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: marketlover who wrote (42067)	1/12/2009 1:41:13 AM
From: Math Junkie	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

"But an honorable person who gives bad advice would step up and take repsonsbility and apologize and refund, IMO." Do you know of any newsletter publishers who have done this? If not, it would seem you are saying that none of them are honorable. We have a newsletter writer who often posts on this thread. Does anyone know if he gives refunds when his buying and selling advice loses money?

To: marketlover who wrote (42067)	1/12/2009 10:47:43 AM
From: EQ	3 Recommendations Respond to of 42834

> My entire point was that Brinker would be well served to refund the subscription price for his wrong advices to his subscribers. Have you requested a refund? If so, what did they say? Cheers Elan

To: marketlover who wrote (42067)	1/12/2009 11:13:20 AM
From: EQ	2 Recommendations Respond to of 42834

> My entire point was that Brinker would be well served to refund the subscription price for his wrong advices to his subscribers. > I am fully responsible for my investments and for following Brinker's bad advice. I do not blame him for my losses, but do not think I should have to pay for bad advice. I don't care about the subscription cost, as much as the principle. ___________________________________________ I have an idea. How about performance-based subscription prices? For instance, if the initial subscription price is $185 and the recommended portfolio loses 35%, then your next year subscription price would be $120.25. On the other hand, if the initial subscription price is $185 and the recommended portfolio gains 35%, then your next year subscription price would be $249.75. This of course assumes that subscribers are passive investors and do NOT perform any due diligence, duplicating EXACTLY the portfolios that the newsletter publisher recommends. In reality, I dont think this occurs very often. Cheers, Elan

To: marketlover who wrote (42067)	1/12/2009 7:57:51 PM
From: octavian	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

marketlover said: <<Octavian, Now that you have had a chance to read my posts on The Beehive Buzz, I'm curious if you would care to revise your post of Jan 4th: "Some dufus using the ID of "marketlover" actually asked these questions on honey's google board . . ."? You duly noted later on Honeybee's blog "Anyway, I do appreciate you responding, and in a polite way. It is very rare among bashers.">> --Yes, I would be very happy to retract my use of the word "dufus" in describing you, and to apologize for having used it. I assumed, partly from the content of your post but mostly from past experience with bashers, that you were typical of the breed and were there only to bash Bob and not to discuss or debate him. The odds were heavily in my favor, but you know what they say about "assuming." :) As it turned out, we had a pleasant discussion, and eventually agreed to disagree. I hope you stick around. You might find it enlightening to watch real bashers in action. Not the bashers on honey's blog, where they simply agree with each other and tell honey how wonderful she is, but those here. Watch how they react when anyone disagrees or asks them a question. Watch how they avoid aswering legitimate questions, as Web$urf demonstrated today. Watch how they simply bash, and avoid debate and discussion. Watch how some of us will respond to a bashing diatribe by BFree, and he will just ignore the response and write another bashfest. Then you might understand why I jumped the gun and called you a demeaning name.