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: Lorne Larson who wrote (2548)	1/26/2002 6:54:35 PM
From: David Alon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Lorne, concerning NG prices, I can not see a recovery unless we have either a very very cold 2 months or an extremely hot summer. On the supply side, many are drilling much less and therefore, by next winter the supply/demand should be better.On the forward market, NG is trading close to $3. Companies that have a good hedge in place are sill going up, eg. AVN. Oil is another wild question, but I started buying again AY (their latest issue), as the other reits are now to high and the return to low. Good luck.

To: Lorne Larson who wrote (2548)	1/26/2002 9:48:48 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Did a little checking of past posts myself this morning. Found one from a certain Peter Panchyshyn (#1145) which stated: "Best across the board buying opportunity in the last couple of years". That was June 27/01. I note PGF was at 17.74 on that date, and now trades at 14.07. NCF was at 16.95 (split-adjusted) and is now at 12.04. PWI was at 8.45 and is now at 6.49. PVE was at 10.85 and is now 8.85 etc, etc, etc. ----------------- From my post # 2543 the following """""""----------- I have "attacked" those that have clearly misrepresented the facts. For one the major who attack me is with the buy-hold point A to point B instant in time,comparisons . Which as I told you. You could not even get right. THAT IS NOT WHAT I DO NOR IS IT WHAT I HAVE SAID I HAVE DONE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. Anyone who has attacked me has made the exact same point and mistake. But clearly it is an apples to oranges comparison. And it is a false comparison. But it is the only comparison they can make because if they did a proper look then they could not claim victory in the argument. They just hope that no one will be able to see the difference. The difference however is crystal clear especially given the amount of supporting fact and data I have countered it with. --------------------------- """"""" ---------------- Since I have stated numerous times that I accumulate on weakness ( and not strict buy-hold) your failed attempt at trying to compare apples to oranges and say it proves your case, simply just doesn't. AS USUAL. A buy hold from point A to point B time sequence example like you give shows buy-hold A to B results only. It does not show results for an accumulation strategy that has to start at some point in time. Joined together by several other successive points in time. All designed to lower ones cost base and or to take advantage of lower unit prices on the way down. Then to sit back and enjoy the rise. It comes as no surprise. That you do not include what I really do and then to incorporate the fact of a rise and how buying at the lower prices is of benefit Now with PGF having a high of $21.95 in 2001 a starting point to the accumulating strategy of around $17 would be an acceptable starting point according to my detailed method of accumulating on weakness. As the same would hold for NCF. ------------------ In fact the present prices are well off the lows posted in November and December. When you recommended the trusts in June many of us were suggesting that it might be wise to lighten up because oil and NG prices appeared to be weakening. You were very critical of this approach. While I have no problem with your buy and hold strategy, and agree that over the long-term it provides excellent returns, the "documented" evidence as you are so fond of saying, establishes that there is a better strategy. An investor who held the trusts in 1999, 2000 and the first part of 2001, sold in mid-2001, and is buying back in now will be substantially ahead of an investor who held continually during this period. ---------------- By just trying to turn the tables of the discussion from proving your case as I asked with documented evidence to you only doing a comparison to a strategy that is not mine (exclusive buy-hold) does not show your superior results, what and where are they. Your own failed attempt at trying to prove your superiorness resulted in a gain of $0.10 at the very best using what was documented . Taking off commissions of the activity would drive the return down lower. So low infact that depending on the amount of the trade it would make the whole exercise a waste of time. All this means is that your low less than 2% return would have to be followed by many numerous successes going forward. Your own documented other trades or shorts do not show these many many trades that are suppose to be occurring but only either more further losses (PWI - again we don't know how much you haven't provided them) unless of course you wish to invent many trades of only a few days duration to counter as you did for NCF. An activity I grilled you on now several times and you still haven't responded about. You recall the one where you demanded I post a retraction that said I claimed you stated you did trades or shorts of only a few days duration for superior gains which by asking for the retraction indicates that it was untrue and not something you did. But then later on in your one post you do state you do many such trades, shorts, for NCF for example and very frequently and yes for superior gains. WHICH IS IT ?????????????????? You can't demand someone retract saying you said you did that then state you do do it later, when it is convenient for you to do so. . Several losses occuring one after another add up to a big total loss for the period in question. Now take that big loss and your gain from selling out at the highs before the fall in june. And what do you have? Well its not superior thats for sure. And all these losses are all real and realized they can not be gotten back by the unit price rising. As in my case. YOUR NEXT TRADE HAS TO DELIVER and deliver bigger and bigger the more losses you have had AND THAT IS NOT A GUARANTEE AS YOUR POSTS DOCUMENT--------------------------- An investor who held the trusts in 1999, 2000 and the first part of 2001, sold in mid-2001, and is buying back in now will be substantially ahead of an investor who held continually during this period. --------------------- First and foremost I do not just hold continually. So this does not represent me as you seem to suggest. I accumulate during the weakness and my accumulating assures I buy near the lows. And enjoy the benefit of the rise when it comes. You talk here of someone buying back now. That is not you either. You both bought and traded and shorted during the period (mid 2001 to now) . And not all of those were gains some were losses , the documented gains were not superior. The documented losses may have been even more. Altogether the trading and shorting done has no guarantee of even a positive outcome in total. It could be a loss. If it is a loss (which is likely given your documented cases) than any benefit of someone who sold out mid 2001 disappears. The losses eat up the gains. So you see the person who at first seems substantially ahead really isn't. He hasn't captured at the lows, and will not benefit from a rise from those lows. He did not receive any high current income. And all his failed trading and the losses from that have eaten up his previous gains. Leaving him in a postion that is far from superior. And more than likely less than the accumulator when the final tally is done. ---------------------------- It's not a matter of "trading", ------------------ It most certainly is because trading is not guaranteed. There could be a loss. There could be many losses. And the gains when and if they come could be so small they fail to cover the losses. Leaving a net loss. ------------ it's a matter of acknowledging that oil and gas is a commodity and is therefore cyclical. If NG hits $10.00 again and/or oil hits $35.00 again, I'll be selling and even shorting again. ------------ All with no guarantee of positive results. As you seem to suggest a sign will not pop up that these are the highs just like there is no sign popping up at the lows. Your guarantee at hitting the exact highs and lows just aren't there. So your claim of guaranteed success just isn't there. Especially since your superior documented returns have been shown not to be there. ------------------- Are we to take it that you will not sell what you have now until ngas reaches $10 and oil hits $35 as you say .? What if it doesn't but falls before it reachs your levels to lower than they are now. You havent sold you have losses. But then thats when MAGIC comes in. You will magically know when the turn will happen and magically sell at the right time. That just doesn't happen. As your case with PWI shows . In that short term instant you were dead wrong you bought high and sold low at a loss. So much for your magic claims. ---------------- I'll buy back in when NG hits $2.00 and oil hits $18.00, as I have in fact been doing with PVE, AVN and AY over the past month. AVN at my average cost of $7.75 is a much better price than its $9.90 price at your stated "buying opportunity" on June 27, and PVE at my average cost of $8.25 is much better priced than its $10.85 price on that date. ------------------ And like your documented loss with PWI. Its just as equally likely that the price will fall below your cost you'll get scared and realize a loss. Your trade is not guaranteed. Just like it was not guaranteed with PWI when you bought it. Thinking because you were such a superior trader you could not lose but you did. Its documented. It happened at least once ( most probably many more) and we were led to believe it just could not happen . But it did. Or as with the documented short of which there is documented evidence your gain could be $0.10 or less than 2%. A loss and a 2% gain is not superior. And your not fooling anyone into believing it is. --------------------- I'm still a bit concerned that I'm buying in too early. Only a fool would not be at least somewhat concerned about the high NG storage levels, the possibility of Russian oil flooding the market, and the possibility of this being a secular recession. ---------------- A turn in these one way or other could impact a trader. Causing him to be at the wrong side at the wrong time. Resulting in a realized loss ---------------- I agree with you that these are not factors for someone taking your long-term approach to these trusts. However it is a consideration for anyone looking for an entry point - whether for the first time or as a cyclical investor. -------------- It is of no concern for an accumulator with a long term approach because unrealized losses just disappear and turn to gains with the cyclical rise of unit prices . It is not a consideration for an entry point because these points are determined by a verifiable method. You don't buy at the high ranges as I describe in # 1998. Concentrating on doing so at the low ranges and the average ranges. And benefitting from doing so. ---------------------- As a side-note I do not "trade" these trusts on the long side, except for some nice dividend stripping on SHN becauseit paid quarterly. Having now bought AVN, PVE and AY, I will hold them for a long time. I do trade on the short side when distributions are dropping, because as I stated in a previous post there is (was?) money to be made around the announcement and x-dividend dates. I have attempted to refrain from insults in this post as suggested by other posters. The tone of your response will dictate the tone of my responses in the future. Enter symbols or keywords for search: Symbol Lookup Subject Titles Only Full Text Go to Top Terms of Use Got a comment, question or suggestion? Contact Silicon Investor.