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 (16927)	10/23/2002 12:42:12 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

Didn't he advise people to go to the Library to read the details of the QQQ advice? Plenty of time for people to get in then the plug was pulled on Library subscriptions... so those that were in had to subscribe to get follow-up advice. Could there be a plan there more than just a cover-up? If Hulbert wasn't going to include the QQQs in the portfolios, why did he need to cover it up? The Bulletin was undated with no prices... people might think it was from the bottom or brand new if they just happened to find it. Then again, the month after month of saying to average in as they dropped then pulling the plug without a sell at $40 is there in gory details. Hmmmmm

To: geode00 who wrote (16927)	10/23/2002 8:39:29 AM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

Now if you can model Bob's good advice and bad advice and figure out a way to get the good and totally ignore the bad, you'd have something Sounds like you're suggesting cherry-picking, but I suppose it's useful to think about whether one can devise a strategy that could work going forward. One possibility would be to ignore any advice he gives on the NASDAQ. In Q1 of 2000 he said something to the effect that he didn't know why anyone would look to him for advice on the NASDAQ, and then proceeded to conclusively prove the wisdom of this statement through his subsequent actions. Another possibility would be to exclusively follow one of the model portfolios and ignore all other advice. Of course, this would depend on his stating up front whether any specific piece of advice was going to be included in the model portfolios, but he has said that he will do this going forward. A rationale for this approach would be that he can be expected to put the advice he has the most confidence in into the model portfolios, because he knows that is what is going to be tracked by Hulbert et al. Another approach would be to ignore any advice that goes against his own forecast of the major trend. In other words, if it is presented as a "countertrend" move, run, don't walk, the other way. A fourth approach would be to avoid any recommendation whose stated purpose is "short term gains." Three out of four of those approaches would have kept one out of the money-losing QQQ "trade." They all would keep one out going forward, when combined with his announced policy of indicating model portfolio impacts in any future bulletins. Unfortunately, any or all of those strategies could fail, because NONE of his advice has any track record of calling cyclical trends, as he is now hoping to do.