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: mark calgary who wrote (2601)	2/8/2002 9:13:32 AM
From: Goldberry	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11633

My goodness I have P.P. on ignore so don't know what he said to get you so riled up but I love the "backwater prairie" touch. I was sorely tempted to go back and look at his posts but it is such a treat to read these threads when messages originating from him simply say "This message is ignored" By the way those of you on this thread that are into the oil and gas trusts or stocks should take the time to follow the following subject thread Subject 3540 especially posts by Richard Saunders who unlike Peter knows what he is talking about when it comes to oil and gas related issues.

To: mark calgary who wrote (2601)	2/8/2002 8:01:27 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

You arrogant backwater prairie hick. ---------- Whats the matter all the facts and data about and concerning the past history of these trusts got you all bent out of shape because you can't counter with anything to them other than insults. Insults don't win arguments. Insults don't provide any meaningful content what soever. That you and Lorne and Graham and Stan have to resort to such is just so juvenile. But it is to be expected. ------------------------------ Peter - put up actual #'s of shares held and opening and closing balances for the year 2001 and " let the board decide just how well you have done". ------------------ Those on the board who have taken the time to look at the method I follow which I detailed in post # 1998 and also much earlier. Those who have looked to find the historical data to back test that method. And verify it for themselves have already decided how well the method works and how well I have done. FACTS LIKE THAT SPEAK VOLUMES. Unlike the magic that you fellow traders use which can not be back tested which can not be verified. Which all should just take your UNDOCUMENTED WORD FOR. -------------------------- ----------------- I direct you to the post # 2527 """""""""""""Peter, give it up , you know you have already won the argument when they start calling you names and they did that long ago. Your strategy works, who cares what the others do ? """""""""""""""""""""""" -------------------- Don't bother with one of your long winded replies... ---------------- I will reply as I like. That you have a problem with FACTS. That you have a problem with doing GRADE SCHOOL MATH. THAT YOU HAVE A PROBLEM LOOKING UP REAL PAST DATA. THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM NOT MINE. My replies are meant for those that find them of use. That you don't is GREAT. YOUR DOCUMENTED "SUCCESSES" here in this forum speaks for itself. OH RIGHT I FORGET YOU DON'T HAVE ANY. TOO BAD ---------------------------------- YES OR NO WILL DO Mark Oh and by the way "My holdings have been posted way back to my post # 46, dated 1998 And onward and ongoing where I have stated I accumulate on weakness. And have a rather large and extensive holding ( number of units ). Thats DOCUMENTED. ------------------ No it isn't - you have never told us how many units you hold - you have said how many you bought at times, but not how many you hold in total. ----------------------- Well gee I detail a method. I Tell I accumulate on weakness following the ranges I set out in that method. I have a post dating back to 1998 which states I have done that since that time and from the very beginnings of 3 of the longest trusts. Is your understanding of simple math so lame as you cannot figure that out. Thats 4 years of documented here in and almost 20 since when these first came out. Does your understanding of simple mathematics then seem to suggest that I have 10 units of ERF or 10 units of PGF or 10 units of REF or of the other 9 trusts I hold. If that is your understanding of simple math then there is no choice but to call you a MORON. And I can see why it is you have absolutely no documented evidence to show your claimed successes. -------------------------------------- ---------------------- And as you so kindly have put above """""""you have said how many you bought at times, but not how many you hold in total."""""""""""" Is it your suggestion that my total is somehow less than what I have stated I have bought at times. If it is then you really are a MORON ------------------ Put up or shutup, ------------------ At least when I attack someones claims. I do so with simple math. I do so with documented facts. I do so with real past numbers. THAT ALL CAN CHECK ON. At least I detail a method. A method which uses simple math which can be verified with the past data... YOU and LORNE and others provide MAGIC and the STATEMENT that this magic works each and every time. And that this magic is far superior and gives superior returns. THE PROBLEM IS WITH YOUR MAGIC IT CAN'T BE TESTED IT CAN"T BE VERIFIED.. UNTIL YOU AND YOUR SIDE CAN DO AS I HAVE DONE PROVIDE A TESTABLE AND VERIFIABLE METHOD THEN IT IS YOU WHO MUST PUT UP OR SHUT UP. Of course if your just too stupid to do that well then that is quite understandable and is well supported by your lack of documented evidence. As joe average here has already figured out. ------------------------------------------------------- or are we to learn that your holdings are actually puny as compared to what you have relentlessly bragged about. ---------------- The key problem with your sides argument is that to prove it you try to turn the argument to my side. To do apple to oranges comparisons. That doesn't work. As I told Lorne all I have to do is show by your sides documented failures that your side doesn't work. That its not superior. And then ask Joe average here if he wants the same thing to happen to him. Or worse since he is not the expert you guys claim you are and your getting such losses or pathetic 1% gains. ------------------ -------------- What you , who have not gone through and tested my method thinks, is of no concern to me. What is, is that I get that endorsement from those that do look at it. My documented activities (trades, accumulates) here beat your undocumented ones hands down ------------- -------------- That you only show up to hurl your insults like the last few posts of yours here show. Whats the matter not good enough or smart enough to offer the others here anything but that. Again thats what the documented facts show. And thats all the others see. SO BE MY GUEST KEEP THEM COMING ------------------

To: mark calgary who wrote (2601)	2/8/2002 10:11:03 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

you have never told us how many units you hold - you have said how many you bought at times, but not how many you hold in total. ----------------- Seems I recall you yourself had put up a listing of some of your trading activities in a previous posting. Showing unit prices and how many units. The problem with your numbers was that they in no way whatsoever corresponded to any sort of documented post where you had said you had done that (trade) at that time. Meaning that the trades you said you had made could not be verified. They were made up. Now as you so kindly say yourself above """"""" you have said how many you bought at times, but not how many you hold in total."""""""""""" Now to give you a quick course in simple math. To find a total add up the how many, at the times indicated and you have your total . If you have a problem with that you could take the info to your local grade school and the kids would be pleased to help you. And while your there ask what accumulate means. It simple means if you buy 5 then at another time you buy 5 more you now have 10. If you do that over a period of time then each time you just keep adding that to the previous total. Take your time with this I know it all must be so hard for you to take in all at once. Just try not to get frustrated. ------------------ are we to learn that your holdings are actually puny as compared to what you have relentlessly bragged about. ---------------- Now the good thing about detailing a method and being able to back test that method is that you can do your own what if scenarios on the data. A what if scenario is like yours and Lornes FANTASY STORIES but with the important difference that they use real numbers real past data and show real past results. You can also do real time as with the last 9 months of posts here show. So with the method over the long term of the data (near 20 years) or more shorter term ( from 1998 to now , as per when my postings here started ) do what if scenarios of buying 1000 units (or whichever you like) at each interval within the desired ranges ( low range and average range ) when these present themselves. Now with all of these when at a high range look at how well you would have done. When at the low ranges keep an eye to the total units accumulated and the income these generate each month. Be sure to keep a careful eye to the monthly distributions. If you wish you could further make it like what I have done by utilizing leverage as I indicated in a previous post ------------ I know for the next few weeks your going to have a real time just figuring out what a total is and what accumulate means but once you have the basics down pat the rest should follow ----------- Ahh heck, who are we kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. You have neither the brains nor the balls to carry this out. Best you just stick to denial of the facts. And stick to making your undocumented , unsupported, and unverifiable claims of superiority. Just too bad not too many are falling for it. ----------