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 (3023)	3/24/2002 11:43:07 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

You know I think that " arrogant prairie hick " got caught LYING. Not just being ARROGANT, but LYING!!!! ------------------ Whats the matter can't do anything but name call and insult. I have presented real historical data and a testable method.(accumulate on weakness). I countered all of Tommy's feeble attempts. Look for yourself at the evidence that those trusts were around that long ago as mutual funds. You won't just like you won't look to the method or the historical unit price data. And until you do. Your blowing nothing but steam. Whats the matter documented evidence got your tongue. Or is it a case of no balls and no brains to do the looking at the sources and the simple math ---------------- Peter accused me of lying about my trades, and I even offered to fax him the trade tickets - what did I get - just another load of his crap. So - What do you say little man - want to fax someone your trade tickets to prove you were actually in those STOCKS as you claim - even pick anyone you want. THAT IS the only DOCUMENTATION that counts now that we can't trust you not to EXAGERATE. If we can't trust what you write, perhaps you are done here on SI. ----------------- I'll let the documented post of a handbag where he says my method is backed by considerable historical data. Message 17228219 Read it and weep. So I guess that must mean that I am not done. Or would you like similar posts as confirmation . What a cry baby!!!!!!! ------------- What does everyone else think? Even though Tommy gave him an honorable out ( which by the way I would not ), the fact that he is whining so hard about it suggests that he has gotten his peepee caught in the toilet seat. Maybe we should take a vote or do a show of hands. --------------------- Sure we could do that or just go through the already posted and see for yourself. As I just did with a handbag's. Unless you cry babies are going to the source of the data I provide and counter with that some numbers and math of your own. These attempts of yours are just so laughable. And so easily shown for what they are. From a bunch of sorry they missed the boat amateurs who claim to be experts. ----------- Mark Thoughts ?

To: mark calgary who wrote (3023)	3/24/2002 11:55:39 PM
From: Lorne Larson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Lying Peter lies all the time. He said awhile back I was net short the trusts, when he knew damn well I had posted in early February that I was 80% long, because he studies all my past posts in great detail. This from a coward, who as you say, brags continually about his buy and hold strategy, but refuses to state what he holds so we can check his record against reality, and hasn't indicated a recommendation on anything in 6 months. He's not ever going to leave this site, I expect. However he's going to have to put up with me, because I'm not going anywhere either.

To: mark calgary who wrote (3023)	3/26/2002 1:59:08 AM
From: Tommy D	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11633

Mark, I tried to give Peter a way out. He confirmed in his first post that he invested for 16 years. All he had to do was to say he had acquired the trusts as mutual funds prior to that time. He did not. He then reverses field the next day and then attacks me for stating what was in his posts, not mine. It is a curious rationale that Peter operates on. Because he says it is so, it is. He refers to facts that support his position but how does one support over the internet their investing pattern over 16 years. Did Peter post in 1986 about his purchases so they could be verified. Of course not. There was no internet so we are left with taking his word as to what he did or did not do. While I disagree with Peter's investment approach, I really had no reason to disbelieve what he said was his investment basis for a long period of time. His investment approach is very consistent with his personality on the thread, that of a very dogmatic narrow minded individual but boy when someone complains as much as he did about something that he could have easily clarified, it makes you wonder. Maybe Peter thinks he is Garth Turner. Certainly both get on my nerves. Onto the real world. It will be interesting to see how the market reacts to the Shell/Penzoil deal. Probably will help the O&G stocks rather than the trusts. I sold about 1/3 of my trusts last week but only sold a little of the O&G shares that I intend to sell before month end. Hopefully get a bit of a bounce. Regards TommyD