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: stockalot who wrote (24662)	8/30/2006 5:16:20 PM
From: queenleah	Respond to of 42834

So Math said (six years ago) "I have not followed the four per cent guideline either. I believe he [Brinker] espouses this because some of his less sophisticated listeners have put huge percentages of their portfolios into some stock that he mentioned, and then gotten scared out on a dip. I have a higher risk tolerance than that, and in any case would never blame him if I got burned by overconcentration in a stock or industry. " Or maybe they've put all or most of their 401Ks into their company's stock. I wonder how many investors Brinker has saved with his advice to NEVER do anything like that, no matter how good your CEO says the company is. I wonder how many he's saved from "ruin" over the years with his four percent guideline. To which stockalot responds Perhaps Retired was emboldened by Schmardt guys like this one [Math] who thought that Bob's rules were for sissies or the less well rounded and risk tolerant investors. This guy says here that while he wouldn't blame Brinker if something went wrong that he wouldn't follow Brinker's advice. Math didn't say "Bob's rules were for sissies". Why do you have to overblow everything to make an exaggerated, off-base point? All of which only goes to show ya that people make their own decisions, with or without anyone else's advice. But only some choose to look backwards for someone else to blame when they made a decision to "do their own thing", and then things go wrong. And math's comment COULD be read to say one shouldn't blame someone else when one chooses to make his/her own decisions outside the suggested guidelines. But maybe stock's screen "doesn't read that way".