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: shres who wrote (22876)	8/1/2006 11:00:20 PM
From: Kirk ©	Respond to of 42834

There is a huge difference between trading and investing. "...Even worse is the practice of adding to a losing position so as to "average down". This is a recipe for disaster. It is essential to limit (and accept) losses in advance, in accordance with your trading plan, by predetermining your exit point if the stock price moves against you. Stop-loss orders provide a convenient method of doing this. Hmmmm. I have seen some newsletter writers who routinely average down as the price falls below their initial recommended price. They say the stock isn't really falling...it's just getting cheaper. LOL! In fact, if you set automatic buy levels below your initial recommended price aren't you violating this well-known cardinal prohibition against averaging down? OTOH, I guess it's relatively easy to continuously double down as the stock tanks if you are just playing around with fantasy money and not real cash like the subscribers." I'd suggest you learn what it is before you compare an investor like me or Warren Buffett who will buy more of good stocks on sale with amateur traders like Bob Brinker who recommend QQQQ for a 20% upside trade and let it turn into a 75% loss. Look up "trading" and "investing" and report back to us why Brinker looked foolish to let a trade turn into a 75% loss yet I look pretty smart to buy more CACS at 39 cents after buying my first ever shares at $7.05 (give or take a few pennies.) BTW, those thousands of CACS shares I purchased in my ROTH at 39 cents back in 2002 when it was selling at a tiny fraction of cash on the books sure look good today with CACS selling at $7.50... above the price I first recommended it. When I bought more CACS at 39¢ (and 40 something for my newsletter) CACS had about $3 per share of cash on the books and was not losing money very fast so buying under $1 was easy. If some idiot wanted to sell me $3 in cash for 39 cents, who am I to say "no thanks?" BTW, were you the one who dumped CACS at a buck and was making a big deal of it over on UTEK to attack me? That clueless investor gave away $3 in cash plus the IP of the company for $1. Traders don't look at fundamentals.