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.
Technology Stocks : A Bob Brinker Fan and Critic Club
QQQ 629.07+0.5%Oct 31 4:00 PM EDT
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Kirk © who wrote (113)8/13/2014 12:27:49 PM
From: Kirk ©Read Replies (1) of 123
 
Posts about Bob Brinker from elsewhere to save:

My reply:

Message 29668338

To: ETF1 who wrote (2779)8/13/2014 11:39:26 AM
From: Kirk ©1 Recommendation of 2782
Excellent post! If you got your data from past issues of MT, then look at those issues when the market bottomed in 2008/2009 and see what he said about dollar cost averaging... I seem to recall he took DCA off and said wait for a test of the 2009 low which never came so he finally got back into DCA when the market was up significantly from its 666 low. I don't think he identified a "buy level" until 1100 or so...

In the 1990s he under performed the markets due to poor fund selection and high expenses for the funds.

He currently shows higher than market returns since he and Dilbert don't count the QQQ advice that clearly was meant for cash reserves. He managed funds at that time were in the QQQs and their returns suffered. The most recent report in HFD shows he is under performing again and a big part of that is he sold his Nasdaq100 fund that he got into with cash reserves for model portfolios just before the NASDAQ greatly outperformed the markets. He was probably anticipating a big correction as he was advising DCA on weakness after that move.

As for integrity, the money management company that he advertised in his newsletter and used his name to advertise (I get some ads still via email) was sued for delivering less than advertised by Brinker returns. It looks like they settled but you can still find the original complaint. When I looked at the time frame, it appears to me that they couldn't get the advertised returns because they could not use cash to buy the QQQ near the bottom in 2003 and the claim says they were using loaded funds to make up for the fees they paid Brinker... or something similar.

BJ Group - Genworth Financial Class Action
and
reuters.com
UNDERPERFORMANCE
The plaintiffs claimed that Genworth's marketing materials touted the company's "exclusive partnership" with Brinker, in which it would implement Brinker's recommendations by selecting mutual funds for clients.
They contended that Genworth did not actually do that, causing their returns to trail those in Brinker's "Marketimer" portfolio in every calendar year from 2003 to 2008.
For example, in 2003 Brinker's portfolio allegedly returned 43.4 percent while a BJ Group portfolio earned 29.1 percent.
Meanwhile, in 2008, the year of the financial crisis, Brinker's portfolio allegedly fell 37.4 percent, while the BJ Group portfolio lost 39.6 percent.
To me, it seems simple that if you don't have as much cash to dump into the market in 2003 near the lows, then you can't get the higher than reported returns....
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