Honey's Brinker Beehive--Not a Fan Club
- allancoleman
- mrs1123
- allancoleman
- honeyoneohone
- honeyoneohone
- honeyoneohone
- allancoleman
- Kirk
- SteveT
- allancoleman
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Next »
» allancoleman - Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by bob90245:i agree with bob , mrs123 . you are very unlikely to hear bob brinker give away any secrets on his regular weekend radio broadcast . although i've been a listener for years , it's very rare to gleam any direct mention of a ' signal ' .
sometimes you can ' guess ' what's on bob brinker's mind by reading between the lines of his answer to a caller . but it's usually as much a result of the listener ' wanting ' to hear a certain answer as it is bob brinker giving away any secrets .
bob90245 is very correct that by following suite101 , you can keep up with bob brinker's ' signals ' , and only be a day or so behind .
as for " honey's board " being of any value in following bob brinker's latest predictions , my personal opinion is that her board is stuck too much in what happened years ago by imaginary posters that may or may not have been bob brinker to have much value . in other words , i doult her ' stuff ' would hold up in a court of law . and any grand jury would probably vote to not allow this evidence to go to trial before a jury . and certainly a defence attorney wouldn't have any difficulty disproving their line of reasoning . as most of it is purely circumstantial at best . my opinion of course .
-- posted by allancoleman
» mrs1123 - Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by bob90245:Thanks for the tips on the "Brinker watchers". I will have to keep an eye on the two boards for any current news.
DID ANYBODY NOTICE that at times when it seems that there is news that Bob Brinker should be commenting on he has a guest host on his show. Maybe it is only me but I've felt that more than once when he was absent. I am sure it was only a coincidence but it almost seems like he is intentionally gone at times.
-- posted by mrs1123
» allancoleman - Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by mrs1123:i have the same feeling you do mrs123 . about the time the market gets really interesting , bob's taking the weekend off . sort of makes it necessary to be your own investment advisor i guess . which is the whole point of bob brinker's show anyway really . funny how that works . 
.
-- posted by allancoleman
» honeyoneohone - Brinker's Program Today?
.Will Bob Brinker talk about the big one today? "Outliers" r us.
-- posted by honeyoneohone
» honeyoneohone - Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by allancoleman:.
Yo, allancoleman,
You are entitled to your opinion about what is posted on this board, but rather than just telling us your "personal opinion," why not act as a "defence" (sic) attorney and debate the issues that you "doult" (sic)?
If you can show any evidence that anything posted here is not the absolute truth, I would appreciate seeing it.
"You can learn so much from history"___Bob Brinker
-- posted by honeyoneohone
» honeyoneohone - "Brinker's Stock Market Almanac Style of Marketiming
.In the latest issue of Bob Brinker's Marketimer, he begins a whole new scam to cover the fact that his "cyclical bull" market is getting way long in the tooth. This one is very cute! He's calling it an "outlier."
"Outlying then or outlying now?"
Good one, Bob! LOL! Will L. is enjoying it too:
"Brinker is beginning to change his claims to fit what is going on in the market.Recall as we pointed out that Brinker claimed he wasn't bearish in 2000 when he made the "tactical asset allocation". Now he claims that he was bearish. Outlying then or Outlying now? you decide.
Brinker is now claiming as fact that a secular bear market began in 2000. Now here goes Brinker using a very short history with very few events to come to a conclusion --what I call Brinker's stock market almanac style of marketiming.
Let's look at how Bobby Brinker is a bobbin and a weavin his phoney baloney these days.
A secular market movement is a long term trend that lasts for 15-20 yrs. Brinker bases his claim that this is a secular bear market based on the fact that in a totally statistically insignificant number of events over only 80 years of history in retrospect there were a handful of such trends.
So Brinker who was "not bearish" is now "bearish" for another decade or so with the claim that the way you will make money in this market is to play the cyclical bull markets (recall back in 2000 Brinker's claim was that the way you would make money was to exploit the countertrend rallies in the bear market--how'd that go?) This is perfect for a marketiming seller isn't it? A long dangerous period with pockets of gains (countertrend rallies) that you identify at the tops and bottoms.
Curiously Brinker believes that the low of this "secular bear market" happened in late 2002. (what a shame for you QQQ investors he didn't claim that at the time isn't it?--they were under $20.00 then --were about $25 in Mar 2003).
Since Oct 2002, when Bob and I agree the bottom was hit in the market, we have been up and sideways--
To recap the S&P fell from about 1500 or so in Aug 2000 to about 775 in Oct 2002. Bob claims that is the low for his secular bear market. That is a period of 14 months of a nasty bear.
From Oct 2002 thru today it has risen from 775 to 1266.Now Brinker until I hammered his overlapping terminology for CTR and cyclical bull markets used to define his "cyclical bull or bears" as counter trend events in a secular bull market lasting 6 months to two years. In Sept 2001 he changed that to 1 to 3 years.
So far, in what Brinker is calling a secular bear market, we have had 14 months down to the low and 39 months UP from that low.
Now Brinker instead of acknowledging this discrepancy in his "mega trend" call has called the up-leg --the recovery from the low -- an "outlier".
The rational way one would look at this is to revisit your secular trend hypothesis and re-establish any credibility for that.
Brinker does not do that. He just forges ahead claiming this is a mega-trend because he says so. He believes the lows were set in Oct 2002 and thus we have a 14 month bear market and a 39 month bull market so far during his "secular bear".
He calls data that doesn't fit an "outlier"? LOL There is NO claim that I am aware of that his model predicts decades of market action. Thus, his continuing claim that he hold tenaciously to, seems built only on "it happened that way before and I said this is a secular bear market".
A cooler and more rational person looking at a 14-month downturn and a 39-month up leg with Brinker remaining bullish and claiming still big gains from here (meaning the market according to him is undervalued) would perhaps discard the notion of his "secular" claims and instead describe this as a bull market after a severe but relatively short bear market.
Brinker just like his ruinous tenacity though on the QQQ trade, simply cannot stand it if the market does not conform to his claims. He seeks word games to explain why the market is not conforming with his call. I won't give you all the excuses from the QQQ trade. Now he, instead of reassessing his take, claims that this bull market is an "outlier."
-- posted by honeyoneohone
» allancoleman - Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to Re: On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by honeyoneohone:hello honeyoneohone ,
rather than get into a lengthly debate with you about the merits of your ' sources ' for assumming that some of the posts from years ago were bob brinker's using assumed names on the internet ; i'll leave that up to a court of law at some point in the future . suffice to say , if your allegations are true , i'm surprised that someone hasn't investigated this by now and brought charges again bob brinker . until that point in time , i'll have to assume that bob brinker is not guilty . and , of course , until that happens , your allegatons are just that ........... allegations and conjecture . .
-- posted by allancoleman
» Kirk - "Brinker's Stock Market Almanac Style of Marketiming
NEW: My two recommended newsletter core portfolios can be fully replicated with seven ETFs bought from a discount broker. Details in the next issue!
In response to "Brinker's Stock Market Almanac Style of Marketiming posted by honeyoneohone:
A cooler and more rational person looking at a 14-month downturn and a 39-month up leg with Brinker remaining bullish and claiming still big gains from here (meaning the market according to him is undervalued) would perhaps discard the notion of his "secular" claims and instead describe this as a bull market after a severe but relatively short bear market.
Exactly! This is what I’ve said for some time, that the “outlier” was the bubble in some technology stocks, especially the “business to business internet stocks” that Brinker recommended in his January and February 2000 Newsletters.
Brinker was blindsided by this “outlier” which was evident in his October 2000 recommendation to put up to half the cash reserves into the NASDAQ100 just before the two worst years of the bear market, 2001 and 2002. Remember, the S&P500 “only” saw single digit losses in 2000. The big declines came the next two years with 12% in 2001 and 22.8% in 2002.
Brinker’s P1 subscribers as of Nov 2000 with 33% in cash, 33% in equities over weighted to foreign and 33% in the NASDAQ100 via QQQQ had a beta over 1.0 and thus suffered larger declines in 2001 and 2002 than the S&P500! Add in the 5% in TEFQX and it is even worse.
For people new to this forum, see:
for the full story.
February 4, 2006: What Secular Bear Market?
February 4, 2006: What Happened to MOABO?
-- posted by Kirk
» SteveT - On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by mrs1123:
This discussion about market timing in my opinion is a perfect illustration as to why it is a bad idea. If you insist only do so with a tiny portion of your portfolio.
From my summary of brinker’s 3-15-03 radio broadcast: “Bob said the work he does is the most difficult challenge there is. Most won’t accept the challenge of anticipatory stock market timing. He defined it as attempting to look into the future.”
If it is the most difficult challenge it makes sense in my view that it will not be successful 100% of the time and bob is living proof of that. Seems to me it is a very high-risk proposition. Nothing wrong with taking risks, especially if the rewards are commensurate with the risks. Only a fool would suggest structuring an entire portfolio using only high-risk maneuvers.
After getting back in to the market in 2003 David Korn calculated taking into account all bob’s market timing advice he did no better than DCA.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.a...
This link brings up some very good quotes concerning market timing.
http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/i...
Which one is your favorite?
-- posted by SteveT
» allancoleman - On Board the Starship Moneytalk
In response to On Board the Starship Moneytalk posted by SteveT:another excellent post SteveT , stating objectively both sides of the issue . as you've correctly stated , market timing isn't for everybody . and especially those who have to ask or rely on others for their timng signals .
for those people , they are much better off sticking with a DCA approach or some other type of long term strategy .
-- posted by allancoleman
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.