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: Scott Mc who wrote (3459)	6/14/2002 1:40:00 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

These examples are comparing apples and oranges ---- Not at all. Lornes point was that switching from one trust to another was almost always the right thing to do. A person would mostly make more as a result. I used the real trading numbers from the trusts he provided to show otherwise in accordance with my assertion that staying with that one trust and accumulating on weakness (lows) made the person who had done so no worse off and perhaps better off ---- ---- You only seem to have a problem with my use of the unit numbers used on accumulating at the lows. So instead of providing a more meaningful attempt at a challenge like say using 1000 units as the second purchase you use 500000000 units. Okay since you are afraid of the math then I will do what you should have done below ---------- Now P on the other hand he buys 1000 units of PWI at $7 ($7000). He doesn't panic when PWI falls to $5.95. He watches it for a while and buys just 1000 more units at $5.80 ($5800). Bringing his total units to 2000. PWI is now at $6.87. ($13740). Now lets compare the two results. For L and his buying and switching 2 trusts his loss is 6398 - 7000 or -$602 or -8.6%. For P his buying and buying again the same 1 trust on weakness his gain is 13740 - 12800 or +$940 or +7.3%. P's gain is more than L's gain ------ Such a feeble attempt on your part to play with the numbers. As I redid above with some much lower numbers (1000 units added on the weakness). The outcome is still the same. P's gain is still more than L's gain ------ Now I show using the real world past trading numbers and with my strategy as outlined from the very beginning. What is it that you have to show as your proof ,NOTHING. Nothing but a grotesque exaggeration of the numbers. Now it is quite possible that joe average investor would be able to buy 1000 units then 1000 units additionally at lower levels. That is within his grasp. It maybe that the more than joe average may in fact be able to buy 5000 additionally as I first put forward. Your take on it is that lets get really silly and say its 50000000 units additionally. And somehow that silliness disproves the underlying real world numbers. IT DOES NOT, NOT ONE BIT. ------------