David,
You accuse Brinker of spin, but to be honest, I’ve seen a great deal of “spin” from yourself lately. Let’s look at two specific examples:
Example one:
1] You make a statement about Bob Brinker which is repeated here: “he has made as many horrible recommendations as he has made fantastic recommendations.”
2] Math responds by saying, “Care to document that assertion?” A very reasonable request given the original statement made by you.
3] You Respond by saying, “I don't really have time right now to go back and put them all here……” and then you go right to the QQQ, without a direct response to your original statement which again was “he has made as many horrible recommendations as he has made fantastic recommendations.”
4] Then you try to assert a position of expertise by saying, “I was like both of you.”. But you never addressed the original claim you made which again was , “he has made as many horrible recommendations as he has made fantastic recommendations” If you are such an expert about Brinker, then it shouldn’t be difficult for you to prove your original statement.
Example 2:
You made IMHO, a very strange post on 2/5/2008 on another SI Brinker discussion thread which was addressed to “Bob.” This, IMHO, was a combination of spin and spam. It’s spam because you included the statement, “…..my other newsletter which you can learn about by clicking on my profile or visiting the other silicon thread………” That’s spam. And, so far as we know, Bob is not on SI, and if he is, he obviously wishes to remain anonymous. If you know for fact that he’s here, then outing him isn’t the right thing to do --- see SI TOS, transmission of material invasive of another's privacy. But beyond that, you stated to Bob, “I am going to heed your advice and within a week, I will try to get our performance figures on theretirementadvisor.net published.” When exactly did Bob give this advice? Was it on his radio show? A week from tomorrow, 2 months will have passed since you posted that statement, and I don’t think your results have been posted. Further, if it takes this long for you to figure out what your results are, well that’s a fundamental problem with any newsletter.
You also stated, “One of the difficulties I have had is trying to gather all of the information from about 1000 newsletters (including alerts) that I have sent over the last 9 years so that I can provide performance figures from inception. When I have completed that daunting task, I will publish them publically on my discussion thread on SI. I promise you that, but it will take some time to go through. I intend to include every thing, not just cherry picking. “
Again, a week from tomorrow, 2 months will have passed since you stated this. One mark of a professional is following through on what you say you are going to do, so we hope you choose to publish this information soon. Oh, but you’re too busy publishing more newsletters. I don’t see how you can you justify publishing a newsletter complete with alerts etc, and not know your historical performance. I wonder how you can assure your readers that you know what you are doing based on past performance when you make buy calls like your recent buy call on the SP500. As I understand it, those who followed your SP500 buy advice either lost $$$$$ or made no money when they were stopped out.
So, before you make a direct statement calling Bob Brinker or anyone else “a true master at spin,” you might consider looking at your own actions, and how they look to others.
Cordially,
Midwest Investor |
