their enthusiasm and the fundamental story in the sector that he neglected to consider the appearance of a conflict of interest. Now, is that the better explanation, or was there a quid pro quo? We'll probably never know, but it is just way too cynical in my book to just assume the worst in the absence of actual evidence.
BTW, thanks for pointing out that DOW forecast. The S&P went up another 13% in the following eight months, but considering that this was pretty much in line with the performance of the preceding years, I don't think it would qualify as the market "skyrocketing." It would seem that Brinker's prognostications relative to the Dow and the S&P have been profitable from 1991 to the present, and he only got in trouble when he started dabbling in timing the NASDAQ. |
