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

Top 5064. Jan 2, 2001 7:42 AM

» Will_L - Re: Re: Re: Re: A Question

In response to message posted by Fahrenheit451:

Fahr. Your post in answer to Felipe's questions points out something I find interesting. It's the desire to believe--"faith" if you will in Brinker.

The question and your response:

"
"I'm primarily interested in knowing whether you have the same level of confidence in Brinker."

My confidence in his long-term outlook has not changed materially. My confidence in his short-term outlook has been pretty much eliminated. If the day comes when he makes his recommendations in such a way that I can't tell which is which, then I would be hard pressed to find a way to use his advice profitably. Hopefully, that day will not come."

It is interesting that when you see Brinker after exuding confidence at least equal to his ability to call "moabo" in this QQQ thing and fail badly that you make a distinction and trust him to be able to do the former.

It seems to rest on "faith" . What is behind that faith I wonder? Is it the slick presentation? His manner? The fact that the Nasdaq plummeted after he decreased his equity allocation in January? His model?

There is no evidence that he has ever done anything like get out at the top of a market and get back in at the bottom in either a short term trade or a long term trade. Thus any ability to actually call his "MOABO" has never been demonstrated. We do have some evidence to the contrary in fact. Yet many believe him when he tells them he can. MY question is what provides that faith and what shakes it. I notice that many have lost faith with this QQQ debacle but others like you have separated it.

Just curious if the basis of the faith those have in Brinker is the belief that Brinker has some scientific basis to his long term model that they believe in or if they just 'have faith'.

Much like religion, no one has ever seen this model. It is shrouded in mystery, yet for believers holds the perfect truth. Do they ever doubt the existance of the "model" or is their faith of such strength that they never question? So is it the "model" that many think now has been perfected that allows them to have such great faith? Is it not a sales tool like the short term trading model that forecast the QQQ trades. Is it not dependent on the same guy for "interpretation"? Does it seem illogical that it is blinking the same bearish allocation signal while the same guy reading his other model was bullish at much higher levels, has not changed his mind and the market is much lower now?

I really think for some they do believe that there is some scientific breakthrough that only Brinker has found that will allow him to do what no one else has been able to do. I think for others it has simply become something they relied upon for strength through the bull market and now desperately want to believe in his magic to do what he claims he can.

Tis much like religion -- belief in things unseen and untested, tis faith.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 5065. Jan 2, 2001 7:53 AM

» DanG_6 - More on Buffet

In response to message posted by _grasshopper_:

The WSJ had an article last week stating that Buffet had taken positions in certain high yield bonds. He's convinced that bonds could well outperform stocks in the next few years, and that with proper analysis, value can be found in certain high yielding debt securities. Apparently Warren does not listen to Moneytalk since Bob says NO to junk bonds. And I just have a feeling that Buffet does not have a current position (or even a past position) in QQQs either. Boy, what a dummy!

-- posted by DanG_6

Top 5066. Jan 2, 2001 7:57 AM

» Will_L - Re: More on Buffet

In response to message posted by DanG_6:

Buffet's probably having a hard time scraping up the 185 bucks to get smart Dan. smile I do like that Margaritaville song of his though!!

-- posted by Will_L

Top 5067. Jan 2, 2001 8:17 AM

» Laurence - Re: Re: Re: Did somebody mention Hulbert earlier?

In response to message posted by Rande:

Thank you VERY much for the table. Just last week I began to wonder why BB did not include industrial averages in his portfolio reporting. I guess that I know now.

-- posted by Laurence

Top 5068. Jan 2, 2001 8:22 AM

» Kirk - Re: More on Buffet

In response to message posted by DanG_6:

And I just have a feeling that Buffet does not have a current position (or even a past position) in QQQs either. Boy, what a dummy!

Yeah, Warren is not one to jump on any bandwagons. Junk bonds have had a TERRIBLE year as fears of recession have hammered them. Perhaps Buffet feels the worst is priced in?

I put up some charts for QQQ on our NASDAQ thread here: http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/i...

I can sure see why Buffet doesn't buy counter trend indexes that he feels are overvalued... as if you miss the CT rally, then you are stuck in a long position holding something overvalued.

Visit my pay-per-click sponsors ------ PLEASE -----------------\/

-- posted by Kirk

Top 5069. Jan 2, 2001 8:25 AM

» Centigrade233 - Once I had an Uncle

I once had an uncle who told me he had a system to consistently beat the ponies, and he asked me if I could write a computer program to implement his system. I said, sure, tell me about it.

After several hours of agonizing Q&A, I realized his system was completely Ad Hoc, and was, in fact, no system at all. He would simply pick a horse, and then find some reason to justify it, such as a "special message" broadcast over the PA system for those "in the know".

Naturally my uncle's system could not be implemented in a computer program.

Does this absolutely true story remind you of anybody we all know? I have often wondered if Brinker's "proprietary" model is exactly like my uncle's system for beating the ponies.

-- posted by Centigrade233

Top 5070. Jan 2, 2001 8:32 AM

» jbrady - Re: Once I had an Uncle

In response to message posted by Centigrade233:

Out of curiosity does anyone know if the conman's site is open again yet? Quite funny how he shut it down. Like the boy who took his ball and went home.

jim

-- posted by jbrady