Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : The Justa & Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 1:48:00 PM
From: Hank Stamper	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15132

I have had similar thoughts, Justa. Here are some assumptions: --the external conditions for a bear-type pull back are in place --there is minimal to zero room--i.e., no conditions to support higher prices--for stock market growth --there are few signs of significant distribution at present The last assumption would be, I assume, a key element in the timing model that would light the "bear" lamp. So, my comments raise a question: Are there signs of distribution? I don't know. What would they be? What are the indicators of distribution? Can anyone answer this? With all best wishes, David Todtman

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 2:24:00 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15132

re >> Thoughts How does rotation sound? Bob's portfolio #1 had a banner year and it is loaded with internet heavy funds. (Almost funny in light of his strong warnings of valuation for the first 10 months of 1999). I believe this sector will get shaken out as many of us bought $500 power tools from Amazon and only paid $400 to have them delivered to our doorstep thanks to the generosity of the stockholders. This is a broken business model and only the very rich with deep pockets will survive the eventual shakeout. Even Laszlo said he is waiting out this year except for AOL which has been hit. A sector rotation of massive proportions, say internet stocks into semiconductor stocks (what I have bet on) may take the whole market sideways for a year as the dollars slosh from overvalued internet stocks to undervalued semiconductor stocks (LRCX is STILL only at a PEG of 1.0). A mutual fund timer can not take advantage of this and it is uncertain if the fund managers of the hot internet stock funds will see this.... so perhaps getting a nice rate of return on cash is a good risk/reward way for Bob to go until he gets a 20% correction to come back in on? This not an unreasonable way to play it with his massive audience. what do you think?

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 8:14:00 PM
From: Justa Werkenstiff	Respond to of 15132

Gramlich Quote Moreover, there is a potential problem with inflation targeting even in good economic times. If forecasting inflation is difficult, even forward-looking inflation-targeting central banks may respond to inflationary shocks too late to ward off inflation. Although there are several ways to forecast inflation, none may be that reliable. On one side, many analysts use econometric models, but these may have intrinsic problems in periods of significant structural shifts. The very nature of such shocks is that they are not easy to predict or model. On the other side, one could imagine constructing leading indicators of inflation, but the experience until now is that not many of these are reliable either. One could also rely on market expectations of inflation, survey evidence, or other forecasts of inflation. But if models are not working well and there are not many reliable leading indicators, it is not clear how much information is contained in these other forecasts. Without models or leading indicators, even forward-looking inflation- targeting strategies may not work as well as advertised." bog.frb.fed.us

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 8:51:00 PM
From: Gary D	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15132

Justa, re:"There is one issue in my mind that sticks out at this point -- namely, is Brinker calling for a bear market or is this more of a risk/reward asset allocation decision? Brinker discusses the root causes of a bear market but does not explicitly call for one. And, as we know, if Brinker was calling for a bear market he has said he would go to 100% cash and he has not done so here. Moreover, if he were calling for a bear, shorting the market would have been a discussed option and this option was not mentioned in the newsletter. So, perhaps, with a 60% cash allocation he currently see the risks of a bear market at 60% at this time? Hope we get clarification this weekend." I think I recall Bob saying that he would not predict a bear market until a decline is already underway. At the onset of a decline he does not expect to be able to distinguish between an intermediate correction and a bear market. So since a decline hasn't begun yet, it's way too early to be predicting a Bear. In light of the above, we could recast your question as "Is Brinker calling for either a bear market or intermediate correction, or is this more of a risk/reward asset allocation decision?" It's my impression that Bob might predict "either an intermediate correction or a bear market", and not go to 100% cash until the actual Bear call is made sometime later.

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 9:18:00 PM
From: Justa Werkenstiff	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15132

Greenspan Speech It's the business cycle again with a focus on the wealth effect: bog.frb.fed.us

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (11100)	1/13/2000 10:00:00 PM
From: Lars	Respond to of 15132

Justa, >>> And, as we know, if Brinker was calling for a bear market he has said he would go to 100% cash and he has not done so here. Moreover, if he were calling for a bear, shorting the market would have been a discussed option and this option was not mentioned in the newsletter. So, perhaps, with a 60% cash allocation he currently see the risks of a bear market at 60% at this time? Hope we get clarification this weekend. >>> I, too, hope for further clarification. I thought any expected decline more than 20% was considered a bear market; thus, why wouldn't there be a move to 100% cash.