John... thank you for your comments.
First and foremost, I do not question your right to read this thread or even, to post here. That goes whether you own DGIV shares or not. I am gratified to hear that you like the DD done here and that you agree in the fundamentals of the co., management and market sector.
As to the issue of trust... that is indeed difficult. I think we are born as natural "trusters," but our society (as a whole) quickly teaches us that trait needs to be suppressed in order to survive and prosper. This is particularly true when money is at stake. By the time that we are adults, distrust most likely has seeped so deeply into the core of our being that it seems a natural reaction.
There are tons of examples in which money has been the catalyst of turning basically good men into not so good men. "The Treasure of Sierra Madre" (Humphrey Bogart) is one of my favorite movies and is a wonderful study on just this behavior.
The scenario that you painted is certainly possible, but I think not plausible. It sounds as if you have good reason to, at least initially, doubt the intentions of the leadership of this board (as I suspect that you would include macker and Rocketman) in your scenario.
BTW, when I first came to the board, I had similar thoughts creeping through my mind.
Do you know what I did? I did DD on all 3 of them - not in depth... just looking at all the posts that I could find. (I also didn't know enough to know that it might be called that). Not being a member of SI made that difficult to find them on other threads, so I read every single post on all 4 of the DGIV threads. Know what I found? They were all very consistent in the personalities displayed on the board. As a self-stylized storyteller myself, I know that it is tremendously difficult for a person to stay in character over a period of several weeks. Eventually, a person will "reveal" themselves. I didn't see that at all; though, there was still some nagging doubt.
I became a member of SI when Byron first came out with the idea of the "Cloaking Device." You know... going icognito. That upset me! The reason that I was monitoring the thread was because of the great DD and the apparent "inside information" revealed. It also appeared that we suddenly had an episode of being "out of character." I paid my SI fee and protested loudly (for me anyway). Once I was able to gain access to looking at all their recent posts, I did so. I didn't even see them posting on other threads (at that time). Posts subsequent to the infamous "Cloaking Device" message have been consistent with the personality presented; hence, no revelation there. I've traded PM's with Byron, Rocketman and macker. Those PM's are very consistent with the personalities presented to the thread, though in honesty the PM's with macker have been short & sweet and non-revealing. I am not in a position to do more DD than this (like calling them) because I don't really want to intrude. I also don't have the access to certain resources that might allow me to gather other information about them (gladly, this is not available to most people).
All this consistency leads me to believe "what you see is what you get."
What do I see? A group of 3 individuals for whom the mantle of leadership does not rest comfortably. Individually, each probably has a different comfort level with that leadership and so, they react differently. Sometimes, its a great lot of fun to be the leader and they revel in it. At other times, the burden of responsibility (perceived over other financial conditions AND the constant questioning) becomes a bit overwhelming and they react: weariness is what mostly comes through. Others just flat deny that they are one of the leaders.
That behavior is NOT indicative of a group of sharks. That is such a complex and subtle set of behaviors that they would indeed have to be very, very good con men to pull it off.
In fact, I would invite anyone that has observed behavior in any of the 3 folks mentioned above that was not in-line with what I have previously stated to share with us. I think you will find NOT ONE person coming forward. The scenario that you present is conjecture and is possible. The information we have available; however, refutes the premises and subsequent hypothesis.
Now, do I believe that they profit from their positions. Oh yes, I certainly do, but I believe that it is restricted to being within the guidelines that they themselves have set. Do I believe that macker buys a stock before (or shortly after) posting the pick. You betcha! He'd be a damned fool not to. Do I begrudge him these additional profits... Not at all!
One of my favorite figures from history is Alexander Hamilton. He believed that George Washington should have been made King instead of President. Why? Because he felt that King's were corrupt. If the leader were put into a situation whereby they could profit handsomely from making decisions, they were going to do so. The young nation's financial health was closely tied to the financial well-being of our forefathers (and foremothers). It just so happened that Martha was, I believe, the wealthiest person in the colonies and George was no slouch either. Making them prosper would allow for the prosperity of the rest of the nation. Now, I differ with Mr. Hamilton in that I believe that people will be guided within the confines of their mores, values and character. I do not believe that "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
The character of the 3 leaders has already been discussed. They will behave within those guidelines. All we need to do to profit from there leadership and expertise is to tie our wagons to theirs.
My apologies to anyone of they feel that this was a cold-hearted analysis of the folks (our leaders) on this thread. But, that is the nature of the discussion. I also apologize for talking about you guys "in front of your back." These are my opinions and are the expression of a great deal of thought over the last month - because I too, was very afraid (initially) that I had been scammed. I have no such feelings now.
John, I was going to PM all of this to you, but again, I believe that well thought out dissension and discussion is a very healthy thing. But, with that said, perhaps if you want to continue the discussion, it should be through PM's as we don't want to boar the poor folk here.
Lazarus, putting the fuzzy slipper back on and thinking noon will never get here! [_]3
P.S. RM, now that's twice you've been told you've been DD'd over the course of the last day! <g> |
