Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 59,820+

Top 501. Aug 22, 2005 6:25 AM

» allancoleman - Re: How does Bob keep his ratings up? ... and more on oil...

In response to How does Bob keep his ratings up? ... and more on oil... posted by jamesj24:

agree with ya about bob being off alot lately . Larry also mentioned that he'd be on again in acouple more weekends . ? sad ? . between terry savage , larry , and bill flanigan , perhaps they should change the name of the show to , " bob & company " . ? ?

-- posted by allancoleman

Top 502. Aug 22, 2005 7:03 AM

» clocker - Re: How does Bob keep his ratings up? ... and more on oil...

I actually enjoy Larry and especially Terry. I actually feel like they do homework and keep up on current topics. Bill had routinely filled in for Bob in the past. Then I heard Larry substitute a year or two ago. I really enjoyed the fact he had on several guests that weekend including Elaine Garzarelli. I enjoyed hearing those quests' comments. It takes more preparation to do a show with that content. I feel Bob doesn't work at his show hard enough. He's coasting. When I hear his voice I feel I'll likely hear nothing new.

Terry keeps current and gives direct specific answers when people ask questions. She doesn't preach at the caller, rant "When did I ever say that?" or dodge the question. When Bob isn't able to answer a question, he may say, "That's a question for your accountant." You likely won't get that from Terry. She's a financial journalist,and she's able to clearly and articulately discuss topics that are in the minds of the listening audience. I feel she's more adept at answering whatever someone may ask. Bob, on the other hand, screens out what he doesn't want to discuss, and is less specific in his answers than he used to be. Terry can take over the show anytime as far as I'm concerned. Bob can fill in whenever Terry or Larry are away for the weekend.

-- posted by clocker

Top 503. Aug 23, 2005 5:34 PM

» bbaddict - Re: Re: How does Bob keep his ratings up? ... and more on oil...

In response to Re: How does Bob keep his ratings up? ... and more on oil... posted by clocker:

I think it is a good change of pace to hear from other hosts once in a while. Larry Kudlow is a little dry, but still interesting.

Terry Savage also has some good input.

Bill Flanagan is worthless. Half his answers are incorrect, and I find myself yelling at the radio.

But Bob is still the best to listen to. And I really have liked the guests he has had on. All have had something provocative to say.

-- posted by bbaddict

Brinker MT Act Immediately QQQQ Bulletin

Top 504. Aug 25, 2005 4:59 PM

» managerisk - Brinker is the best

Brinker is the master in low expense and high returns. Also he is very deversified

[ Kirk's Editor Comment: For people new to this forum, see:

BJ Group Nasdaq100 Memo

QQQQ update

TEFQX Summary

for the full story.]

-- posted by managerisk

Top 505. Aug 27, 2005 10:06 AM

» jamesj24 - Re: Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and...

In response to Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and... posted by Kirk:

Like everything else, Brinker's recommendations have been a very mixed bag for me. I began listening to him about when he went national, I supposed in the early 90's. Listening to him got me interested in stocks in the first place. I give him credit for that.

In the mid-1990's, I followed some of his early days buy signals, buying a few hundred shares of the S&P 500. Those did very well, again I credit him for that.

I then started my mutual fund investing phase. I became increasingly bullish and started buying into numerous mutual funds, including the big names of the day like American Century Ultra. At one time, I the number of mutual funds I had numbered in the teens. I was investing 100% of my 401-K contributions in stocks, buying the S&P 500.

Then I began trading stocks in 1998, buying some big names during the correction of October of that year, when Bob once again gave a buy signal on SPY at 110. I bought such names as CSCO, COST, NOK, etc. Those did very well after the correction, and that is when I felt I had made a fortune, which I had to credit to Bob as well.

However, I noticed that whenever I followed any of Bob's specific stock advice, I lost money. Sometimes he would hint at being bullish about some companies like Intel, and I would buy, and always lost big, and because he hadn't actually recommended them, I'd be lost about what to do, except to sell and take the loss. For stocks he recommended outright, I invariably lost money, such as UTEK and QQQ. Fortunately, I had not made huge bets on either of them.

With one exception, I ignored his call to sell in January 2000, and actually traded the S&P 500 during 2000 very profitably. I did sell all of my holdings in the S&P 500 in my 401-K, because it had no tax consequences. Unfortunately, this was not a very significant part of my portfolio. I remember selling out at SP500 1350. The SP500 then made a new high of 1525.

By the way, I read that BB says that SP500 1350 is now his goal for selling.

The SP500 made a new high in August, 2000. If I had sold my taxable holdings, I would have lost more than a half of it to taxes, so I don't think that I would have been better off if I had sold it. I sold most of my equity holdings at break-even and to offset other losses during the bear market.

During the period of the bear market, I was without a financial leader/guru, because I had lost confidence in Bob Brinker. I resented all of his hype about MOABO, which was a thinly veiled strategy to keep listeners' buying his newsletter and listening to his radio show. Yet, I don't recall that he offered any useful advice until his buy signal in March 2003. He announced that buy signal on air after his subscribers had been informed, and was encouraging people to buy for maybe two weekends on the program. After that, he actually discouraged people outright from buying, scolding callers, saying "you don't buy after the market has had an 8% gain in less than a month," etc. In retrospect, this was dishonest, because he had really known that the market was expected to have gains of 20%-50%. He claims that a buy signal implies gains of that magnitude. His dishonesty and greed for the purpose of selling his newsletter gives me great concern about the trustworthiness of his market timing advice.

So, I have been punished for not having subscribed to his newsletter to get the buy signal, and by my distrust of him when I heard him announce it. I thought it was some kind of trick. Besides, he had been too early on other buy calls, so I took my time and ended up not buying at all.

Then he was saying not to buy, but instead to average in. Well, I consider that recommendation to be no advice at all. I or anyone could give that advice. That's the kind of advice the run of the mill advisor gives. I won't mention any names, but they all say to average in.

After that experience, I don't think I will ever trust him again.

I haven't added it all up, but I think I'm still better off by not having followed his advice beginning in 2000, given the tax consequence and his extremely poor record on individual stocks.

I'd like to hear others' experience with following BB's advice or not. I'd rather not hear from the ones who simply followed his advice and are now millionaires. OK, you got lucky, we know. You also might be robots. Millionaire robots.

-- posted by jamesj24

Top 506. Aug 27, 2005 1:16 PM

» allancoleman - Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and...

In response to Re: Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and... posted by jamesj24:

hello james ,

appreciate your post . my experience closely mirrors yours . i first came across bob on the radio in the 90's and listened to him and really enjoyed his program - still do . although there are those here who belittle bob's " gift horse " buy signals durning that period of time because they say those people were already invested anyway , couldn't be more wrong in my personal circumstance because at the time i was pretty much invested in a " balanced fund - more stocks " as i had been for years in my 401(k) and was entirely pleased with my results . however , at bob's urging , i switched to a 100% u.s. stocks asset allocation durning the secular bull market and actually pulled a DOUBLE in three years in my 401(k) at that time . and i doult i would have done that without listening to bob .

i got out of the stock market in mid 1999 so can't credit bob for thar decision when bob called for a sell in 2000 . and although i can't credit bob for getting out in mid 1999 , i certainly can credit him for my staying out after his sell signal .

as for his Q trade , i never thought much of the Nasdaq 100 as a index , and still don't think much of it now , so i didn't buy those at the time . i do remember telling some of my friends who bought Q's at that time that they should take into consideration their own risk tolerance before following anyone's specific advice . and i was told by one friend that they considered themselves a " aggressive " investor and , of course , they paid the price . and later was told by that same friend , " no lectures " when i tried to advise them on how to handle their losses by holding those Q's in their accounts and take losses against gains in their future trades . they pretty much sold out at the bottom and , of course , no lectures from me .

i did not buy back into the market at bob's buy signal in march of 2003 and think those who are critical of bob not actually hitting the bottom set that fall of 2002 are alittle too critical and wish them well picking their own tops and bottoms .

i did buy into the stock market last fall based on bob & sy harding , and Normxxx's buy signals and did very well in 2004 . and actually had my best year since retiring in 2000 .

i got out this spring and sold in march of 2005 for the market top set so far this year and credit that decision on myself & sy's " common sense " advice in his book .

i am presently pretty much out of the market and beating the indices and am watching bob's S & P 500 1160 buy signal AND sy's favorable season starting later this fall , and Normxxx's posts for a possible entry back into the market .

i find bob still " adds value " and his legacy will be " to be your own investment advisor " . just my opinion of course and thanks for sharing yours with us / me .

-- posted by allancoleman

Top 507. Aug 27, 2005 1:48 PM

» BrianMcG - Re: Re: Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and...

In response to Re: Re: Brinker is the best at promoting Brinker and... posted by jamesj24:

Like everything else, Brinker's recommendations have been a very mixed bag for me. I began listening to him about when he went national, I supposed in the early 90's. . . . His dishonesty and greed for the purpose of selling his newsletter gives me great concern about the trustworthiness of his market timing advice..

Brinker started broadcasting nationally in the 1980's. I was a regular listener from 1986 to about 1999, when I decided I had had enough of his hype and deceptiveness. His timing advice stumbled very badly with the crash of the late 1980's. He had his followers in at the top and out at the bottom, when he should have done just the opposite. Of course, he didn't talk about the debacle on the air. I only learned about it later on the internet.

I listened for basic investing advice: the advantages of no load funds, maximizing 401k contributions, avoiding commissions, diversifying. The kind of basic stuff every investor should know.

Your experiences are interesting. They seem quite honest, and not at all atypical. Brinker has a good radio voice, a smooth delivery, and a lot of chutzpah. Unfortunately those things cover up a lot of faults that many people don't learn about until it is too late.

-- posted by BrianMcG

Top 508. Aug 28, 2005 1:19 PM

» pete2214 - oil prices

3 weeks ago bob was okay with the price of oil, yesterday he was complaining that it is too high.

-- posted by pete2214

Top 509. Aug 28, 2005 5:07 PM

» permabear - Housing bubble

On Sunday's show Brinker kept downplaying the effect of the housing bubble. He didn't accept the premise of one caller that all of these creative interest only, ARM, no down loans are not going to hurt the housing market, suggesting instead that they play only a small part of the real estate market. Bob is going to have to live down this viewpoint as these creative loans are going to play a big part in the coming unraveling of the housing market.

-- posted by permabear