Monsieuer Gonzo/Steve
Let me first say, that I too would like to bring this to an end--but not by the usual means employed on this thread by those who take issue with Iqbal--which is to drive them away.
I will not be driven away by the flamers and others who question my motives--I have seen it happen to some good contributors.
If you follow my postings, the one thing that you will notice is that I rarely indulge in personal attacks--and quite frankly, did not do so in this case. I was rather caustic in a couple of my last postings of yesterday to Iqbal--because he decided to go into one of his tirades about being attacked by all and sundry, having his integrity questioned, being hurt, and so on and so forth. Now that sort of stuff --just does not wash with me. What I took Iqbal to task on -- and Mohan did before me in a detailed posting --was regarding his insistence that it was the bears who had lost money during this decline. Now for a serious individual, with his experience to say something like that is at best comical and at worst delusional.
>>We were all caught by the events which pushed the entire market down.<<
Yes, we were -- to one degree or the other; to me the issue is one of our ability to deal with it. Iqbal, who has a following, could not bring himself to acknowledge that he was wrong--worse still, he insisted on suggesting that it was those who took a counter position to his were the ones, in fact hurting. That is intellectually dishonest -- and needs to be surfaced.
>>Ike is a soothing influence in a stressful place, and seems like a nice man, who cares about people.<<
On this, I agree for the most part--although, I have never met him, I do believe that he is a decent human-being, a gentleman, shows a lot of class and is ever-willing to assist others, to an extent that is truly remarkable--and I have said that to him.
He capacity to soothe, IMO, is directly proportional to whether one pays him and his views homage. He does not like people challenging him.
>>I think folks have unreasonable expectations of Ike. Like, "Tell me what to buy and when to buy it and when to sell it". Doesn't work that way. Ike is an interpreter of events/news/markets.<<
You are probably right--about this. I have gone thru an evolution of sorts regarding how best to use Iqbal's postings. There was a time when I felt that he had an uncanny ability to read the market--he may still do so--but I for one, will not rely on it any more. I hasten to add that it is not because he made a wrong call--but because he lacks the objectivity and dispassionate approach to accept what the market is telling him--and that, IMO, is a fatal flaw for a trader.
I still follow closely his analysis of global macro-economic trends because his insights in this regard are close to brilliant at times.
I am a person of no exceptional talent or brilliance and I once posted that over the years, my greatest strength has been to hire good people and to be able to utilize the talents of others. I compared myself to a sponge that has a great capacity to absorb knowledge and expertise of others--and to use it well.
>>He writes well, surprisingly so in that English is not his mother tongue.
Not sure what the relevance of this comment is--unless it is an aside.
>>Yeah, he has an ego, most humans do.
You are right there--but let me tell you something--when it comes to trading, the human ego can be the bane of a trader.
>>Your postings are wasting our bandwidth
Well what can I say--I thought that I made some cogent points to Iqbal--and guess what, I shall continue to "waste our band-width", when Iqbal or anyone else who I follow makes inaccurate remarks that don't comport with the facts.
This thread is an interesting one--it has several talented posters-- it had a few others who were driven out. What this thread also has is an almost cult-like attitude to those who choose to challenge the leader. It is rare to see any of the regulars, challenge anything that Iqbal says--the only one who does, is Mohan. And woe to anyone who dares to question what the leader says--your first posting smacked of having taken umbrage to what I said.
When I e-mailed someone that I was going to do what I did yesterday afternoon, this individual -- who also thinks that Iqbal is just plain wrong--expressed alarm because of the fear that the "latifites" would be all over me.
The ironical thing is that even as you accuse me of wasting band-width, you cannot bring yourself to tell Iqbal that he is wasting band-width when he suggests that it is the bears who are bleeding.
As far as future postings to Iqbal are concerned -- I shall continue to do what I have always done---when he is right or I agree with him on something of consequence, I shall post it to him and when he is wrong or makes self-serving statements, I shall bring it to his/the thread's attention--always politely, unless he chooses to get into one of his chest-beating, persecution complex routines.
From your post this morning:
>>Although I agree with many of your observations, and have posted such in the past, to the displeasure of many here - my essential point is that I don't want "IQBAL" to become the TOPIC of this thread<<
Iqbal is NOT the topic of my postings--his inaccurate dissemination of facts and self-serving comments are.
>>Personally, I just don't care whether Ike was "right" or "wrong"
Neither do I and I have NEVER challenged anyone for making a wrong call--and I have often complimented people, including Iqbal, when they have made a good call.
>>or, persists in having a Pollyana Attitude<<
I don't care about this either--I do care immensely when he misstates the facts and is self-serving in pointing out his excellent calls and happily ignores those he is wrong about--and what is worse gets into a hysterical frenzy when it is pointed out to him.
>>Right now, amigos, I need help! My long-term holdings have taken a severe blow, and my net worth is down $50K from last quarter.<<
I am sorry to hear this--though noone who is long this market has not taken it on the chin to some extent. If you are a long term holder and you do not need the funds in short-order, you have less to worry about than those who may do so.
If I can help in anyway--short of giving you $50K--please let me know:) |
