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 (3039)	3/25/2002 8:19:08 AM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11633

So in your world that's a now a "time-stamp" indicating a buy. You're the guy who indicated that the only proof of a buy or a sell was a specific post on a specific day indicating a trade and the price. Nowhere in that post or any subsequent post do you indicate you bought PWI. ------------ Your quite the denier of facts. Fact is in that post I told Harry what my method said of PWI at that time. That recommendatioin is there. As it says beyond doubt to ACCUMULATE FOR SURE BELOW $ 6. What you said in your post was that I made no such recommendations. And none came true. WELL IT DID. ON BOTH COUNTS. THERE IT IS FOR ALL TOO SEE. FOR YOU ITS ALWAYS DENY DENY DENY NO MATTER WHAT. AND THAT IS OBVIOUS NOW. So read the fact as it is documented and weep. ---------------- As usual, because you're an egotistical POS you apply one rule to yourself and a different rule to everyone else. ------------ As always I use the same rule LOOK TO WHAT MY METHOD SAYS AND IT IS ALWAYS RIGHT. LOOK TO WHAT I DO AND IT TOO IS ALWAYS RIGHT. In the long term of things. AS I SAID FROM DAY 1 . You only say I am wrong because you do not like the fact it worked so well and so easily and that it is documented. Its you that change your tune each and every time. ------------------ Since the date of the post to Harry on Dec 23 you have never even once mentioned that you own PWI, or that you bought anything near the bottom. ------------ Don't have to because the method as I did it for Harry's question on PWI tells beyond doubt ---- ACCUMULATE FOR CERTAIN BELOW $6. PERIOD. READ IT AND WEEP CRYBABY. ----------- AS IT DOES FOR ALL CASES IT IS USED.------------- The evidence is pretty obvious. You missed the bottom, and now you're lying about it. ----------- What is very clear is that with that evidence Harry most probably did buy it and did benefit. I know for a fact that J-R did because he said so in his post. AND THAT TOO IS DOCUMENTED READ IT AND WEEP.----------- And the only one to miss the bottom and take advantage of the lows was clearly again you. Because the documented fact again is that you sold out of that one (PWI) at a LOSS at that time. Something now your trying to deny with this statement of yours. Just how could you have gotten the lows if in this case you got scared and took a real loss when you clearly did not have to. Such a feeble attempt on your part. But is as expected from an amateur. -------------- ---------- So to recap I gave Harry specific ranges for PWI that my method told of that he could follow going forward. . And what to do at those ranges so again here is what my method said well before the fact as documented """""""""""We can use as a guide not accumulating above say $8 and accumulating for certain below $6. Between $6 and $8 would be about the average long term ranges and one could accumulate if he so wished, especially closer to that $6 """""""""" from Message 16825958 READ IT AND WEEP CRYBABY and LIAR. ----------------------

To: Lorne Larson who wrote (3039)	3/25/2002 10:07:53 AM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

You're the guy who indicated that the only proof of a buy or a sell was a specific post on a specific day indicating a trade and the price. ----------- Well lets see I put forward a method which tells what to do and how to do it. That method can be checked and verified with not only the historical past trust trading data. But also can be followed real time as in the last several months and that it works most each and every time it is used in the long term. Now there are what maybe a hundred or maybe fifty royalty trusts. What you seem to be saying is that if I show that it works in those cases where I may or may not hold a position. That somehow means that it doesn't work. Because I don't hold one specific trust to your liking. It works in most all cases and you can do the number crunching yourself. To prove it if you have the brains or balls. BUT YOU WON'T , Now as to someone using a method which can be verified with the past data. WHERE IS YOURS????????? Please show us how it is done , the math involved that we may all test it. Oh you know I just about forgot. You have NO METHOD. What you do CAN"T BE TESTED and VERIFIED. IT WORKS BY MAGIC EACH AND EVERTIME. The trouble is is that it really doesn't. Because of examples like your trading loss with PWI , your numerous shorts like ERF as but one example. Since you have no method you must quite simply give your date and time stamped recommendations as the only proof. That is acceptable as such. Because that is all you have. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. I can give not only my method for others to use with the trusts they hold as proof using real past numbers. And as well I can give my own recommendations and accumulates. That beats what you provide 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 . And you can't or refuse to even do that 1 . COWARD. ------------------ SO UNTIL YOU DO YOUR JUST A CRYBABY and a LOSER. ---------- Nowhere in that post or any subsequent post do you indicate you bought PWI.