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: gg cox who wrote (4773)	11/9/2002 1:07:31 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

OK gg, OFF TOPIC :o) Message 18210336 after looking at this I was thinking maybe Nortel should go trust too...err...reverse trust that is as way to solve its financial problems.. Every month they could collect distributions from the unit holders....:o) regards Kastel

To: gg cox who wrote (4773)	11/9/2002 3:53:19 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

The simple math of it is this, if you take Your"chart" of NT from it's begining to the present and applied your "method" you would not only have purchased it in the $ 1 to $10 range but also in the $70 To $120 range Please refer to my post Message 18209081 from that posting "The strategy can be applied to all types of traded securities ____with some slight modifications or adjustments ___. It works best for the trusts because of the high current income being paid out each month from them." Further on in that posting "The problem is that NT got too far ahead of itself according to the number crunching of my strategy around 1998 or 1999. Meaning that someone following the strategy would not have been running after it just because everyone else was buying it and it was going higher. _____He would have been a seller ______. Because that is what the strategy says to do at that time. _____Especially for a stock which pays little in the way of a dividend. For the trusts its okay to hold and just sit and collect the high monthly income until the price falls downward again. But for a stock your not getting the benefit of that high income so holding on in that case is not adviseable______. """. Now I have tried to highlight some of the key points when it comes to applying the strategy to a stock. You will also notice that in that posting to Lorne Message 18192774 """Now quite arguably NT holders too as well have the choice of not selling. Not taking the loss. Or taking the loss but sticking with NT at the much lower levels. Those who are real professional and experienced traders _____may decide to trade NT_____ as it has bounced around these lower levels quite a bit over the period. ____Successfully doing these trades and many of them going forward. Could result in this activity wiping out the earlier losses suffered on NT____. """"" Once again here in the above I have highlighted a few key points taking the loss means realizing the loss SELLING (-90%) also the most important being the key word ___TRADE____ Now trade means to buy and sell. And one would sell when the price got to within or near its high range. --------------- and as it dipped in these high ranges over the years you would be buying more.. ----- In your haste ,you failed to read the postings for what they clearly said. They said for stocks not paying a high monthly income you do not hold (not adviseable) but you sell. THAT IS THE MODIFICATION and its clearly indicated. YOU OVER LOOKED IT. THATS A SHAME ------- when it dipped below $60 you like the wallmart greeter and the doctor would have been buying more and like so many others as it fell to $50 more $40more..."this is a dip it will come back" $20 more..Loans to buy more, PLC's..mortgage the house a la teevee..I think when you do the simple math ...You would end up like the Wallmart greeter..You contend that because it was trading between $1 and $.67 that you could have bought so much more at these prices it would make up for all the high end entry levels..Try selling that to loans officer ----- I did. But to the banks manager. I mentioned before that I have a huge investment line of credit. Before I got it. I showed him exactly as I showed for all here. My strategy I showed him how I applied it to my trading (stocks)and how I applied to my trusts. He was impressed with it and its results that I got that investment line of credit and over the years with my quarterly filings of how I have been doing I have increased it already several times. ----- as a sure thing when you tell him your story.No the simply math is not a 210% gain.. ----- Yes the simple math is a 210% gain. Reread that post to Lorne. """"Now quite arguably NT holders too as well have the choice of not selling. Not taking the loss. Or taking the loss but sticking with NT at the much lower levels. Those who are real professional and experienced traders _____may decide to trade NT_____ as it has bounced around these lower levels quite a bit over the period. ____Successfully doing these trades and many of them going forward. Could result in this activity wiping out the earlier losses suffered on NT____. " ---- Taking the loss here means just what it says selling ---- ( - 90%). Then bought back stuck with it doing trades (buy and sell) Doing these trades and many of them going forward could result in wiping out the previous losses ie 300% - 90% = 210% ------------------ and also we would never know..because you never sell ----- Actually for stocks that dont pay a high income you do sell and that is what I clearly said ------ ...a simple poll could end the debate( if anyone is reading this anymore).. At the present time NT trading around $2,(including all the NT splits)using Peter's method begining to present and assuming Peter does not have unlimited funds as in "real life" would Peter have a gain ..I say no. ---- I say YES and the documented proves it ----- READ IT AND WEEP -----------------

To: gg cox who wrote (4773)	11/9/2002 6:12:39 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

Just a few items from previous past posts for some added confirmation Message 16672644 From the above post "Now between the unit prices of $28 to $35 an (joe average) investor would not buy. But just enjoy the rise and take the income" ""Now one could if he so choosed, and was comfortable with it, trade ( once again for all who dont know trade means to buy and sell) these trusts using this method as a guide"" Message 17980066 ""Now with the high ranges set before hand if the trust price is in that range or close to that range I don't buy. I don't see the need to sell either because of the high monthly income being paid out.""