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: Math Junkie who wrote (22502)	7/24/2006 10:25:11 PM
From: queen90700	Respond to of 42834

Thanks math. Will someone please pass the crow to piglet?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (22502)	7/25/2006 9:59:15 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

"Brinker has been very consistent in advising people in or near retirement to adopt conservative investment objectives. " You must not have read his message boards back in 2000 when he recommended TEFQX. In print, he was quite specific this and the 50% in QQQQ was for P1 type investors, but most of those posting on his message board bought TEFQX...including the retired folks. Heck, his top poster, John Bsomething, was a big fan of that fund and he was retired. John B seemed the designated person to give offical retirement advice... To me, it looked like Brinker was encouraging retired people to take more risk. If they bought the TEFQX fund, why would they not also put 50% of cash reserves into QQQQ? I know you think this is not "proof" but someone I know with a web presense told me they LITERALLY have hundreds of emails from people who did just that, put the recommended 33% in. Myself, I've had lunch with someone in the 60 age bucket who went to 100% cash since he thought he was very conservative and wanted to preserve his critical mass. Then when he got the bulletin, he put 20% of his total portfolio (100% cash reserves) into QQQQ per Brinker SPECIFIC instructions in both the bulletin and in newsletters that followed. People in retirement have no business seeing 20% of their portfolio drop 75% in a Las Vegas type trade. Not only was Brinker's advice reckless, many who took it feel he abandoned them in favor of preserving his image. Kirk Out

To: Math Junkie who wrote (22502)	7/25/2006 10:08:02 AM
From: fahrenheit451	Respond to of 42834

Math Thanks for the link to the Bob Brinker bio provided by DavidK. It illustrates my point. It is the most comprehensive I have seen in my 10 year plus search. Bob Brinker claims to have worked for 25 years on Wall Street and this is all the detail we know: "Prior to starting with Moneytalk, Bob worked in two positions primarily over a 20 year time frame: He worked as the U.S. portfolio manager for the London-based Guardian Royal Exchange Group and before that, as a vice president for the Bank of New York." We know who his employers were and THAT'S IT. What did he accomplish? This link shows you the type of detailed information I am looking for: home.netvigator.com Click on the name and you find out why they are considered to be experts in investing. You will note that there is one or more names on this list that Brinker has TRASHED on his show. If Brinker wants to criticize any of these folks he needs to show us what his performance was on Wall Street that qualifies him to bash any of these money masters.