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: Honey_Bee who wrote (24510)	8/28/2006 10:03:50 PM
From: stockalot	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

Best warning ever written about Bob Brinker was not by a "basher" but by Peter Brimlow. "3. Do not, repeat -- NOT -- gamble the rent money, much less the retirement money, on any market timer's recommendations. Only speculate with money you can afford to lose." Obviously he rightly believes Brinker's marketiming is for gamblers...ie LOSERS. .

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (24510)	8/28/2006 10:24:41 PM
From: queenleah	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Doesn't this sound exactly like something we've read before? Like months and years? "Shortly after I retired I got Bob's bulletin to put up to half my stock market funds into QQQ 'immediately.' I followed Bob's advice and it has ruined what should have been a wonderful retirement for me and my wife. We bought in at 82. What REALLY is unforgivable is that Brinker had NO EXIT STRATEGY for this horrendous trade. Even today he is still telling us to hold the QQQ (even though down 75 percent). Does he realize how many lives he's ruined?" Isn't that word-for-word what we've seen before, so many times? I remember that "ruined what should have been a wonderful retirement" business being quoted word for word before. Could this be an old Brimelow article? I know it says last update, but that just refers to the website, not the article. Or could it be that somebody sent old recycled complaints in and pretended they were their own? Or could it be that Brimelow is recycling old material? Just asking.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (24510)	8/29/2006 9:41:59 AM
From: stockalot	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

There is no doubt to anyone hearing Brinker talk to Mary on the phone that he was working overtime to keep any mention of his having recommended a huge investment in QQQQs several years ago that to this day has not been closed out and Brinker is HIDING. He interupted her and raised his voice to be sure to shut her up or prevent her from being heard on several occasions. He very deceptively used the term "balanced portfolio" in two different contexts. Mostly Bob Brinker used the term in the generic sense, as a person approaching retirement (Mary said her husband was NOW 4 yrs away--was about 10 yrs away in 2000) and having one's investments equally divided between stocks and bonds. He would then use the "balanced portfolio" term to mean his Portfolio III and claim that no one should have QQQs in a balanced portfolio. It was Brinker dishonest slickness at it's finest. He was trying to reshape reality. Brinker recommended CONSERVATIVE and AGGRESSIVE in other words ALL CLASSES OF INVESTORS to buy QQQQs back in 2000 and pounded the table into 2001 for this allocation of resources for all including those with a balanced portfolio. Bob Brinker has to this day NEVER CLOSED OUT THE QQQ POSITION AND INDEED IS DISHONESTLY HIDING IT. Dija and Queen are going out of their way to try to claim Brinker was not spinning like a top in his call with Mary. No one who knows the subject would give them any credibility if they heard the call. Another test of their credibility is their characterization of this article as being supportive of Bob Brinker. I'll let people judge if Dija and Queen are right and that this is a coveted recommendation of Bob Brinker by Peter Brimelow. I've never seen Brinker brag about it. In fact I believe he screamed like a mashed cat and got the introduction to the piece changed when it was first published. Anyway Queen and Dija quote this article and see it as supportive of Bob Brinker's advice. You be the judge, and if you find that this is absolutely the worst sort of comdemnation an advisor could get, then you'll know Dija and Queen are likely pulling the same "black is white" scam on Bobby's spin job on Mary. " * By Peter Brimelow, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 12:30 AM ET Aug 22, 2002 . NEW YORK (CBS.MW) -- I asked for it and I got it. An extraordinary number of e-mails denouncing my August 15 column on Marketimer's Bob Brinker, either for being too hard on Brinker, or for not being hard enough. Sigh. . ( Read my previous column on Brinker.) Interestingly, about half were from Brinker backers. That's unusual. Generally, people only write when they're mad. Both sides in this fierce fight accuse the other of mass e-mailing under fake names. Maybe they're both right -- although if so, they're individualizing cleverly. . Some Brinker backers mounted articulate defenses of his disastrous QQQ trade in 2000, for example arguing that he made it clear it was a speculation. But one critic has actually posted Brinker's famous bulletin on the Web. It does make chilling reading for a stock that went from above 80 to a recent 25.75. Another critic sent this distressing note: . "I have never written anyone on this topic before but your article spurred me to write back to you. I retired early in the first half of 2000. I had been following [Brinker's] advice based on his excellent track record and comments he made during a personal appearance in Rochester NY in the late 1990s. "Shortly after I retired I got Bob's bulletin to put up to half my stock market funds into QQQ 'immediately.' I followed Bob's advice and it has ruined what should have been a wonderful retirement for me and my wife. We bought in at 82. What REALLY is unforgivable is that Brinker had NO EXIT STRATEGY for this horrendous trade. Even today he is still telling us to hold the QQQ (even though down 75 percent). Does he realize how many lives he's ruined?" . To be fair, another correspondent says Brinker saved his retirement -- by getting him out of the market in 2000. But still... . All of which leads me to four observations: . 1. Much of the Brinker brouhaha stems from things he's said on his ABC radio show or in the commentary section of his letter. Or allegedly said -- there's often total disagreement among my correspondents. . Perhaps because of this, there's now a letter and a Web site, begininvesting.com, devoted to monitoring Brinker's radio show.. . This of course underlines the wisdom of Mark Hulbert's decision to stick to monitoring Brinker's model portfolios. It was because Hulbert caught the fact that QQQ had not been put in Brinker's model portfolio published in the letter subsequent to the Special Alert that he sold it out, and didn't take any more loss. Quite obviously, most readers and listeners are not so systematic. . 2. But Brinker must realize his readers and listeners are not so systematic. In fact, notwithstanding the fine record of his model portfolios by Mark Hulbert's count, Brinker's behavior in this whole affair does seem odd. There's bitter disagreement about whether he provided the follow-up advice he promised. But what kind of a "counter-trend rally" is it that he's still holding QQQ for (outside his model portfolio, of course) after two years? . 3. Do not, repeat -- NOT -- gamble the rent money, much less the retirement money, on any market timer's recommendations. Only speculate with money you can afford to lose. . 4. If there are many more stories like my poor friend from Rochester, we're going to see massive re-regulation of the financial markets -- a repeat of the 1930s." . marketwatch.com.