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: Boca_PETE who wrote (7080)	8/23/1998 10:00:00 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

I agree Pete re:< Princeton Economic Institute research > . Just updating the accounts of some I help and noticed that one international fund that was bought to replace an emerging market fund is down over 8% since making the switch. The best move would have been to cash then or sell all international funds. It would be interesting to have a caller ask Bob how long he would hold to putting 25% of a portfolio into an underperforming sector (international) as it is clearly far behind the VTSMX? I am starting to wonder if that much diversity, 25%, is too much? Myself, I am only half that, but I argue that my large HWP position is half international and it sure showed the signs this year by being down about the same as an international fund....8( For the record, a caller asked Jim Jorgensen last week why he didn't have ANY international funds and he said poor performance and too much risk. (of course JJ has a big bet in a loaded sector fund, SIFE, and Kaufman with a 12b1 fee which I don't like.) I know Bob would thump his chest and trot out his European Pick, but that fund is only 10 of 25% and the caller could ask "why not all 25% in Europe?" Further thoughts? Will Europe and the rest follow the US out of the slump? Many argue that the selloff is in sympathy with Russia and Japan's problems and not due to fundamentals. regards Kirk out

To: Boca_PETE who wrote (7080)	8/23/1998 12:28:00 PM
From: Karin	Respond to of 42834

Pete, thanks for your information on the fake "Princeton Economic Research" pretenders. Goes in the trash can.- Now can you figure out, where all the cash is, that should flow into the Mutual Funds? marketgauge.com

To: Boca_PETE who wrote (7080)	8/23/1998 7:45:00 PM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

As one who has followed Bob Brinker since 1981, did Bob warn his clients out of the market prior to the bear market of 1982 or the 1987 crash? I'm curious to know if he's as good at predicting downturns as he is at staying the course in a bull market. I simply don't know, but you might with your long familiarity. One wag used to say "don't confuse a bull market with genius". Martin Armstrong, the director of Princeton Economics Institute, is occasionally quoted in Barron's. I've heard him interviewed on the radio a few times. He's been analyzing markets since the late '70s, and his primary business seems to be in helping large international firms with their economic forecasts. Currencies, the stability of various countries and their debt, economic cycles, these appear to be his primary focus. I first heard him predicting a July 20th turn in the market last February, although he was saying that his model identified that date four years ago. From what I gather his model is predicting another, much larger downturn beginning in the first week of September. So it looks like we will have a good opportunity to compare Brinker vs Armstrong.