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: mister topes who wrote (13317)	4/19/2000 6:01:00 AM
From: Justa Werkenstiff	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15132

don: I asked the author of that post (formerly 13311) that linked the questionable material to have the post removed as a personal favor to me. I did not wish to discuss the poster's right to link the questionable material with the poster. But that seemed to be first on foremost on the poster's mind. That was not the issue. I asked only as a favor to one who has openly provided a forum to the poster to link his for-profit site at will when such posts could be easily viewed as spam which happens to be a term of use violation. I had even worked to provide a link to his site at the opening of this thread. I was extremely disappointed that my request was rejected. Nevertheless, the post has been removed through my own efforts. We try to run a civil forum here and, while the offending poster may be many things, references to him as "scum of the earth" is something that is better left unsaid.

To: mister topes who wrote (13317)	6/11/2000 11:16:00 AM
From: Allan Harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15132

Re: scum of the earth I was deeply saddened Saturday to listen to Moneytalk and the first few callers supporting the DOJ persecution of Bill Gates and Microsoft. They claimed to be long time listeners of Moneytalk and if the goal of Moneytalk is to propagate the cumulative acquisition of financial education for it's listeners, based on these callers, it appears to be failing. It is not my intention to get into the details of this travesty or engage in argumentative rhetoric with the morons on the other side. Rather, I am my wondering aloud by this post whether Brinker might address these calls on his show today. We know that Bill Flannigan is dull, but he is not stupid. Yet he refused to challenge these idiots yesterday and in so doing gave respectability to these clueless imbeciles that were so full of hatred for America and capitalism that they had no idea of the dangers to liberty are beginning to flow from the actions of that napoleonic rat-bastard and his blood-on-her-hands-burn-them-out political hack of a boss who makes those other crooked Attorney General's Mitchell and Meese look like statesmen. Shame on you Bill Flannigan. You had the microphone and refused to stand up to ignorance. Or maybe you did, but after about the first 20 minutes of these vomit-from-hell calls, I switched to our local PBS radio station playing some opera..some friggin' opera, rather then endure any more shame. As for Bob Brinker, we disagree on many things and on many levels, but I suspect not on this. You influence a lot of people and you have an opportunity this afternoon to clarify a few things about liberty, capitalism, socialism and little rat bastards that pose a greater threat to our future, to the future of technology, of success, of the coming biological immortality, of a better life for the generations to come, then any business cycle or interest rate czar could ever fathom. You know it and in a few hours, you will have the microphone. A

To: mister topes who wrote (13317)	4/8/2001 6:52:07 PM
From: Boca_PETE	Respond to of 15132

MEGA KUDOS to BOB BRINKER for warning Moneytalk Program listeners on Jan 20, 2001 (2-1/2 months ago) to check their money funds for holdings of commercial paper issued by Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric (now bankrupt). I did that then and closed two money funds because the fund family gave me an unclear response to my pointed questions. Only kept funds that clearly said they had zero such holdings. One typical unacceptable blow-off response I got was "don't worry, we guarantee the fund $1 NAV or we'd be out of business in one day". The problem with that answer is that when pressed for an answer, they would not specify when money is placed into the money fund to replace the guaranteed worthless commercial paper (ie. PG&E). It is of paramount importance how and when (if ever) the loss from worthless commercial paper is funded. Does the management company replace the loss with new investable money - Immediately ? - As investors withdraw money from the money fund in the amount necessary to get to $1.00 NAV vs. actual NAV including the loss. - Over some other prescribed arbitrary period. - Never since the loss is deducted from future fund earnings over some arbitrary period. Obviously, every day the money replacement is not made, is another day the worthless paper earns no income and acts as a drag on overall money fund performance. P