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: Kirk © who wrote (24537)	8/29/2006 11:12:50 AM
From: shres	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Kirk answer me this. If your goal is really to warn people about the evils of Brinker... WHY DO YOU OFFER A LINK TO SUBSCRIBE TO HIS NEWSLETTER AFTER YOU TACK ON A MARKUP FOR YOUR COMMISSION? Isn't this a bit hypocritical not to mention downright tacky?

To: Kirk © who wrote (24537)	8/29/2006 3:07:06 PM
From: queenleah	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Kirk: It hardly matters that Brinker is beating the W5000 by 2% over the last 10 years when they say a cover-up occurs and is not counted in the calculations. They"? Who's "they"? Let's just be clear. "Many subscribers have never forgotten what they regard as a disastrous Brinker trade in 2000 and his subsequent cover-up." Not Brinker, not Hulbert, not Brimelow, but "many subscribers" and what they regard and what they have not forgotten . Of course they haven't. Who has? It seems as if some people can't stand it that Hulbert used an honest method and included an explanation of why the Q trade wasn't included. First they said Brinker was dishonest for claiming the new Hulbert rating. Then they said ok, well, Hulbert was dishonest in the methodology he used. Now they're relying on the old Brimelow article and saying it says something it doesn't say about both Brinker and Hulbert. LOL.