Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 59,820+

http://noppa5.pc.helsinki.fi/koe/corr/co...

Top 61. Mar 1, 2005 7:50 AM

» arommel88 - Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Brinker Babble posted by JIMMY62:

You can make a case that BB is a flawed personality. However you must consider the context. Many of his listeners do not have much investement knowledge and much of it will be trivial. Whenever I pass by the Kim Comando show I am in agony. He has made the case that the SP 500 will not reach its high and as such it is a statement about the potential high as of today.

In my opinion BB has a good understanding of macro economic data and has probably established correlations with them. However, a valid correlation coefficient can also be a weak predictor if it is not strong. Consider where on the scatter plot the next dot will hit when r=.3

Do not bet it all on a .3 coefficient. Now when you get it wrong people, will not be understanding as this is an unforgiving world. This led to BB's moral dilemma on QQQQ. This is also relavent to some of the other topics on BB. Does the skill of looking at "counter trends" correlate with macro economic data? I do not think so. BB was out of his element. He is not skilled in every field and he has character flaws. It is a lot like politics. We set our standards in such a way that only liars can get into office.

When you have high employment, high factory utilization, rising interest rates you can guess that something is more likely to go wrong and you may risk adjust on macro economic data in my opinion. For me it might mean going from 80/20 stocks/fixed to 70/30. However no scheme will account for the arrival of cheap solar technology or a 9/11. What I do is adjust allocations to the relative risk/reward. If the US is at 10% unemployment I will make a guess that it is an anomoly with higher upside etc.

-- posted by arommel88

Top 62. Mar 1, 2005 8:47 AM

» BrianMcG - Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Brinker Babble posted by arommel88:

You wrote: "[A] valid correlation coefficient can also be a weak predictor if it is not strong. Consider where on the scatter plot the next dot will hit when r=.3."

Do you publish a glossary for proper understanding of your posts? Is there a translation service? Or are you content just to dazzle the financial hoi poloi with your verbal grandiloquence?

I suppose this fancy talk relates to the radio personality we know as Bob Brinker, but I'm not sure how.

-- posted by BrianMcG

Top 63. Mar 1, 2005 10:03 AM

» arommel88 - Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Re: Brinker Babble posted by BrianMcG:

What an impressive post. When you see something you don't understand to you squish it? Do you riddle it with holes? Did you toss the nerdy looking guy in the mud puddle in your day. Or are you content to insult people anonymously?

I like interesting conversation with someone that understands something about statitics. I offered an explaination that supports Kirks investment style and identified it as regression. Look it up, do your own research instead of expect it spoon fed to you or feel free to ignore it. I was speaking with Normxxx who I do not always agree with but is certainly someone that provokes thought and is polite.

What are you? Someone brave enough to cast insults on the internet? What a lovely display of unprovoked contempt. Since there is no evidence of my provocation, the only thing that is evident is your hatefulness.

-- posted by arommel88

Top 64. Mar 1, 2005 10:17 AM

» arommel88 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble posted by Kirk:

Quite honestly it was an insulting post. However people's hatred and agression toward BB appears to work people into a frenzy. Its fun to laugh and throw scorn? Its not pretty that is for certain. Sorry to see the LOL from you.

-- posted by arommel88

Top 65. Mar 1, 2005 10:43 AM

» BrianMcG - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble posted by arommel88:

"Hatefulness"? "Insulting"? "Unprovoked contempt?"

Relax. I think you're funny.

-- posted by BrianMcG

Top 66. Mar 1, 2005 11:28 AM

» arommel88 - Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Brinker Babble posted by Kirk:

As it was posted it did appear to honor me with a crown of thorns. It looks like an overreaction on my part. I realize that one needs a thick skin on the net. I have controversial opinions so you must know I expect it. I just like to remind people to be polite and not just to me.

My axiomatic phrase is certainly worth a laugh.

weak predictor if it is not strong

It does not hurt to put in a if you want to ride someone a little:-)

-- posted by arommel88

Top 67. Mar 1, 2005 11:37 AM

» SPYDR22000 - Brink's current bond recommendation......

What is Brink's current bond recommendation.
Please provide specifics. Is he in love with
gnma again? High yield coporate? Short term
corporate?

-- posted by SPYDR22000

Top 68. Mar 1, 2005 11:37 AM

» arommel88 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker Babble posted by BrianMcG:

OK. I apologize for my overreaction. I confused you for the "muscle head" type that knocks over the chess board when he loses a piece. I can sometimes be a little predatory myself when I think I ran into one.

Add this to the Mister Potato Head of my life's work in sculpture.

-- posted by arommel88

Top 69. Mar 1, 2005 2:17 PM

» SteveT - Re: Brink's current bond recommendation......

In response to Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by SPYDR22000:

40% GNMA, 35% Short term investment grade, 15% High yield corporate, 10% TIPS.

-- posted by SteveT