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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1832)	11/8/2001 6:43:18 PM
From: Lorne Larson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

stan: Forget the guy. I've had him on full ignore for a month and now find the site quite enjoyable. I decided the guy had no credibility after it became apparent that he had no idea that Canadian producers quoted their NG sales in Canadian (not U.S.) dollars. Even after about 5 posters directed him to sites that proved him wrong he refused to acknowledge that he could possibly be wrong. Truly one of the most egotistical personalities I have encountered on any site. Blast away Peter. You're still on ignore and will remain forever on ignore.

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1832)	11/8/2001 6:54:47 PM
From: David Culver	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

My two cents is no one strategy works buy and hold worked well for riocan but I also held some hotel trusts much to long. I think your tax situation is also an important consideration concerning when to sell.

To: stan_hughes who wrote (1832)	11/8/2001 7:37:58 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Dear threadmeister David - Be forewarned, The Guru here has just pronounced his invincibility and seems bent on taking on all challengers, however puny we may be. -------- I challenge those that make claims or statements to provide supporting evidence. That is all. I detail my methods strategy and provide data and data sources as well as my own buys and positioning. All is out in the open for all to see confirm and verify for themselves. It is documented. That your side when asked for more info and or more data to back up your statements fails to do so. Resents that anyone would ask for such and then resorts to name calling and insults as proof. This is a discussion forum. A discussion means to bring points up bring support to those points and to counter those with points and support with more of your own. You don't want a discussion you just want everyone to believe in a blanket statement that trading is superior. You don't want to have to defend it. Myself and others here have a right to expect you to deliver on that discussion. ------------------- Perhaps you should consider renaming the thread "Peter's Patronizing Paradise", or "The Buy & Hold Til You Grow Old Club", or something else more consistent with the Guru's self-approved singular point of view. That might help cut down on any contrary points of view cluttering up the message list. ------- Contrary to your beliefs I welcome points of view. But views that are supported by facts or actions. I have asked again and again for some facts for some support of your claims. I don't get any. Anyone asks me and I deliver. Wheres the data to support a buy hold accumulate,? I gave where to find it. Wheres the data to support a trading strategy or specifically your superior trading strategy none are forth coming EVER. ------------------------------ I think it would also help orient visitors to the flavor of the thread if you would amend the original post to reflect Peter's demand that posters must report all their trust trades to him personally for price verification or be dismissed as nefarious charlatans. ---------- Very few people have come out with statements of superior returns from trading. Very few have come out to completely denounce a buy hold accumulate strategy. And then to top that off provide very little in the way of evidence to support any of their claims. You have and a few others. I only ask that you provide the evidence I ask for. The others here present news or info there is no need for them to report any of their trades. They don't make outrageous claims then run off when asked to explain. It was you who in this discussion stated "your superior returns". You made that part of the discussion. I only ask that you back that up. That you can't or won't tells volumes. --------------------------------------- I went back and checked the original post and somehow this requirement does not appear in the preamble - probably just some kind of oversight on your part.