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: Lorne Larson who wrote (3024)	3/25/2002 12:00:23 AM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) of 11633

Let's assume I bought PWI at $7.00. It drops to $6.00. I hold it and it returns to $7.00. (the Peter approach to trusts). --------------- Sorry but the Peter approach is to buy more and a lot more on weakness all the way down . Where in this is what I really do. Again it is not there. Not at all ------------ I am break-even at that point. -------------- If you did like I do and say I do you would have bought at $5.80 and lots too. With it going back to $7 and over what does that do to the return. You really are an amateur. You have lowered your cost base substantially by accumulating on weakness and the rise and the returns from that show more than break even. Such a simple concept and you can't even get it. And you are suppose to get the more complicated for superior gains I doubt it. As your other documented evidence shows (erf short for one) --------------- Assume instead that I bought PWI at $7.00, it drops to $6.00. Instead of holding I buy the same number of shares of another trust at $6.00. It goes to $7.50 (which is what I did with PVE but I've simplified the numbers for you, because you're a simpleton). How in the hell, you complete fool, can the 1st situation be better than the 2nd???!!! ----------------- Because you accumulate more and much more of the original first trust at the lows . You do not have that first loss because you never sold it. Your cost base is now much lower with the accumulating. And you do not have fees to pay which reduce your returns further. As always your loss just magically doesn't count, the costs of the trades doesn't count. Well they do count. Add these all up and subtract them from any gains you see with the second trust. And then look to that accumulating of the first trust at the lows and the gains from that that again you do not count. Must be nice to be a trader where you can just ignore all your costs and losses and just show your gains. Well thats not how it goes. --------------- ---------------- And what happened to that example of yours where your next trade after a loss goes from $10 to $100 I don't see it like in that last exchange. Good of you not to include it this round. It was just so far fetched as to be laughable--------------

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next