I2,
In response to your post dated March 4, 1998, #3778, I would ask you kindly to reevaluate your conclusion. You said:
"It is evident that you have a bitter taste in your mouth when the subject turns to Bob Brinker. You seem to want to discredit him for some reason. Are you one of the Bad News Bears or financial advisors that Bob makes fun of on the show?"
First, I don't think you have any evidence, whatsoever, to support any of your allegations against me. I have been very clear that I endorse Bob's view on indexing. Furthermore, I think he offers outstanding advice in regards to financial matters. I don't understand how you get to the conclusion that I "have a bitter taste in (my) mouth when the subject turns to Bob Brinker". Please clarify and support your argument.
Second, ironically it seems that you are the one who wants to discredit me for some reason. I believe that the facts that I have posted are 100% accurate. If for some reason you disagree, then please address CLEARLY which points you believe are inaccurate and we will go from there. I believe that you are either purposefully trying to smear my creditability, a la Clinton, or you completely missed my point of contention. If in your rebuttals of my posts all you can do is to attack me personally, the messenger, and not the message, I will assume that you can't counter my posts with evidence of your own and that you have desperately fallen back on weak attacks on me in an effort to deflect the facts and the focus of this matter. Don't you know that people see right through that stuff.
Finally, when you said, "Whether or not Bob felt trouble brewing is a moot point,..." in post #3826, I couldn't disagree more. Whether or not Bob felt trouble brewing is the answer to whether or not Bob indeed has unique timing ability that is backed by his superb fundamental analysis of the situation or whether he is just a Spin Doctor. Bob has numerous times over the air given the impression that he got out of New Asia because of the pending crisis in the region. Furthermore, at ABC Radio's site on AOL, Bob answered me with hindsight on December 29, 1997 by saying:
"New Asia was eliminated from all Model Portfolios and the Recommended List effective July 11, 1997 at a price of $9.15 per share due to concerns about performance prospects in the Asian Theatre.
We reinvested the monies in international growth. We did not reinvest the monies in another Asian fund because we were not bullish on the Asian outlook. Since July 11, New Asia fund has declined 38% through December 29 inclusive. So far, it appears the decision to pull out of New Asia is a good one!"
This is completely inconsistent with what he said in his July newsletter. He said, "Rowe Price New Asia will be deleted from coverage effective July 11 due to lagging performance."
THEREFORE, I CONTEND THAT IF NEW ASIA HAD NOT HAD LAGGING PERFORMANCE, BOB WOULD HAVE NEVER DROPPED NEW ASIA FROM COVERAGE.
So, I2, if you want to dispute that point of contention then by all means go ahead. You are entitled to your opinion and I look forward to seeing what you come up with. But, please, don't start with your personal attacks again, it only discredits your own credibility.
Best Regards,
Rillinois |
