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: Math Junkie who wrote (1760)	10/31/2007 7:52:50 AM
From: InvesTing	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

Honey asked "Has Brinker EVER made recommendations that fit the profile of the QQQQ-trades where he followed up an "Act Immediately" Bulletin by publishing the exact range of (previously raised) model portfolio cash reserve percentages, like he did over several months with these QQQQ-buy recommendations? If so, please give us an example. " and Math who's whole apology rests on making Brinker's adamant promotion of the QQQ debacle seem irrelevant said: "Not that I know of. So what?" Well the "so what" is --that you claim Brinker's one of a kind, up to "1/2 all in" call was simply like his mention of a stock. That is like saying a row boat is the same as a Yacht. That is like saying that recommending jumping off a two foot embankment is the same as recommending jumping off a 2000 ft cliff. But it gets worse. Instead of just casually saying "jump off that two foot embankment" what if your guru sent a one of a kind "how to" to jump off that 2000 ft cliff. Made it sound like he had it all nailed down and it was absolutely without risk. He'd be there to guide you to a nice safe landing. He told you exactly according to your age how far up the cliff to climb before jumping in complete confidence. He was the "jump master' "No worries Mon". After the jump he told you that you are exactly in the position --that deep canyon---where he would provide a resuce. Each month for about a year he told you that he was going to rescue those trusting his expertise. But alas those people who took the jumpmaster's guidance are in the same canyon and the jump master has moved on pretending he never recommended they jump. He now has new recruits and a different pitch--'hang gliding" . And it's only a matter of time until the hang gliding master leaves a bunch of sorry followers in some other canyon and he will be on to another exercise and Math will be busy telling us why the 'hang gliders' (marketiming with Brinker crowd) have only themselves to blame for not doing something that would have saved them----that the jump master never recommended. When one sets out to alibi for such abuse of a fiduciary relationship or curry favor with the guru, there are apparently no bounds beyond which one won't go. It was a slippery slope when Math began this alibi. It's now simply laughable. 1) Brinker told followers to sell up to 65% of their portfolios including model portfolios calling the proceeds "cash reserves" 2) Brinker told followers to use up to 1/2 of those "cash reserves" to "ACT IMMEDIATELY" for 20% or more gains; soon changed to "significantly more than 20%" Brinker never one time talked about suitability or risk or an exit strategy--but said he would "identify an exit point" He bragged that the big advantange of raising those cash reserves was to take advantage of these short term opportunites "when they were identifiable" . Month after month Brinker sent most of his newsletter first touting and pimping for this trade, then making excuses but still claiming it was a good idea and would turn out fine. No follower as even Dija admits would have thought Brinker was suggesting that people who had raised their "cash reserves" from selling his "model portfolios" should sell the QQQs and go back to 'cash reserves'. It is not an argument to be proud of and weakens the credibility of anything you say.