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: InvesTing who wrote (1678)	10/20/2007 8:23:09 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

OK, just change your name from Will to InvesTing and you can see why you are wrong. I think it is high time to stop the BS in trying evaluate what we THINK Brinker's subscribers must have done. WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHAT ALL THOSE SUBSCRIBERS DID, OR EVEN A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEM. The ONLY thing we know is what Brinker said and wrote. . I don't know why Fahr (long after he was totally put out with Brinker's deceptive practices on the QQQ fiasco) belately chose to claim this bogus BS about Brinker recommending subscribers sell QQQs in Nov 2000 and go to cash. Maybe this will help: you and I agree that Brinker should disclose the trade in his published results. The ONLY difference between us on this point is that you, for some unknown reason, think it MUST be done through his existing model portfolios, and I don't. . By the way, why is "Fahr" OK in your book, but "Willy" is something to be outraged about? . It didn't happen, he knows it and I suspect his dislike for Brinker's critics has caused him to stake out this rather bizzare claim. . Oh please, cut out the amateur mind-reading and psychoanalysis! . If you subscribed to an investment letter, and you saw that the portfolio you wanted to be in had no QQQ, and you had QQQ, do you claim that you would not realize that you would have to sell your QQQ in order to be in that portfolio? . Sorry, Will, I am not willing to believe that you are stupid! . There was not ONE SINGLE LINE OF TEXT OR ONE SINGLE WORD THAT TOLD A SUBSCRIBER THAT THESE QQQ's SHOULD NOT BE PURCHASED WITH MODEL PORTFOLIO CASH RESERVES NOR THAT THERE WAS ANY DISTINCTION IN CASH RESERVES. . THAT FACT IS NOT IN DISPUTE IN REGARD TO THE OCTOBER BULLETIN! . Now Fahr chose to pick one sentence out of two pages of tripe that was Brinker's November 2000 newsletter . What does the number of sentences have to do with anything? Since when does a statement have to cover two pages in order to be binding on Brinker? . Besides, it wasn't just one sentence; it was a paragraph, and in addition he devoted an entire page to detailing exactly what was in the model portfolios and what wasn't. I suppose you will say that I "picked those out" too, LOL! . Anyone who claims that this was a sell recommendation just is wanting to be an apologist. . I really wish you would give up making up motives for your fellow posters. :( . The December 2000 newsletter also shows just how bogus the take Fahr has adopted would be. . Wrong. (See below.) . ---Not a single mention of risk, suitability, model portfolios,* stops --only hype.* . Sorry, Will, that's just not true. He devoted an entire page of every issue to detailing exactly what was in the model portfolios and what wasn't, and it is plainly shown in every issue until the March 2003 bulletin that there was no QQQ in the model portfolios. He even added an explicit statement in the November 2000 issue that it was not included. How you think that is subject to misinterpretation is completely beyond me. . So there you have it and each newsletter continued the charade that tells you that no honest person would claim that people buying QQQs in response to that ACT IMMEDIATELY bulletin would have sold them according to the advice Bob Brinker himself was given subsequent to that bulletin. . I will ignore your claim that I am dishonest, and simply point out, yet again, that our task is to evaluate Brinker, not his subscribers. The latter is an impossible task, because we have nothing but speculation to go on. . If you wish not to concede the point we will have to type Brinker's December 2000 and his 2001 newsletters text under the fair use provisions to show that you are misleading the public on this data. . That would only work if you left out the ONLY place where he explicitly said whether the model portfolios were participating, AND left out the ENTIRE page eight of every issue! . "Marketimer's long-term model portfolio equity asset allocation is 65% cash reserves, 25% U.S.A., 5% Europe and 5% International Growth. Short-term capital gains opportunities in QQQ shares, as recommended on page one, are not included in our long-term model portfolios on page eight or in the active/passive portfolio." -Bob Brinker's Marketimer, November 6, 2000