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: LLCF who wrote (5963)	6/5/2003 12:48:02 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

<How much we dont know for certain. > Just like most here... yet you claimed I was "loading up"! -------- Its a claim which is just as equally possible as your claim giving the ""facts stated in your postings"". Your trying to play both sides of the fence. If PMT continued higher you could state that your "some and bought more" meant that you bought lots and are enjoying the benefits of such a smart move. If PMT fell as it did then you can claim that your "some and bought more" meant that you didnt buy much and are so clever because that had little impact. THATS THE OLDEST CON JOB GOING ---------- Then you call me [and others] a liar about Paramount AND my overall positions in trusts? ----- I didnt call Kastelco a liar. Because he was being truthful. That being truthful helps others. Your stories help no one. And are designed solely to make you look smarter than you are. ------- Look, my response to you was a flabbergasted one that you were actually here 'scanning the board' to see who the losers were and compare them to your list of those "you argue with". ----- Because those I argued with use as their defense personal attacks insults and name calling as evidence. Its not. Those don't provide joe with answers and don't help him get to the truth of the matters discussed. As I said its giving you back what you dish out. If you cant handle that then quite simply don't do that. Thats simple enough ------ Nothing to do with Paramount and total disregard for what any past arguments might have been about ------- Has a lot to do with PMT. Has to do with doing the proper due diligence. Has to do with not ignoring past evidence past history. Like that previous shutin Paramount experienced. Has to do with glossing over ones own impact from the recent collapse in unit price. Has to do with trying to say that a discussion of RLI on a different trust PGF is somehow the very same as a government shutin of current production. As I said RLI (reserve writedown) may or may not impact distributions several years into the future. If the trust should do nothing about it. Which they obviously dont let happen. This PMT shutin by the government will have a more immediate impact on the nearer term both in terms of unit price and in terms of distributions going forward from NOW --------------- just personal ego building, [we're liars, and you're not] period. ----- All the above I lay out are facts they are not ego builders. You show no facts just opinions and urge others to take those as fact ------- Sorry I know you may not want to look at that.... but's it's all it is: <it can be and usually is viewed by many joe averages as a recommendation. > Peter, to be honest, this has always simply been your sad excuse to crusade against anyone you don't like over here... and those who don't like you. Gives you an excuse to assert yourself in inappropriate ways 'in the name of the lurker'. Pretty sick IMO. ------ I give out the other side of those things which are discussed. So joe gets a balance. And can come to a proper and correct decision. You have had ample enough time to present real trust trading numbers and real trust fact and you instead give out opinion. In the case for RLI in the PGF case I showed with the trading data at the time of its news release going forward that for PGF then at just under $15 it fell $0.20 (intraday $0.40) then climbed well above $15. That trading data clearly showed RLI had little impact on PGF as is what I had said all along. You provided NOT ONE REAL TRUST EXAMPLE TO COUNTER OR EVEN SUPPORT YOUR SIDE. ------- <And it is the likes of you and others who first started the bashing a long time ago. > Well, at least we know what this is all about. ----- Its part of it as I said. Your playing word games here . Singling this out. Out of all else that was introduced ----- <What exactly does this apples and oranges comparison suppose to tell.> Your quote was an answer to a direct question to you about Paramount and Viking, and shows that at best you had no opinion about either one: ------- It was not a question about just ""those 2 trusts"" it was all in relation to a discussion about the issue of RLI and it started with that news release concerning PGF and its own situation. Like all the lies you spew. You take things out of the context they are presented. Twisting them to suit your own purposes. ----------- Message 18705203 My point stands, simply that you said nothing to save ANYONE from buying Paramount given a direct chance... I said 'not all that helpful'... and that's about correct don't you think? ------ As the posting shows it was about RLI. It was not about ""just PMT""". And that is all to clear. Your reading much more into what is there in that posting. And I clearly did not come out saying later look at me I bought some. And look at me I bought some more. Sure it looked good for you as it was going up. But when it crashed then it looked bad. Then it was time to do some damage control saying ""when I said I was buying some and some more you know really it wasnt much TRUST ME""" Yeah right that will be the day.!!!!!!! --------------- My related comments were NEVER a recommendation, and reserve life actually negative. ------ RLI never entered into what happened to PMT. It was a government shutin of current production. It was not a result of a reserve estimate write down. As I clearly said several times now RLI may or may not affect some future years distributions if the trust does nothing about it. Clearly the at the time trading data for PGF and its own release going forward show no bad affect to the unit price for PGF. That unit price did not fall significantly and it actually rose to higher than it was before the release. Thats what the documented evidence shows too clearly. Now getting back to PMT that was a goverment decision to shut in current production. That affects the unit price NOW. And it affects distributions going forward from NOW. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE. ----- <You and others are lying about your positions. That you and the others carefully chose not to reveal some real numbers when talking of how much and how much more you were buying says it all quite clearly. Those who wish to believe that can do as they like and they will suffer for it just like they already have ------------- >> I know you keep saying that Peter... "me and others" who doubt argued with you right? And probably not even about fundamentals or companies, probably personal pissing contetests ritht? And were "so careful" not to reveal our 'size'? ROFLMAO! ----- More of your opinion. Too bad my facts. Discussed above. Beat out your opinions. They will do that each and every time ------------- Look, anyone who's been around, lurkers or regulars catch the drift now...they don't need our commentary.. stop back next time you can puff your feathers out.