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, Moneytalk and Marketimer -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: queenleah who wrote (1567)	10/13/2007 12:43:58 PM
From: Honey_Bee	Respond to of 2121

So, Ms queen, since you have a problem with anyone discussing Brinker's market-timing activity going back "ten years," you must really be outraged that Bob Brinker rates his model portfolios all the way back to January 1988. BTW: I'm sure that everyone is fully aware of your opinion of my opinions. There's no need to continue down that silly road--unless you would like me to graphically express my opinions of YOUR OPINIONS. Turn about seems like fair play to me. . No? I didn't think so.... .

To: queenleah who wrote (1567)	10/13/2007 2:36:44 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

"But we were still talking about the whole James/Brinker matter, at least that's what I thought." PMFJI again, but I think YOU are the one who wants to keep talking about it. What was reported here by Honeybee was factual. Dr Jay didn't make the "senility comment" until AFTER his subscription was canceled AFTER he told people that following Brinker had not benefited him (over on Suite101 I believe he first said it.) Later he clarified this on our Facebook Bob Brinker Discussion forum that following Brinker between 1990 and 2002 caused him to under perform the market. All the other crap, including accusing the good Dr. of a crime, was the typical attack the messenger and try to destroy credibility in an attempt to [ fill in the blank. ]