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 (41745)	12/28/2008 10:58:29 PM
From: octavian	4 Recommendations Respond to of 42834

honeybee said: <<Oh my goodness. Here we go again. Nitpick a word and ignore the substance. It must be heck to try to have a conversation with some of these people.>> --Honeybee, no one is "nitpicking." There is a HUGE difference between saying these GOs were the ONLY ones he WOULD own, and the only ones he DOES own. If you weren't so blinded by bias and hate, you would be able to understand the difference. For example, Vanguard money market funds are the only ones I own, but that most certainly does NOT mean that anyone who owns different ones is doing something I would not approve of.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (41745)	12/29/2008 9:16:59 AM
From: gronieel	6 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

"...Brinker left the woman-caller NO HOPE that her California GO's were the same as his. That's what matters..." That is just NOT true at all hon. Don't you even read what you transcribe and post? Brinker told Pamela that some of his bonds *might be different* than hers. Brinker didn't know which California GO bonds Pamela owned and accordingly Pamela's bonds may have very well been pre-refunded too. Pamela could be holding pre-refunded bonds and not even be aware of it. Many folks don't even understand pre-refunding and even some amateur newsletter hacks went scurrying around to find out what pre-refunding even MEANT! Even then they got it WRONG and posted their erroneous nonsense all over the web showing their total lack of understanding and lack of basic economic knowledge. BTW, here is what Brinker ACTUALLY said and as you can see he NEVER said that ALL his California bonds are pre-refunded nor did he EVER say those are the only CA bonds he would own. Additionally, he told Pamela that some of his bonds MIGHT be different than hers... Brinker: "That's a personal decision, Pamela. I really can't tell you what to do with your bonds. I have some California bonds, but in almost all cases my bonds might be different than your bonds and I'll tell you why. The bonds that I own have Treasuries behind them. In other words, they've been prerefunded by earlier transactions by the state and backed by Treasuries.'