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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (16525)	8/18/2002 6:01:02 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

Richard, you are wrong and that is my opinion. I stand by what I said about the Brimelow article. It is full of factual inaccuracies and draws grossly inaccurate conclusions. Brimelow is a poor journalist who exhibits a poor understanding of his subject matter. You are spinning as fast and as furiously as Bob. It is laughable that you think Bob has held onto the QQQs through a near 75% decline because he likes them. He didn't like them as an investment in October 2000, he just has a failed trade that he is too arrogant (and too much of a scumbag) to close off and admit abject incompetence on. I find it unbelieveable that you give Brimelow a pass on the BJGroup (and his inaccurate statement of what Bob actually did) simply because he doesn't address it in this article. The point is that he should address it in this article. Do you understand this? Again, why are you dealing with posters whose points you disagree with by pointing out possible legal action against them? Is that how you debate against those you don't agree with? I find that poor sportsmanship but very much in keeping with Bob's venomous fan base. IMO Bob is very much a liar. He is a liar by omission by allowing false and favorable statements about his advice to stand time and again on national radio when he has every opportunity to set the record straight. He is also a liar by omission by leaving the QQQ out of his model portfolios but using the portfolios to advertise his newsletter. In addition, I find that he is a liar by omission when he says he is 65% in cash. That is also inaccurate because his equity positions have deteriorated so much that his aggressive portfolio is closer to 80% cash. I believe he is a liar by omission when he said that he would sidestep a bear. He never sidestepped it as he remained in equities and even increased (and stayed with) his equity holdings. However, he now lets stand the L-I-E that he somehow went to cash and bonds in 2000. It is a L-I-E and I'm sure you know it. He now claims bearishness but in reality he never went 100% bear. He has never explained that contradiction and has held onto his Microsoft, Vodafone, ETFs and equity mutual funds throughout the bear. In other words, he rode the bear down so how could he have seen the bear as he now claims he has? Was he lying then or is he lying now? It has to be one or the other as he is in complete contradiction to what he said for years as he was awaiting the end of the bubble. Why do you let him get away with this bs? Don't you believe in the truth? I do.