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: Jeffrey D who wrote (19614)	10/17/2003 10:29:04 PM
From: stockalot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

Jeffrey my boy, don't ask so many questions until you validate your presumption. You said the following in reply to a post of mine. To:stockalot who wrote (19588) From: Jeffrey D Friday, Oct 17, 2003 9:41 AM View Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19616 Are you on drugs? Your post is one huge paranoid fantasy that can only be brought on by a hallucinogen. Get a life. Jeff I find your post offensive and lacking in subtance and designed to obfuscate the facts in my post to the benefit of the guy you have spent every post shilling for on this thread for 6 years. Here was my post. Instead of postulating about my drug use, why not be specific in you exceptions to my characterization of the guy you are promoting here. Please argue the facts about your guru and don't depend on your very tiresome personal attacks that you have used for 6 years here on posters showing Brinker in his true light. Why don't you refute the things about Brinker and leave the personal attacks aside. I'll let you have another chance Jeffrey. Please tell me where I'm wrong Jeffrey? Are you trying to claim that Brinker didn't post that silly crap as Don Lane, now mistertopes? You don't want to lie like that do you??? Are you referring to specific elements of my post that you find wrong? Why not argue them? I'll be happy to supply chapter and verse to support my take. Why are you afraid to do so? Here was the post you suggested I must be on drugs to make--but have spend the whole day running from. Try again shill. I see some are still into the belief that there is a valuable Brinker timing model out there and it if only Bob didn't try to interpret it for them, everything would be fine. Easter bunnies or tooth fairys anyone? 1) If anybody had a model that with great regularity predicted the stock market would they not be rich beyond believe and unlikely to spin, huckster, sell flooring, get tied up in conflict of interest deals like UTEK and post incessantly on this thread as Don Lane to try to get you to believe he had a model and that you should send him 185 bucks? Would he change all of those self serving and damning posts from "Don Lane" to mistertopes a year and a half after making the last one? 2) If anybody was bright enough to have developed a stock timing model that worked, would you guess it would just happen to be a radio pitchman who takes his pay in commercials for said marketiming model? Not somebody at Wharton or Stanford but instead by some back of the envelope guy who claimed as Don Lane on this thread he could play professional golf if he got anymore pissed off with ABC or people posting a sentence from that precious newsletter? 3) The model in early 2000, Brinker claimed was "not bearish" and gave a signal that the market had a chance to go up 5% or down 20% or more. He made a "tactical asset allocation" based on that claim. At the same time he bragged on technology claiming his model didn't include the Nasdaq. The only changes after he was not bearish in his stock market allocations was in Aug 2000 to remove another 5%. In Sept 2000 after the market sank further Brinker claimed that he was lying back in Jan 2000 and he was indeed "bearish in January" LOL. Then in October 2000, Brinker added 12% to 33% of the money he had removed to purchase QQQs, adding to the tech component of a very screwed up portfolio recommendation. Now if the model told him in Jan 2000 that the market might go up or it might go down in percentage terms, why didn't it ever give such a signal again? What were the percentages over the last 3 years? Did they not change? What are they now? Does his moves make you believe his model was predicting anything like we lived through? Recall this is the guy that claimed the model was either "bullish or bearish" . If bullish he was fully invested. If bearish he would go to 100% cash. Anyone who believes that Brinker just couldn't read and interpret his model properly needs to buy my swampland. You see it is all as Aaron Task of the Street.com describes Brinkereze, "hubris". He did the same thing in 88-91. He fiddled with allocations and even went to cash claiming it was based on his model, but any logical look saw that he was using SWAG and not a bunch of schmidicators finely tuned to give you the world's only true model to accurately predict the market. SWAG--Scientific Wild ASS Guess. If Brinker had a model that worked, he is bright enough and sufficiently articulate that you wouldn't have to get the raw data and interpret it for him. He doesn't have such a model, so like any good siding salesman or infomercial for baldness cures, he is selling you BS, not raw data which is only useless "hubris". He knows it and that is why he is such a nasty critter as he proved here as Don Lane.