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: dijaexyahoo who wrote (22594)	7/27/2006 12:52:09 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

There is no footnote about Microsoft. But there IS a footnote about the QQQ call. So, how much did he sell of each model portfolio then tell people in a special bulletin to use this money to buy MSFT? How can anyone who isn't blinded by hate possibly believe that is unfair? Indeed. If you didn't hate those of us who pointed out how foolish you look defending this cover-up, you would not be so blinded by your hatred for us. Besides, if you follow his 4% rule, you never had more in MSFT than 4% AND you gave it all back when you bought TEFQX.

To: dijaexyahoo who wrote (22594)	7/27/2006 10:52:03 AM
From: Honey_Bee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Dija said: "Honey, you keep posting all these words, but without even the tiniest amount of evidence." The words, which are verbatim quotes, are the "evidence." ROFLOLOLOLOL! Dija said: "Right or wrong, Brinker NEVER AT ANY TIME PUT THE QQQ CALL INTO HIS PORTFOLIOS!" Yes, he decided NOT to put them in his model portfolios, but he used the cash reserves raised from his model portfolios to buy the QQQQs. HE USED THE SAME MONEY TWICE! Hulbert's knows this and still let's it stand. Why do you ignore that fact? It's a lead pipe cinch if the trade would have gone well, he would have put it in his portfolios and used it to boost his Hulbert ratings. And he would be bragging about it on every program and in every issue of his newsletter. You bias is never ceases to surprise me on the down side, Dija--keep up the good work. . .

To: dijaexyahoo who wrote (22594)	7/27/2006 10:53:30 AM
From: stockalot	Respond to of 42834

Dija in making an alibi for Brinker not counting the QQQ disaster says: "How can anyone who isn't blinded by hate possibly believe that is unfair?" And Dija goes on to ramble about Msft not being counted etc: The HUGE DIFFERENCE is WHAT PRECISE MONEY BRINKER RECOMMENDED TO USE TO BUY THE 80+$ QQQS. You see Brinker told people to remove approximately 2/3 of the money from all of his equity portfolios in 2 moves in 2000. Hulbert gives Brinker credit for those two moves. Brinker was specific that these monies be kept in "CASH RESERVES" ready to be invested back in equities. Then Brinker sent the special bulletin below to every subscriber giving SPECIFIC recommendations to use CASH reserves in amounts varying from 20% to half of those cash reserves, a third of an entire portfolio to buy those QQQs. Hulbert claims to have bought QQQQs on that advice and sold them in November. Obviously Hulbert was "duped" that Brinker meant for all followers to buy the QQQs as directed in the bulletin. The QQQQs went DOWN. In November when the newsletter came out the QQQQs were underwater, yet Brinker still was acting as though the QQQ advice was good and still advocating using CASH RESERVES to purchase them in that newsletter. Brinker has NEVER RECOMMENDED SELLING THOSE QQQS. Brinker moved the money that he did not leave in the market or use to buy QQQQs back into the market in March 2003. Hulbert PRETENDS that all the money taken out and raised as "CASH RESERVES" stayed in money market funds or now I hear "T-Bills" it seems--and was only used to go back in the market in 2003. This gives Brinker a complete pass on using up to 1/3 of an entire portfolio to buy QQQQs in the 80s and now trading in the 30s 6 yrs later and still HOLDING according to his advice. Any rating leaving out one purchase with "CASH RESERVES" and letting the advisor use the same money without reflecting the effect of the first use renders any conclusion BOGUS and hurts the investing public while aiding an advisor in decieving those looking at the rating. Each advisor to whom Brinker is being compared should be allowed a "do-over" with a third of their funds for their worst advice. Which would make all such ratings the JOKE that rating Brinker while abetting him in hiding his worst call has become. SUBSCRIBER BULLETIN FROM MARKETIMER MARKETIMER is projecting a significant countertrend rally which is expected to be led by the Nasdaq 100 Index. We expect this rally to persist over a period of approximately 2-4 months, and to generate Nasdaq gains in excess of 20% from the vicinity of the recently established Nasdaq closing low point. We view this projected Nasdaq rally as a significant trading opportunity for MARKETIMER subscribers seeking potential short-term capital gains. Our clear vehicle of choice for this opportunity is the Nasdaq 100, which is traded on the American Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol QQQ. We recommend MARKETIMER subscribers with aggressive objectives invest 30% to 50% of existing CASH RESERVES in the QQQ shares in order to exploit this opportunity. Also, we recommend subscribers with conservative investment objectives invest 20% to 30% of CASH RESERVES in the QQQ shares in order to take advantage of this opportunity. MARKETIMER will provide follow up guidance for this short-term opportunity in regular monthly editions, and, if necessary, in follow up bulletins. We recommend subscribers interested in taking advantage of this recommendation act immediately.