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: Allan Harris who wrote (11540)	1/30/2000 2:22:00 PM
From: Digger Sacket	Respond to of 15132

>>> He told a caller on Saturday who was completely out of the market to dollar cost average back in up to the 40% allocation. This just doesn't add up to a bear call. >>> Being 1/2 in and 1/2 out just makes a bull with a bare bottom. Or is it a bear full of bull???? Whatever the animal, still a great call. Digger

To: Allan Harris who wrote (11540)	1/30/2000 11:03:00 PM
From: Mark Pritikin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15132

I believe Bob did not go 100% cash because there was too much risk in making that call. With 40% in the market, he can claim victory even if the market goes up based on "risk adjusted return". If Bob went 100% cash and the markets still rallied, he would quickly lose his audience and become one of those "bad news bears" that he makes fun of. Kudos to Bob for his timing call, but for those of us who follow him closely, we all know Bob has a way of playing both sides of the fence.

To: Allan Harris who wrote (11540)	1/31/2000 8:20:00 AM
From: Allan Harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15132

This just doesn't add up to a bear call I respectfully disagree. Although I did not hear much of Saturday's show, I was able to hear the first full two hours of Sunday's show. Brinker has most certainly made a bear call, notwithstanding his refusal to use the S word and his inexplicable 40% weighting in equities. Sunday's message was pretty damn clear, "It's market timing, stupid!" (My words, not his...his bear call, not mine). I don't know what changed if anything since he first described this move as a change to risk-averse asset allocation. Maybe he saw that the markets weren't going to collapse as his Sell signal rang the exit bell; maybe he was emboldened by the last week's declines and the kudos he has received both on-line as well as on air Sunday; or maybe I just misread his earlier descriptions of what he was doing and why he was doing it. Whatever the case, Sunday's show is now archived and no doubt will be presented as evidence at some future date, in this forum and/or others, by fans and/or detractors, as proof positive that he either got it right, or wrong. A

To: Allan Harris who wrote (11540)	2/3/2000 11:43:00 AM
From: Rillinois	Respond to of 15132

Allan P. Harris, If we are going to raise our glasses in tribute, there are a lot of reasons to honor the man... Cheers! It's been a great experience. BTW, regarding Bob's tactical asset allocation strategy where he makes 70% of a 10% up move and avoids most of the downside in a 20% down move. Isn't this the idea behind general asset allocation? By diversifying between stocks, bonds and cash you can get most of any up move with less risk while not fully participating on any down move. What's your opinion of taking this to another level? (asset allocating within an equity allocation) It seems to me that if one was properly allocated in the first place, they can already say that they will participate in most of the upside and avoid most of the downturns. Because of this I tend to believe that the reason for the shift is not for a strategical asset allocation, but for Bob to be able to have an "out" in the event the market runs away from him. Best Regards. Rillinois