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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (12462)	2/28/2001 10:57:43 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

>>"It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact the QQQ is not in the 90's but is now 49." >The problem with that theory is that the decision not to give short term trading advice on the radio was made and announced long before the October QQQ play was started. "It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that he told listeners on the radio in what sounded like a panic to sell at $84 only to see it rebound back to the $100's?" I think he has a long history of trying to reduce the amount of specific advice he gives (for Intel, UTEK, QQQ, etc.) as it is hard to keep the image. He blew it big time with the First CT trade telling the listeners to tune in each week and he'd tell them when to sell as the QQQs were over $100 at that time. Sure he made a profit of $2 for all, but those that were ready to sell at $100 and waited for his advice won't forget. IF news leaked out to the lawn mowing crowd about telling callers to the newsletter that he was "comfortable" with people paying $86 for QQQ and that QQQ played a rock and dropped to $49 in a matter of months... his image would really take a hit. He does pretty well for the mowing the lawn crowd to just take general investment advice questions on the air. The problem is many of us like to hear more and he is losing that part of his audience as he is avoiding talking about things he might turn out to be wrong on, ESPECIALLY now that he is on a major cold streak. We listen to MANY shows for the variety of opinion and the way he is hedging himself is making listening less useful.

To: Math Junkie who wrote (12462)	2/28/2001 11:04:27 AM
From: lightwave51	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

<<The problem with that theory is that the decision not to give short term trading advice on the radio was made and announced long before the October QQQ play was started.>> Even though this trade has been a bad one as of this point, if all his buy and sell positions are put on the air there is little need for a newsletter.

To: Math Junkie who wrote (12462)	2/28/2001 11:10:06 AM
From: geode00	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

The problem with that theory is that the decision not to give short term trading advice on the radio was made and announced long before the October QQQ play was started. If my memory serves, I agree. He actually said that he moves markets with his words and that showed up in his first CTR on the radio. I suspect that the reason he has refused to take questions, not only about QQQs, but also about CTRs is because the Qs have gone from 80+ to the 40s in about 4 1/2 months. If he really moves markets with his words, why doesn't he bolster his ego and get on his soapbox about the NAS100 being severely oversold? If he tells everyone to back up the truck on the Qs because they are going 80+ by June, which of his listeners wouldn't buy? If he loved it in the 80s why isn't he taking every penny he (and others) have and shoving them into Qs in the 40s? Where is he? That would move the market, long-suffering subscribers would be able to get out, listeners would be thrilled and everything would be fine. Why doesn't he do that?