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: geode00 who wrote (16831)	10/7/2002 3:38:36 PM
From: Tim Bagwell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

>>>It makes him either insane, stupid or a liar. I do not think he's stupid.<<< While I'm tempted to issue a vote here I'd just like to say that I think Bob has lost his marbles and ran home to not play with us anymore.

To: geode00 who wrote (16831)	10/7/2002 7:53:30 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

The May 2001 issue said all individual issues were on hold except QQQ. "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?" One possibility: If he had said to sell QQQ in June of 2001, he would have had to book a loss for the record. By holding on through whatever trough might still be left, he left open the possibility of at least mitigating the losses for the record. Although he was still bearish in June of 2001, I don't think he knew in advance how much the market would go down from there. "Your misconception is that his model works because he was 65% out of the market before stepping back in. " I have no such misconception. The record since the model's inception is not statistically adequate to prove that it either does or doesn't add value to the bottom line. "However, I'm saying that his model is ridiculous because he "wins" or "loses" since he is both in and out of the market." The test is whether it produces better returns over time than other investment strategies that one could use. IF Brinker's model gets the reentry right, then being both in and out of the market will not be ridiculous, because being even partially out of the market will have benefited the bottom line. Being 100% in cash would only have made sense if you had 100% confidence in the model, which I'm sure you do not, and I certainly don't.