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: sea_biscuit who wrote (13093)	3/15/2001 1:02:06 PM
From: Rillinois	Respond to of 42835

Dipy, Re: people seem to forget that Brinker called the top. Well, let's not forget that he hedged quite a bit also. True he took money off the table very near the top, but he also positioned himself to be right if the market kept going higher. 1)The move originally was described as a tactical asset allocation move not a sell signal. 2)Bob recommended a high octane B2B fund close to the time he reduced his stock weighting. He was concerned about the internet mania, but he went ahead and recommended an internet play anyway???? 3)Recommended CTR's after he finally took a stand and said we were in a bear market. At this point why keep the remaining equity position (35%-40%) and why not preserve capital instead of going long a casino like sector???? 4)Bob kept his HOLD ratings on MSFT and VOD even though he always proclaimed there would be no place to hide in a bear market aside from money market funds and the such. My point is that Bob played his hand well from a marketing stand point. If the market would have kept going higher: 1)....he would have been talking about his tactical asset allocation approach versus a fully invested portfolio. The problem with this is asset allocation and risk adjusted returns should always be a part of weighing risk/return. 2)....he would have talked about this winning recommendation (B2B fund) ad nauseum. We actually saw some of this in the first part of the year. 3)...he would have held the QQQ's as a hedge. Perhaps this is why he did not sell QQQ's at 100 during CTR1. Maybe he was scared they could have gone on to new highs and he would have been left in the dust. Think about this one.....could you imagine what Bob would have said about someone trying to call Bull market CTR's (corrections in a bull market) throughout the 1990's that eventually didn't develop. 4)...he would have kept on talking about his split-adjusted cost basis for MSFT and VOD. I bet even Don Lane would have made an appearance telling us how much $1,000 invested in MSFT would be worth today. Best Regards. Rillinois

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (13093)	3/15/2001 3:34:55 PM
From: Tim Bagwell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42835

If the coming years witness a long secular bear market encompassing a few short-lived cyclical bull markets within it (like the 1966-1982 period), I think Brinker's advice will be even more valuable going forward Good point Dipy. In my view, a secular bear market has a good chance of becoming reality. In that case, you want someone like Brinker to guide you through the cyclical bulls. There's no one else I'd trust to get this right. Even then, Bob can't be expected to be right every time.