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.

Pastimes : John Dessauer's Investors World -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DWB who wrote (1802)	10/30/1998 8:46:00 AM
From: psyched	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2346

To compare Warren Buffet to JD is ludicrous. Rather, they should be contrasted. Warren is very much a "pencil/paper" guy, disciplined, and a value investor who indeed believes in buying "low" based on the balance sheet and fundamentals for the long term and taking money off the table when over valued. I have not observed the "hype", self promotion and grandiosity seen with Dessauer. JD is certainly no WB. Pointing out a few winners during the past 3 years is also a specios arguement since throwing darts would most likely have yielded the same results. Recognizing the current market where average Nasdaq and small caps dropped 40-50% and large caps 10-20, his selections noted in previous posts far exceeded the average decline. I find that JD often fails to view the whole picture regarding a stock and instead concentrates on or hypes a few selected details,entirely missing the reason and extent of vast stock movements to the downside.

To: DWB who wrote (1802)	10/30/1998 12:19:00 PM
From: Ralph C. Cinque	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2346

I don't expect every stock in an advisor's portfolio to go up. He or she is entitled to some mistakes. But mistakes like recommending stocks like Pokphand and Service and Monaco over and over for years and years, until they are beaten into the ground, these are tidal mistakes. They raise serious doubt about the overall judgment of the advisor, about the mental process he uses to determine value and promise in a company. And then to exit in a way that deliberately attempts to cover up the magnitude of the loss ("switch from Pokphand to Fletcher") demonstrates how cunning and deceptive and evasive he can be to his subscribers. Regarding Apple, what I am talking about is people buying in the 40s and high 30s on his strong advice, and then being advised just two weeks later to sell at 29. It was a significant loss, Dan; don't make little of it. And by the way the same thing happened with Service. He pushed it hard on the hotline when it was in the 4 range, and it was less than two weeks later that he issued his sell order in the newsletter when it was at 2, a drop of over 50% presto, immediately. The irony is that there were reports in the Wall Street Journal at the time that Service was in trouble, and he ridiculed them; he lamblasted them; it was all a big conspiracy, etc. etc., but in the end he sheepishly got out of the stock after it got crushed. Don't you see, Dan, this isn't just a matter of him being wrong about a stock; it's a matter of him going on a defiant campaign against Wall Street, the short-sellers, "the gloomsters" etc. except it's more like Don Quixote fighting the windmills. These utter investment disasters like Service, Pokphand, Monaco, and even CD (when viewed as a $24 investment) tell me that his critical judgment is really and truly flawed. It is inadequate. If he was once sharp, then he's lost it. It happens, you know. I realize that you are going to continue defending him no matter what because you are psychologically committed to him. However, I am sure that the objective investor has enough evidence in front of him or her to realize the need to look elsewhere for investment advice.