THREAD IS CLOSED! --- Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 11K+

Top 3493. Dec 18, 2000 5:50 AM

» Rande - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE

In response to message posted by Ronjamm:

Ron,

True, but there is the occassional food fight. ;)

One thing I've found over the years is that nothing riles some people up like the facts. Just post some actual numbers and watch the fur fly. It's okay, so long as we learn something in the process. Those 1966-1985 numbers made for some good debate. Even led to a discussion on dividend payout ratios, which is good even if it had nothing to do with the reason for posting the numbers in the first place. The context was one of a specific statement made on the radio that the period was an awful "secular bear market" where no headway was made by investors, that they even lost to inflation. That's just not true, as we've seen. A "Total Market" position of 75% large and 25% small cap returned 10.3% on average for twenty years during what was, really, a relatively adverse period. Now, whether that means anything today or going forward is certainly a matter for consideration and debate. But, before we can learn anything from history to see whether it has any application whatsoever for the here and now, we should at least get our history straight. Nez pas?

-- posted by Rande

Top 3494. Dec 18, 2000 6:18 AM

» Kirk - mvanderbilt=> Re: Are these fears irrational?

In response to message posted by mvanderbilt:

mvanderbilt

Not at all. Those fears are what people use to sell you newsletters and magic market timing formulas that the record shows under performs, but the hype and message will say otherwise.

The facts will say put 100% of your money into index investing.

If you read the welcome message here, you know that I think you should mix index investing with SOME active managment if for no other reason than it lessens these fears and if you do beat the market, you win. Since you are starting with at most 20% in a managed portfolio such as mine, if you underperform a few percent a year as Mr Brinker does, then it is no major loss. IF you beat the market like my newsletter portfolio has done, then you win a bit. Can I keep up my performance or is it luck? Well, the answer doesn't matter too much if you follow and have the majority of your money indexed unless the results are out performance as the 20% will grow faster than the 80%.

On Buffett. Didn't he put a good chunk into MSFT recently at higher levels? Not the top, but not the bottom either if I remember.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 3495. Dec 18, 2000 6:23 AM

» Kirk - To Dennis re Who Knows?

In response to message posted by DennisL:

Trouble is, who knows what is going to happen?

BINGO!

IF ANYONE tells you we at all resemble Japan in 1989, run, do not walk, as fast as you can in the opposite direction from this person.

The guy on the radio, repeat after me, is selling air time, selling newsletters (with black powder to spray on our bald heads to give us instant hair!) and getting you to tune in next week.

Look at how good a job he did getting so many to worry that he might retire! Even one that swore off his newsletter after selling out of his QQQ trade at a lower entry point.

FEAR SELLS. We point these facts out and he seems to use them even more as it works!

-- posted by Kirk

Top 3496. Dec 18, 2000 6:39 AM

» DeepThroat - Re: Moneytalk

In response to message posted by Jonathon:

Jonathon, yes he called me. I called to find out where my December newsletter was, and they said they would call me back because there was a "note in my file". This was last Tuesday. Several hours later, I got a call from someone who said "This is Bob Brinker." I didn't ask if it was Senior or Junior, but it sounded like Senior, although not exactly like he sounds on the radio.

He simply said that he was having someone mail me the December newsletter, and that after that they could no longer be of service to me or something like that. I had already trashed the renewal notice but I didn't tell him that. We said goodbye and that was it.

It could have easily been handled by some office flunky, and I have no idea why he called personally.

-- posted by DeepThroat

Top 3497. Dec 18, 2000 6:46 AM

» Will_L - Re: Secular Bear Market

In response to message posted by mvanderbilt:

MV, I think the answer as to why Brinker is on his secular bear kick has more to do with seasonality and newsletter sales than anything else.

Is it possible that a person who purports to have a special super duper model is the only person who can predict such a long term event? In a word-hellno.

Look, this guy is using the same model that said the same thing about this time last year. He was talking about hyper inflation at that time--and secular bear markets and how if his indicators ever turned bearish he would hibernate with 100 percent in money funds. He obviously didn't believe his talk because he did no such thing.

Economic conditions are not the same as they were last year at all--why would both signal a secular bear market?

Why would one also predict a "moabo" in the same model that had a bead on a 17 year downturn? Why would one want to rush into the most volatile overpriced sector of such a dangerous market, urging subscribers to "act immediately"?

Why would a model send out such seemingly conflicting signals?

Well for those of us non-believers, newsletter sales are a possibilty. I am sure that the single most effective marketing tool he has used was that secular bear tirade he was on last fall--he milked it for all it was worth. It sold a lot of newsletters I'm sure. After a while that was unsuccessful and he moved on--to trading QQQ's and the promise of "MOABO". Those rotating future events that only he could predict appealed to different segments of the population who might want a feller with a crystal ball. Fear and greed sell. But you can't as Barnum knew have the same speel forever.

Now who is due to renew newsletters now? Those hooked with the "secular bear" scam? Is he really able to brag on the QQQ trade--no. His last deal through the fall of "MOABO" is getting a little worn--but those secular bears have to make a decision soon to send in 185 bucks. Wouldn't be a bad thing to remind em that the secular bear still roams the woods. How many times can a man cry "bear"? smile ))

-- posted by Will_L

Top 3498. Dec 18, 2000 6:59 AM

» DeepThroat - Re: Re: Free email addresses

In response to message posted by Kirk:

Kirk said: IF you require a valid, for pay email address, then there is an easy link to the true identity of the person attacking a website. Of course, there are also ways around this but it gets more and more difficult.

Kirk, I used to drive Junior crazy by using "Freedom" and "Anonymizer" to cover my tracks. They allow "safe" cookies that disappear as soon as you exit your browser, and cover your tracks by routing you via anonymous servers so you can't be traced to your ISP.

I hate to admit it, but I may have been (at least partly) responsible for Junior throwing up his hands in frustration, and shutting the site down. He used to do really stupid things like trying to block all roadrunner users from a major metropolitan area. It didn't work because I was using anonymous services.

In the privacy war on the internet, I'm convinced that the genie is out of the bottle. Even the FBI and CIA packet sniffers don't work if you encrypt your email. Just be sure to use PGP, because the Government approved DES is approved for the obvious reason. (Very easy to break)

Even IBM has admitted publicly that all versions of Lotus Notes for export have encryption keys embedded in the header of encrypted messages, at the behest of the CIA. Naturally, domestic versions don't have this feature (Ha Ha).

I think I've said about all I dare to say in this forum.

-- posted by DeepThroat

Top 3499. Dec 18, 2000 7:50 AM

» DanG_6 - Re: Secular Bear Market

In response to message posted by mvanderbilt:

Mvanderbilt, I read that Buffet article then too, and I was totally impressed with his reasoning. Maybe he's missing something, but I sure couldn't find any flaws in his reasoning. And he's not just a CNBC talking head, either. When Buffet speaks, it usually pays to listen.

That said, while a secular bear market such as 1966 to 1982 may not be one of the most pleasant aspects to consider, if one is in their prime earning years and can afford to DCA throughout one of those 17-year or whatever periods, it could be the greatest gift imaginable. Imagine being able to accumulate shares for that long at fairly steady prices, then just as retirement looms, having the market break out into a secular BULL market for the next 17 years or so. What a bonanza!

So for you younger dudes and dudesses, you should be so lucky as to enter such a secular bear market! Now for us newly retired folk, it would be a "bear of a different color", hence my willingness to take the Brinker sell signal in January seriously, even though it may be bogus.

But even retired folks could come through it ok, I think, with a solid asset allocation program intact, and a lot of intestinal fortitude. Wouldn't be the most pleasant of experiences for me, to be sure, but I think I'd survive even without counting on MOABO.

-- posted by DanG_6