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, Moneytalk and Marketimer
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: octavian who wrote (1575)10/13/2007 7:36:10 PM
From: Kirk ©Read Replies (1) of 2121
 
I never said it was catastrophic unless you lost confidence in Brinker as an honest advisor and did not add significantly to your holdings in March 2003. The KEY to MathJunkie's calculation is one MUST load up with something like 25% of the total portfolio with QQQQ AGAIN... after having a third of your portfolio (if you are a P1 subscriber) drop by 75%... how many loaded up again and still believed Brinker after he called for several counter trend rallies on the way down? Calling it a cyclical bull in a secular bear is not going to inspire many to follow him since his last attempt at a "counter trend rally" using the QQQQ was such a bust.

I have not met anyone who said they followed his advice to buy the QQQQs for 20 to 50% of cash reserves that had the confidence to follow him again in March 2003, but that may mean my sample size is too small.

You said you bought the QQQQ in October 2000 on Bob Brinker's recommendation. Did you buy the recommended amount in March 2003 as he recommended?

At least if he had the QQQQ on his official record and told his subscribers he was buying with his own money, as I do with my very volatile stocks that go down even more when they are out of favor, then people would have an easier time jumping in. But, technically, you are correct.

Not to forget, the real issue is properly accounting for QQQQ in his P1 means his P1 has 29.5% less money in it than he reports AND the annual return of P1 since inception underperforms the W5000 by 1.3% x nearly 20 years...
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News