Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host 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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: pigstuff who wrote (22506)	7/25/2006 10:10:41 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) of 42834

>>>He may FEEL that his retirement is ruined, but that's his opinion. >What planet are you from? He may "FEEL" ruined AND THAT IS ONLY HIS OPINION???? Is there no limit to your bs and spin? FACT: Many, many FEEL their retirements were ruined following Brinker in that they lost more money than anyone in retirment should and they gave up on him before his good call in 2003 that would have helped them make SOME of it back. I've constructed many retirement portfolios for articles, newsletters and friends. If you work through the math, they are designed to have very little downside volatility because retired folks will "FEEL their retirement is ruined" if they suffer a major loss such as 20%. I can't post tables with the current Suite101 managment's changes to the site, so I've not updated these articles, but I do cover them in my newsletter. The "Core Conservative" portfolio that is 50:50 equities fixed has only had two down years in the last 7 (Yes, I started it in 2001, but I give data back a few more years so people can see the volatility). In 2001, it lost 0.55% and in 2002 it lost 3.74%, then it gained 15.88% in 2003. Now compare that max loss in 2002 of 3.74% to anyone following Brinker who put 20% of their 100% that was in cash reserves into QQQQ. (Brinker said on the radio in the summer it was OK to go 100% to cash, especially if all in IRA type accounts.) That 20% was down as much as 75% in the worst year at a time money funds were only paying 1%. They probably had back to back 10% down years before 2003 gained them some back. To many, the two 10% down years would be "a ruined retirment." Why don't you ask Mr Math Junkie to run the math for Brinker's P3 for 2001 and 2002 to see what sort of total downside volatility their portfolios suffered with the full 30% of cash reserves applied to QQQQ in the 80's?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next