Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Peter W. Panchyshyn who wrote (3006)	3/24/2002 8:25:23 PM
From: Tommy D	Read Replies (1) of 11633

Now, now Peter, you criticize everyone else for getting nasty but you seem to be just that in your response. Please be civil. 25% out as to the length of holding your investments is just math. You initially said you had been following your successful investment strategy for close to 20 years. I pointed out that royalty trusts had been around for 16 years and you indicated that 16 is close to 20 years. Well 20 years is 25% more than 16 years (ie. 4 out 16) so the number is not out of thin air but rather is based upon the facts stated in your post. In your recent post you state: "Just to add, all you have shown is that the trusts as they ARE have been around since 1986. Which is 16 years ago. And as I said close to 20 or two decades. You also fail to consider the evidence that some of the oldest ones were first around as mutual funds for years prior to that. Which definitely makes it 20 years or more. Look to Royal Trust Energy Trust Fund prior to 1986 which became Westrock Energy Income which was then managed by Enerplus. Where from there it still existed as Westrock Energy Income and then which later was consolidated taken over into Enerplus. Again as I stated you just don't have the facts straight. And that is what is really amusing. So what you have shown is nothing. AS USUAL. ---------------" Last night you stated: "2002 - 1986 = 16 years. 16 years is close to 20 years is it not. If not then my apologies for the error and will in future for clarities sake say only 16. I realize it must be a very big deal. Though I cannot understand why. And in fact some started out as mutual funds first so have a longer history. If the facts are of interest to you." Last night you confirmed that you invested for 16 years. Now it is 20 years. So what is it Peter. Many people might think that the longer the success in an investing strategy the more credibility there is to the particular investing system or strategy and therefore, might conclude the you are touting. I accept that perhaps it was an honest error on your part but perhaps you should do the same thing when criticizing other people's positions because anyone can make an error in posting or recollection or even in their opinion. Accept that and life will be much easier. In any event, I don't propose to waste any more of the thread's time on this issue as I know you will want the last word whether it is after this posts or many more. TommyD

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next