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 (16829)	10/7/2002 12:34:57 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

Of course, I'm sure you're all wondering how I managed to get my hands on the June 20001 issue so soon!

To: Math Junkie who wrote (16829)	10/7/2002 3:18:52 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

Where do you see evidence that his model "became dead wrong"? In all the years of listening to him, I always heard him state 3-5% accuracy as a goal, not as a claim. "Given where Bob decided to place the QQQ trade on hold, I suspect that his longterm model has so far missed the bottom of this bear (in the overall market) by close to 30%" That statement doesn't make any sense. He switched QQQ from a buy to a hold in the June 20001 issue. In that same issue, he stated, "Until our long-term stock market timing model returns to bullish territory, we will continue to maintain cash reserves." Are you trying to spread misinformation? Your questions all stem IMO from the same misconception about Brinker. Bob claims that the market is not yet in bullish mode. Therefore, it is (since it has some volatility) in bearish mode. Is there any way that the overall market can be in bearish mode while the Nasdaq 100, the Nasdaq and tech in general can be otherwise? Of course not, that would defy logic. Bob has even stated that when the overall market moves up, he expects the more volatile Nasdaq to move in greater % terms. How then, does anyone explain how he said to hold Nasdaq 100, Nasdaq and tech stocks and mutual funds while saying that the overall market was in bearish mode? It's utter nonsense. It makes him either insane, stupid or a liar. I do not think he's stupid. When he put the QQQ's on hold ( thought it was earlier in 2001 but you could be right) to where the market is now I calculated to be about 30%. That's where I came up with that number. If his longterm model was predicting a drop of that magnitude from that point forward then why did he say to hold? Again, insanity, stupidity or out and out lying. Your misconception is that his model works because he was 65% out of the market before stepping back in. However, I'm saying that his model is ridiculous because he "wins" or "loses" since he is both in and out of the market.