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: Honey_Bee who wrote (41456)	12/21/2008 12:41:58 PM
From: paulnewmanhero	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

Thank you very much. I am going to call Moneytalk today to ask Brinker directly, but I found this comment on your site similar to what I am thinking: "I find your discussion of Brinker's handling of the caller who asked about California State GO's absolutely telling of his character. It is the same thing you see with the guy over and over. I cannot tell you how many times I heard him rave about the safety of California state general obligations when callers would question them. In every instance he said that there was no problem at all. He would differentiate the risk from that of tax exempt revenue bonds, but claimed out side of Louisana (if my memory serves) that state GO's were fine. Now with the new BS twist of "well mine are backed with Treasuries" --he switched stories without warning people who quite likely at least in part based their confidence in the California bonds on Brinker's absolute positive answers WITH NO MENTION OF THIS DIFFERENTIATION of CONVENIENCE. This is TYPICAL BRINKER. Switch the tale to fit the scenario, not giving a tinkers dam about the people you told the opposite story to. Recall the caller who wanted to talk about his QQQs bought on Brinker's advice in 2000 --a couple years ago and Brinker told him that "We don't have any QQQs in portfolio number three" and cut him off and then pretended that the only QQQs were purchased at 25.00 and sold at 40.00 and that he couldn't help the caller if he didn't take his advice. Brinker knew if he hadn't cut off the caller, that he would have been exposed as deceptive. It seems the same thing happened with the 'Californey' bonds. Thanks for documenting another flip flop. Does anyone else recall Brinker say that if you buy state general obligations only do so if they are backed by treasuries? Btw--how many state GOs are backed by treasuries and if so why would they yield as much as they have in the recent past, GOs in some cases have rivaled treasuries in yield and still tax exempt. If they were truly backed by US treasury guarantee, then it seems obvious they would yield much less. How much smoke was Bob Brinker blowing about these bonds? Ever in your life hear him mention this feature until the week some experts thought there was a real possiblity of default on Calf. state bonds?"